Violence in the workplace is negligible compared to occupational hazards. Those killed by violence in the armed forces or law enforcement is most certainly a "workplace hazard" so that can't be lumped in with workplace violence.

Last I checked there weren't a lot of women working in close proximity to heavy equipment and industrial machines when compared with men. If you're not working somewhere dangerous you're less likely to be killed/injured on the job.

- 77% of males are genitally mutilated at birth (in the US), female mutilation is illegal

The CDC stopped recommending circumcision because it didn't have probable benefits, noticed bad results (increased chance of STD transmission) and started recommending it again. You're fighting an uphill battle on that one

"- 29% of male first-time offenders were sentenced to custody. For women, that figure was 17%. Men have a 62% chance of being bailed, while for women that figure is 80%"

Without information about the nature of the crimes this is useless. There's an infinite supply of anecdotal evidence that law enforcement treats women less poorly (more warnings, less piling on of charges) but that's not really admissible evidence in this sort of numbers debate.

I generally agree with your implied conclusion but pick better supporting evidence, when you have an unpopular opinion you need to be so convincing that even the dumbest of the dumb don't feels quite right disagreeing.