94/6 does not explain it by gender inequalities or chance. the difference is simply too big.
Where are you getting this 94% figure from? The population of women is 50-51%, not 94?
And yes, I think that their cultural differences in women being allowed to roam around in public ABSOLUTELY explains that big of a difference (between 50% born and 6% killed). Here is a pretty representative google image shot of a crowd of Palestinians:
http://azjewishpost.com/files/Palestinians.jpgGo ahead, count up the proportion of men vs. women you see out on the streets, unprotected from flying metal. Looking at this image and pretty much every other one like it, I find a 6% death toll of women extremely believable by chance.
i'll give you another example, there is an issue with teen "spies" that repeatedly try to sneak past the gazan border to identify weak spots for the hamas operatives and then come back, IDF usually don't shoot them, but sometimes when they try to go through the fence at night, the soldiers can't identify if its a combatant or a teen working for combatants and are forced to shoot him down. betzelem automatically assumes them civilians because they are not officially listed in any of the organizations list, but their nature of departure was because they performed a military action (gathering intelligence for a future offensive) and are being paid for doing so meaning they should be regarded as operatives.
But contrary to the palestine side, betzelem can tell precisely what goes on in the israeli side because every israeli has an I.D number and the state knows if he is in the military (or other security forces. betzelem sees israeli police as combative) or a civilian and this data is freely given to anyone who asks for it. the social security benefits to civilian casualties families and military casualties families are different so the social security lists serve as another source of information to compare against.
Assuming the Israeli state has absolutely no incentive to fudge their numbers, even if they do have such data fully available *eyeroll* this still gives no indication of HOW MUCH to adjust down the palestinian numbers. By 3%? By 30%? What? If there's no magnitude implied, then this doesn't tell us much of anything useful for drawing moral conclusions.
And well, if we do demand sources, then this is but one that deals with some of the "civilians".
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_article=493&x_context=2
The argument here is that people outright attacking folks shouldn't get counted as civilians. Okay, that's fair, but that's a DIFFERENT standard than "Do they have an Israeli ID number?" on the other side. Somebody attacking doesn't mean they're government-backed or a soldier, or vice versa.
You have to be consistent. If you want to count "offensively acting person" as a non-civilian, you have to do that for both sides, and both sets of numbers are going to be wrong, because I'm sure there are israelis that are not government-endorsed who commit violences, as well as government forces who weren't being offensive who got killed but were still soldiers. And you'd also not get to include hamas soldiers if they were not actively attacking when killed.
Etc. etc. I don't know how the numbers would pan out in any of these instances absolutely, but you can't go and apply one set of definitions "ID number or not?" to one group, and a different one "attacking at the time or not?" to another group, and claim it more accurate than the earlier reported numbers. You need one rule for both groups.