>>16707212funny, because it sounds like most of the scientists abolishing the gender binary are pushing science to new frontiers, whereas it is a vocal minority who want to stay in their status quo. i believe you've captured two sets of scientists, yet have inverted who is whom.
more seriously since you offer a good input, the reality is more nuanced insofar that proper, good scientists need aspects of both of what you described. the will and grit and determination to set their foot down on what is settled, recognize falsified data attempting to overturn that settled science (e.g. binary sex), and to stick to rigorous scientific methodology while also attempting to discover what's new. the difference is that you've neglected rigor, and when one neglects rigor they often fall into the second camp you described.
to be a good experimentalist, you need only to be a good experimentalist (in line with what you say regarding a technician). but to be a good theoretician, you must also be a good experimentalist (insofar that you properly understand experiments, their limitations, their methodologies, etc.) so that you can effectively model it. this is your first camp.
so it's not a dichotomy, it's a hierarchy