Pretty much all Indo-European languages have the distinction between “human being” and “male adult”. Pretty much all Indo-European languages have expressions which include both sexes in a male plural (like Latin “filii”, which means “sons” but also “children including both sons and daughters”). It’s very common in colloquial English today for women to refer to groups of other women as “you guys”, certainly without intending any bow to masculine dominance!
But all languages are constantly in the process of enlarging the reach of some expressions and narrowing the focus of others. Making different ranges of expression intelligible between two different languages and across time is always going to have some difficulties involved. Even in Douay-Rheims, you will see many different Latin, Greek, and Hebrew expressions being represented by just “man” or “men”. This may give you a false idea of the text; your comments seem to show that.
So the first question you should ask, if you’re concerned about sexual plurals vs neutral plurals vs collective nouns, is what the original language said and meant. Learning Greek or learning Hebrew is not impossible for you. Feel free to take a course. (You will probably want to back up learning NT Greek with learning Aramaic, to understand underlying expressions that Jesus may have used.)
If you want a quick and dirty look at sexual plurals without learning the languages (very apt to give you wrong ideas, but understandable if you want to check out a specific verse), you will find explicit commentaries out there which refer to the exact words being used in the original. But if you don’t know the languages well, you may not know who is feeding you a line of BS and who is being accurate. There are many axes being ground in scripture studies.
If you are not interested in going out and learning this, you probably aren’t all that concerned with sexual plurals. You should figure out what is really bothering you.