I've read and re-read your post, and I'm going to respond what I understand, and ask for clarity where I need it.

"Whats so wrong about women fighting saxons, Im pretty sure if the woads had women warriors the saxons must have too."

OK, I'm not sure what you mean by "woads". Woad is a dye and medicinial plant, known for war-paint as well as a blueish-greyish dye.

Women warriors are documented although we have more from Viking cultures because more of their sagas survived. I can't think of an early Saxon warrior woman.

"If Guenevere didn't make it, maybe another woman may have."

That relatively recent movie turned Guenevere into a warrior woman, but it's the first. Guenevere has never historically been
a fighter. In fact, she doesn't even exist in the earliest Arthur legends.

"You know, in some viking graves they found not only many women with spears and swords but men dressed in women's clothing with sewing kits?"

Be careful of your sources. A lot of those archeological reports are OLD. Many of those swords turned out to be "weaving swords" which look very much like swords but are used in weaving. It's almost impossible to accurately reconstruct clothing that is 1,000+/- years old and in a state of utter decay; how they know a man isn't just wearing a long tunic is unclear. And as for the sewing kits...men have carried sewing kits in war and hunting since there's been sewing.

"And who said the saxons were so much more menacing than woads?"

Maybe I can say when I know what "a woad" is...!