..that they would be undefiled with women...
Literal, or spiritual?
If it is literal, we expect them to be exclusively male.
In the modern age, many are not okay with that. Some want it to include women.
A metaphorical take which says 'women' means false religious systems allows that there may be women.
I think it does not have to be one or the other but that it may be both literal and metaphorical.
But I cannot accept that it includes women because that violates the literalness of the verse, although that isn't to say it doesn't have a metaphorical application.
I raise three points:
It says they are undefiled with women. This suggests they are male.
It says they are 'firstfruits'. I have explained how that means they are off limits, they will not marry, or that it is unlawful for someone to marry them. They are physical virgins.
As to it having ANY metaphorical implication, God has instructed me in the literal mode all over the Bible. So I have witnessed with those who spiritualize in great measure often will spiritualize things we have trouble imagining in a literal sense, i.e. things legendary. But I have also personally seen in some remarkable ways how the Bible is MUCH more literal than we give it credit for. Put simply, I firmly believe that absent any significant factors suggestive of it having a metaphorical intent, then the presumption should rest on the Bible intending a literal purpose, corresponding physically to the thing described. IF it has a METAPHORICAL purpose, then I still don't see why a literal interpretation is dispelled. Even if it is fulfilled metaphorically but is not fulfilled literally then it is literally an untrue statement. I don't think there are errors of this sort in the inspired scriptures. To dismiss any biblical claim as not being literally true seems to be done when the things described are most unbelievable or controversial. This is a dangerous tool to hand to any and every one, to decide for himself what he thinks is literal and what is not. If the Bible cannot be believed as a literal document, then it is not valid for drawing any conclusion from. If it is not literally true, then it is literally false.
If it is a metaphorical excerpt, then it HAS to be shown why the literal is precluded. Otherwise it is either both metaphorical and physical, or it is only physical. I see nothing in Revelation 14 that discounts a literal value.
If the above is true, then this is true...
1) They are men.
2) They are virgins.
I add one speculative characteristic I have never heard presented: That they may be musicians.
I suggest they are musicians, in one sense or another, because they learn the song that no one else can learn. This doesn't mean there aren't organists or guitarists, harpists, flautists, or piccoloists. There is no reason there can't be all of those. Some musicians today play a whole variety of instruments most have never heard of and we could guess those are represented as well. I think they are musicians or at some point they will learn. And it could be that this song is unlearnable because the song is arranged for 144,000 musicians to collaborate and perform. No one, except a God, could organize such a massive musical endeavor. The sheet music, composition, and arrangement would take centuries to compose I suspect and the angels would not be short of work. Legions of angels would be required for such a work.
Some people after followers on Youtube and the need to be dramatic would put together a crappy video to say what I just said, and they'd add some easy listening music (piano and strings mostly) like from Titanic and then add the words "God told me in a dream" or some stupid crap. So basically, if you're looking for the 144,000, they aren't making dramatic videos in their free time. They're doing something much more boring, and that is probably why they never could marry a woman because they are hugely boring. That reminds me, making dramatic videos is boring also so maybe they are doing that, but I doubt it.