Some of their questions were posed as "did proposals treat SAVB appropriately, yes/no" when the answer was "sometimes". Here is what I told them at the end:
The last few q's are difficult in that some proposals did and others did not, yet the questions are framed as all or nothing. Many/most proposals dealt with SABV appropriately. A few did not. Those were pointed out, and that was considered in the scoring.
In my experience (over 10 years on various study sections), the SABV policy has changed how proposals deal with sex.
Further, as a brief bit of history: My mother sat on study sections in the 70s & 80s. She was also part of a large (epidemiological) project that, at that time, was rejected to study heart disease in women because "we have the answers for men".
The world has changed.