A sizable percentage of likely Democrat voters are worried that a woman would get bullied in international negotiations by male world leaders. This is of course a silly thing to think but they think it.
To counteract that women who run for president, and this goes for both Kamala and Hillary as well as the various women who ran in the primary, all have to do a bunch of saber rattling to show how tough they are to those voters.
The problem is that saber rattling inevitably backfires and a bunch of young men see it and get spooked that the woman in question is going to drag us into a war with a draft.
There's an old saying about war, don't give your opponents problems give them dilemmas. What I described above is a dilemma. There's no actual right answer or good solution. If you skip the saber rattling you lose the voters who think you aren't going to be able to negotiate and if you do the saber rattling you lose the voters who think you're going to draft them off to die in the Middle East.
The Republican party has a lot of these kind of dilemmas and they can usually solve them with overwhelming propaganda and dog whistles because they have a much larger media apparatus and a lot more money. Those aren't options for the Democratic party.
Because of all this under the current system it's basically impossible for a woman to become president. I think if they completely eliminated voter suppression then they could win but that's going to be a multi-generational effort.
This is what Jasmine Crockett meant when she said the Democrats are going to nominate the safest white boy they can find. They aren't in a position where they can risk running a woman again. We've got 20 or 30 years of civil rights organization and voting rights organization before that can happen...