The article starts with discussing the top of the funnel (attracting M/F to domain) and hard-shifts to analyzing the bottom of the funnel (they're workers now!)

The article starts with discussing the top of the funnel (attracting M/F to domain) and hard-shifts to analyzing the bottom of the funnel (they're workers now!). I like that the analysis ends with relating the representation of Fs in certain segments of the workforce to the top of the funnel, but I'd like to see more discussion of top of funnel dynamics. Not discussed here is an idea I've heard in gender--pay analyses that regards the funnel in general, and I'd like to see analyzed more: though discussion tends to suggest that men are for some reason smarter/wiser than women for their pursuit of higher-paying pursuits (in this case, CS/programming), the discussion may in fact be overlooking a number of factors that make that pursuit non-optimal over the short or long-run (say, relatively lower quality of life) and women are in fact wise for not going for it. I admit that I do not quite buy the idea described above, but it does appeal to me, as a guy that enjoys learning about counter-intuitive and counter-productive ideas/behaviors. Lots of discussion of this matter that I've seen has gone the route of "look at these fantastic projections of industry growth for CS/programming jobs [as based on current conditions]! It's unthinkable [hard to understand] why more women aren't rushing into it!" Accordingly, I'd love to find out years from now that women are less moved (convinced) by projections of future conditions that are highly based in current conditions than men are (which I think is kinda wise).