What if there had been a line immediately following with the genders reversed, with attractive serving men as a perk? Are people upset with the objectification

What if there had been a line immediately following with the genders reversed, with attractive serving men as a perk? Are people upset with the objectification of women, or the assumption that women wouldn't be participants and aren't the audience of that flyer? You need to know what the offensive issue is before you can apologize and correct it. Does the apology go more "We're sorry we contributed to the objectification of a group of people, treating them not as an intelligent whole, but simply as a pretty object to be admired, like a piece of art, while the others work." Or should it be along the lines of "We're sorry we made women feel excluded by targeting solely men in our advertisement, perpetuating the idea that we don't expect women to be participants in the tech event." To me, I think the latter issue is the major one to be solved. It's something that can be easily corrected, and is specific to the tech industry (and other male-dominated fields). I reject the idea that the two issues can be conflated, that the very practice of objectification is what makes women feel unwelcome. (Correct me if I'm wrong?) My internal counterexample I'm using is how I'd feel if the flyer offered as a perk "Men: Tired from your long hack-a-thon? Have our hot, muscled men bring you a refreshment or carry you to the lounge area to take a power nap." It's human nature to enjoy attractive people, landscapes, art, etc, and I, as a man, don't feel worse off knowing that women might enjoy ogling attractive men.