I would grade the provided answer a **9.0**. 

Here's why it scores high:

1. **Comprehensive Identification**: The answer correctly identifies the attributes `case:citizen`, `case:gender`, `case:german speaking`, and `case:married` as potential sensitive attributes. Each of these attributes is indeed relevant when considering fairness.
  
2. **Rationale Provided**: For each attribute, the answer provides a succinct rationale as to why it could be considered sensitive and how discrimination could potentially arise from its use.

3. **Context Sensitivity**: The answer acknowledges that the identification of these attributes as sensitive depends on societal and legal norms, which is an important consideration in fairness discussions.

However, here are reasons it didn't receive a perfect score:

1. **More Detailed Examples**: The answer could give minor enhancements by providing specific scenarios or historical examples related to discrimination based on these attributes, which would offer a deeper understanding.
  
2. **Possible Over-Limitation**: Use of the phrase "binary representation of gender" may not fully encompass non-binary or other gender identities, which could be viewed as an oversight in a comprehensive discussion on fairness.

3. **Potential for Bias in Other Attributes**: While the main potential sensitive attributes were mentioned, there could be an acknowledgment that other attributes (like `country of origin` or similar derived variables) might also play a role depending on specific contexts, even if they are not directly listed.

Overall, the answer is largely accurate and well-reasoned, warranting a high score.