Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus testify to the Byzantine Text, their greater ancestors . They are genuine Bible's. They have many errors in their ancestry. But they go back to the originals. The Byzantine, or Original Text.
Had it been original, it would be in all of the manuscripts. But the variant is only in a few manuscripts that did not make it beyond the 4th century. It died out because it was never in many manuscripts. Probably came into existence in the 2nd century.
Codex Siniaticus is a valuable 4th century handwritten manuscript of the Greek Bible. It is of great historic value. No one is asking you to accept it's handwritten errors. It is not a threat to you or anyone else. Unless a person just hates Bibles. Then it is a legitimate threat.
Have a wonderful Gospel Synopsis Greek/English. Its English was the RSV, which did not match the Nestle/Aland always. It did have a KJV collation so you could see the differences between the RSV and the KJV. You could reproduce the KJV with the apparatus. Of course they should have made one with...
The overwhelming number of "young girls or women" would have been virgins anyway. So it would be impossible for you to prove any different unless you had forthcoming historical information previously unknown. Or so it seems to me.
There is a reason the 3rd-2nd century B.C. Septuagint translators chose the word, confirmed by the Gospel of Matthew.
Nevertheless, a translator must translate as he/she thinks best. The RSV may not be as good as it should (like all translations), but it is not a "red" Bible.
The fb0 was wrong...