Been thinking the same thing, maybe: Men should speak for personal masculine phrases, women for personal feminine phrases.
Wondering if maybe the single male/female speaker for single sentences containing different gender pronouns&verbs is meant to make us think more critically about gender usage? Still somewhat confusing.
It looks like someone just copied some pop song's lyrics and machine translated them. And there's the boys' backing vocals choir and the girls' backing vocals choir that sing "we see" and "we see" as an answer to some mystery question in the song that was sung by the main vocalist...
The thing is Standard Arabic uses a verb (which doesn't indicate gender in the first person in either language) while Hebrew uses a present participle (which does in both). In the Arabic vernaculars, the distinction would be maintained in the singular since they also use a participle, but still not the plural because they use the masculine plural for both. You could use the participle in Standard Arabic, but unless it happens to occur in a very specific context, it would sound a tad off: نحن راؤون نحن رائيات Nahnu ra'un Nahnu ra'iyat
If it is a computer programme it doesn't perhaps distinguish between wrong spellings and the addition of brackets and letters indicating gender, for example. I have sometimes added the words female and male successfully, especially after animal names, and the programme has identified them as correct, although not always. I think it has to do with other details in the spelling or regarding the sense of the statement which I probably don't immediately see.
In that case I understand you use the masculine which becomes inclusive, as in Spanish nosotros/nosotras.
It does the same for animals when you add the word male or female to make the translation more precise.
To see can be rendered by voir as well as by regarder, depending on the context, in French. it is like Spanish ver y mirar.