Also, I think we should consider the people's race, their views on covid restrictions, whether or not they are indigenous, their interpretation of the merits and demerits of working from home, and what their political stance is on global warming and environmental issues. It's probably not intentional, but to me it feels like you are almost denying certain people's humanity by solely focusing on gender and sexual orientation. Those are important, but not the only issues that we face in modern society.

I understand where you're coming from. I wouldn't deny anyone's humanity, and I agree that there are many important issues that we face in modern society. But for me, focusing on gender and sexual orientation is a way of trying to understand and address the systemic injustices that these groups face. It's not about ignoring other issues, but rather about trying to shine a light on issues that are often overlooked or marginalized. I apologize if this comes across as dismissive or insensitive.

They are probably just using 'men' and 'women' as an approximation that sort of matches the distribution of human beings. Without diving into the exact individual's relationships with sex/gender, you could get a somewhat accurate approximation of how a society operates. Then, from this 1st order approximation, if one was inclined, they could refine and add to the results by further breaking down the input parameters. I don't see any issues with approximating a binary distribution of male and female, even though everyone knows this is not a perfect description of reality. The fact that there is deviations from a binary is good, and can always be tapped into to add alternative views and refinements to the results.