Maybe it is useful for understanding what distinctly female values we want AIs to promote, but it doesn’t seem particularly relevant for things like Interpretability or most other current research agendas.
Could it be that perhaps the research agendas themselves could benefit from a more diverse set of perspectives? I have not thought this through as carefully as you have but the seatbelt analogy seem perhaps appropriate—perhaps the issue there was exactly that the research agenda on seat belts did not include the impact on e.g. pregnant women (speculation from my side). Half the people affected by AI will be women so maybe mostly-men teams could possibly overlook considerations that apply less to men and more to women?
Could it be that perhaps the research agendas themselves could benefit from a more diverse set of perspectives? I have not thought this through as carefully as you have but the seatbelt analogy seem perhaps appropriate—perhaps the issue there was exactly that the research agenda on seat belts did not include the impact on e.g. pregnant women (speculation from my side). Half the people affected by AI will be women so maybe mostly-men teams could possibly overlook considerations that apply less to men and more to women?