I know enough to conclude that No Stormcloak Rebellion = No Imperial ambush = no PlayerChar getting ensnared by it as well.

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/8260/3mc1.jpg

Dragged along for the ride to their execution, and nary a word said to disavow the side-catch. "No point, they wouldn't believe a Stormcloak"? But the effort would have been made and the blame would then solely be on the Imperials. But they didn't, so we'd never know. There were record anomalies with PlayerChar, and combined with "PlayerChar there is side catch, you gonna off an innocent, Imperial dogs?", it's a case to at least set PlayerChar aside to figure out what's going on.

How I feel about the CW debate:

Strong IL supporters will say SC are racists.

Strong SC supporters will say IL are sixists.

To me, thus my ranting, is one sided individual, albeit a bro to me in this forum, makes his claim to be SC-sided, yet I still believe Beth left it to be vague. Try both sides of the equations for more than 1 character and "ask" around.

*And if anyone asks where I favor, it is slightly IL. It is not tipped at their side heavily, but I just believe, at times, we need a a man allegiance and an elven allegiance. Septim dynasty is done in IV, and say this empire is not Septim dynasty, but think the foundation is there for "man" at least [needs a better ruler and intel] to continue, but needs allegiance to balance the scale because the situation is that out-of-whack in V.*

I see what you did there!

I'm pretty sure there were hostile female scientists and officers in the enclave in FO3

Anyway you do raise a good point but for once I'm going to have to go with the annoying "11/11/11" excuse on there not being female legionaries seeing as the legion has a history of accepting females into their ranks and there has never really been much of an issue of gender inequality in the TES world besides for one settlement (Tel Mora).