Compared to the Scandinavian countries, for instance, it's true that the U.S. has a pretty callously indifferent attitude towards all its inhabitants, male and female alike. This callousness is especially atrocious with regards to support for pregnant women and new mothers, since it's a biological reality that they need by far the most support and also it's by far the most important thing that happens in society.

But you switched claims.

What you say here doesn't in any way support your claims from before that the attitude is that women have no value, they can't think or lead, etc. etc..

I was generous before in calling your statements "exaggerations". As given, many are flat-out false. Wrong. You made straightforward empirical claims that are not hard to check. Nobody needs to be "in charge" of straightforward factual matters because everyone gets the same answer (nobody is in charge of "the sun is bright"). For example, regarding female leaders, only 26% of people say they'd even prefer to work for a man, for instance: https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinecomaford/2021/06/26/what-people-really-think-about-females-in-leadership-infographics/?sh=7c2f6dff6606.

While I think the U.S. is barbarically backwards (especially now) when it comes to abortion, you make multiple wrong claims about that, too: for instance, that nature gives you control over pregnancy (?!?!?!--the whole point is that it doesn't which is why we need abortion rights in the first place: it's a medical procedure, not natural!).

When there are multiple serious actual problems to be addressed, all that your level of wrongness does is to embolden opponents who can use statements like yours as evidence that the other side "is crazy".

It is a very good point that women have made innumerable sacrifices to bring children into this world. If we could focus on that, and how to make it less of a sacrifice, without cluttering the matter with falsehoods, it would make a much more persuasive argument. That you mix wrong stuff with well-founded stuff does not logically mean that the well-founded stuff is wrong, but as a strategy to convince anyone who isn't already convinced, leading with a bunch of transparently false statements is not generally a great way to go.