Well, I think that this article did a good thing, which is bring up this topic, which is very interesting to think about. How would you code that behavior?
I think it would be as simple as, look at demographics and census data, and then choose sexual nature and attractiveness rules when a character is born, or rolled. (I was born this way) Anyway, I think it is fascinating to speculate about how to correctly code gender roles and sexuality in a simulation game. I think a problem with that original article is that they didn't really take much of a stance or open a dialogue. It would have been nice for the developer to play nice with that writer and meet her halfway, but it didn't happen.
Now we have the developer speaking out on reddit (and Kotaku) in his own words contradicting that article.
It is really interesting hearing the developer talk about this as well, because he sounds like someone who is good at coding things, and not so good at "reading the room" so to speak when talking about issues like gender roles. It is a touchy subject, with good reason, and his reasoning is a bit odd. But he does admit that it is all a WIP and things will change in updates.
Kotaku did a pretty good job with their article, and they somehow got the developer to go on record with quotes. I guess Kotaku's journalistic standards are not amazing? We'll never know how that original article fell apart, but it seemed like the developer was more than willing to talk to Kotaku. That article is pretty even handed, and even critical of the developer's thought process, which is probably what the RPS article should have done.