[fmxsh]

I agree, and think I see the problem you point at. We don't have to include more groups because, if we do for the sake of including, we have to include all endless variations because there's always a new invented category feeling excluded, and they use it as a power game to ruin the fun for others (seriously). And then what about the argument every obscene category should be included, which by the way would proves the existence of common sense of opposing that....

But, this inquiry of mine had me sympathize more with the recent political trends, that I otherwise think go too far in certain ways. It sucks to not be made visible---or perhaps purposefully made invisible---in the society you live in.

In this case, hypothetically, if one of the men is openly of another orientation, would he be included in the deck? Would society accept that? No, his orientation should not be mentioned in the card, as his orientation has nothing to do with his occupation which is the focal point of the card, but would society even allow him to be featured to begin with, given he is of another orientation? (These are just suggested questions, I don't ask for answer to them).