Your point/example might not work as well as you thought.

First, hermits wouldn't even been born without a woman going through pregnancy and birth. That is a given. So for them to exist, a woman must have risked her health and life. And pregnancy and childbirth was one of the reasons that women's life expectancy was lower than men's. Yet, women weren't given the choice to have children or not.

Second, even buddhist monks were feed by friendly peasants. So even if most of the year lived in isolation, the food they were eating was provided by others.

Thirth, most people who discover/invented things, weren't hermits.

So the "without active support", might not be as true as you think. Most of the time we tend to glorify some kind of men, without taking into account what helped them. Hermits are a good example in that regard, since the being born and cared as children "doesn't count". Yet, giving birth and raise a children takes a LOT of effort. And that effort is obviously not valued/taken for granted, since you said "without active support from woman".

Take a closer look at the men you consider that "make it on their own". Then see how much time the devoted to the "day to day" task. Look if they really lived in isolation and the resources to be alive were all produced by them. You'll find out that peasants, servants, slaves, usually were the ones to provide those things. Even for hermits.