וַיִּצָּעֵ֧ק אִֽישׁ־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל מִנַּפְתָּלִ֥י וּמִן־אָשֵׁ֖ר וּמִן־כׇּל־מְנַשֶּׁ֑ה וַֽיִּרְדְּפ֖וּ אַחֲרֵ֥י מִדְיָֽן׃
And now Israel’s side from Naphtali and Asher and from all of Manasseh rallied for the pursuit of the Midianites.
(The above rendering comes from the RJPS translation, an adaptation of the NJPS translation. 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 their being a constitutive party to the conflict with Midian. 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. This is one of the instances where a “collective” usage of אִישׁ is clearly evident, from the semantics of the governing verb in this clause, and from the mismatch in grammatical number (plural verb) in the next clause. 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, 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.