@Normaigai
You see this discussion is interesting unlike and argument on who should shut up first. Should the 'list makers' have an obligation to recognize that if there are women and men who both qualify, the woman may/will be less likely to come forwards because they think they're less worthy. And is so, is processing first come first serve acceptable or is it inherently sexist. And if inherently sexist (which I suspect it probably is), is it the type of sexism that is acceptable in the rushed circumstances or is it only acceptable because women are excepted to accept sexism. If for some reason, it was all women applying on first come first serve, are we sure the planes would be filled with women.
A woman who works in eligible roles in a place like Afghanistan is no shrinking violet. I can guarantee that. They would be the first to demand their rights. Or be well connected enough such that they get given them anyway.
The problematic assumption here is that there's an orderly queue of people lining up with papers 'proving' eligiblity.
In reality intelligence services are a messy network of transactions, most of which take place undercover with as little proof as possible. There is no single way of proving eligibility. It'll be a mixture of people vouching for colleagues, people having some proof (say some insider knowledge) and people who have no business being eligible but knowing the right person and slipping through.
The ones on the first planes out are those who were contactable on short notice and known to the military. Direct employees on the payroll. Translators, engineers, etc. Not all Afghans - a lot of the men look like foreign nationals employed by the military (who might not have any family in Afghanistan, so no women to consider).
The next batch will likely be more balanced because people will have had time to gather up their families and make their way to the processing centres (or whatever it is) amidst the turmoil. Even for these it's not about men vs women but who can prove their identity. A well connected woman who has a brother who already left for example and whom the Taliban know - she would go ahead of a translator whom nobody knows and has no proof of connection.
A neat 'binary' scenario in which there is ' a man and woman who both qualify and it's really really obvious' is very unlikely. A 'woman not coming foward' is as unlikely as a 'man not coming forward' because people would go as a family - unless there's no time, and the choice if for whoever's eligible (man or woman) to wait for family or go ahead first.
NOW CAVEAT : the only scenario I can think of is that a man and woman who both qualify but cannot prove it. But they believe the man instead of the woman. Then yes, this is sexist. However again it's unlikely that a man or woman turn up alone.