The voluntary segregation of women is a mindframe in which women are guests of this dangerous world while men are the owners and those who run it. So, based on gender alone, women should be spared of the downsides of society, mostly because the extreme outcomes are perpetrated by men (truthfully or not).

For example: during WWI, a part of the feminist movement proposed extending the draft to women, but this eventually didn't materialize. Now we're stuck with the rhetoric for which "war is created by men and women shouldn't be dragged into it", placing conscripted men into agreement with the few men that make political decisions.

This was obvious when Estonia's prime minister, "Women In Power" award Kaja Kallas refused to accept russian men fleeing from the draft because "men had time to disagree with Putin and they're responsible for the policies of their leader"

...

Another example is workplace deaths as a window of gender inequality in risky workplaces: the event credited with starting women's day, the burning of a factory in which the majority of workers was female, showed how unacceptable was for a woman to die as a man in her societal class.

Hernest Hemingway witnessed the aftermath of an ammunition factory explosion in Italy during WWI, in which mostly women were employed, and noticed how exceptionally bad it was to see women dying on work duty, because death was always associated with men. This thought process is now used to highlight women deaths on the workplace, and it's got to the point that a couple of years ago the president of Italy's senate on workers day stated "too many women die on the workplace", despite them being about 5%.