וְכֹ֣ל ׀ אִ֣ישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל קָ֚מוּ מִמְּקוֹמ֔וֹ וַיַּעַרְכ֖וּ בְּבַ֣עַל תָּמָ֑ר וְאֹרֵ֧ב יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל מֵגִ֥יחַ מִמְּקֹמ֖וֹ מִמַּ֥עֲרֵה גָֽבַע׃
And while everyone else on Israel’s side had moved away from their positions and had drawn up in battle order at Baal-tamar, the Israelite ambush was rushing out from its position at Maareh-geba.
(The above rendering comes from the RJPS translation—an adaptation of the NJPS translation—showing a slight modification made in October 2023. Before accounting for this rendering, I will analyze the plain sense of the Hebrew term containing אִישׁ.)
When a referring expression includes אִישׁ in construct with a group name, such as אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל֙, our noun marks its referent’s defining participation in the depicted situation. Here, in the context of intergroup hostilities, it labels the assembled militia in terms of its role as a party to the conflict with Benjamin. The militia’s members are construed as a unit—hence the singular noun. This usage regards them as one of the two opposing sides, as warring parties. On the meaning of this conventional usage in the context of hostilities, see further my comment at Josh 10:24.
As for rendering into English, the NJPS ‘the main body of the Israelites’ recognizes a collective usage, but without a situational orientation. See my comment at Josh 10:24. Meanwhile, the fact that women are not in view can go without saying, because it is self-evident from the military context.