Running in the minority here but I honestly don't have a HUGE problem with the omission of "these", even though, yes it does change the meaning and intent of PG

Running in the minority here but I honestly don't have a HUGE problem with the omission of "these", even though, yes it does change the meaning and intent of PG's quote. I am more interested that in all the backlash, I haven't seen anyone trash Valleywag, which originally sensationalized the article in the first place. If Valleywag didn't add their hyperbolic rhetoric around the quotes, would we be having discussion? Regardless whether you think PG meant these women to be those who apply to YC/choose CS as a major before hacking at 13, I think the greater point he's making (and one that is being lost here) is that STEM bias against women is systemic and starts much earlier than the YC interview process, board room or admissions desk. Girls who are discouraged from STEM interests at 6 and 7 are less likely to pick up "hacking" at 13. This causes a ripple effect over time as fewer girls/women convert into STEM practitioners at each stage of growth, partly from additional gender bias and partly because we're starting at a lower number. This is a real issue and I'm glad we're having a discussion about this. I just hope we don't lose sight of what matters.