The "detail" is so vague as to not deserve that name. Give me a ten minutes description of the described environment and I will give you a dozen alternative explanation to the especulation presented in the article.
Is it unimaginable that this might be uncomfortable?
Is is unimaginable that this might not? Maybe because it was made respectfully and in a friendly manner? Could the fact that the person telling it didn't mention any rejection mean that this was the case? Why are we talking in questions all the time?
This is a blame game. It's tried on individuals. When they reject accusations, there's the "you are biased even if you don't realize" and then the "you are a tool in the hands of an oppressing society". If you can't convince, at least seed the doubt.
Have you seen what happens when there are no employers? Open source projects, I mean. It's qualified then as a "toxic culture" with "ambient pressure", "terrified women" and so on.
There is a handful of nonsense viruses that survive and flourish in the interwebs, concepts that are instantly rejected as absurd but have enough followers to keep then alive for years. Either you detect them early or you will be pushed by peer pressure (until the fad goes away).
Unfortunately the clear feeling that something is totally wrong and backwards (like EU defending Samsumg right to push its crap instead of Google apps) fades very quickly to propaganda.
diversity (or lack of it) of the field is a result of the shift in targeting a certain type of person for the programmer's job
Based on... which facts exactly?
Edit: As far as I can see, the picture is that there's a bunch of socially inept males that some shadowy powers carefully select to make a mysoginistic getto to keep women at bay.
This is utterly ridiculous, no matter which amount of social science "evidence" you put into it. I'll be retired by then, but I'm pretty sure enough time will put this crazy notion to rest.