It has nothing to do with gender. History is the study of nations, of cultures, etc. It is not the study of individual achievement. And it just so happens that, throughout history, it tended to be men who were kings, military generals, etc.

I learnt about Catherine, the Great of Russia. I learnt about Mary, Queen of Scots. I learnt about Martin Luther, John Calvin, and their reformations. I learnt about the unification of Germany and Italy. I learnt about the French Revolution, Robespierre and Napoleon. I learnt about the Russian Revolution and Lenin. I learnt about the constitution of Red China. I learnt about Hittites, Babylonians, Greeks and Romans. I learnt about the explorers - Henry, the navigator, Vasco de Gama, and more.

None of this history differentiated between men and women. Where women were in charge, I learnt about them. However, mostly, in human history, it was men who led wars, were kings or heads of states, etc.

If I were to learn about history today, no doubt, I'd cover Margaret Thatcher, Indira Ghandi, and Golda Meir. However, it wouldn't be because they were women. It would be because they were leaders.

And, no, i don't care whether someone is pink, purple with yellow stripes, or orange with feathers. I am simply interested in world history, and it doesn't matter who created it.