This is kind of a disappointing response to a reply that points out that there are a variety of mixed messages going around, which it's easy to be disheartened by.

I think it's largely wrong (i.e. the true widespread sentiment isn't what Kevin characterized), but it's wrong in a way that reflects actual messaging within the culture.

For example, your article itself is very thoughtful and reasonable. However, your title suggests that men are uniquely bad at creating "technology for all", and that women should do it instead.

I know that's not what "feminist" means. (And you reiterate that in the article.) But "fem-" as a prefix has implications that are hard to entirely escape.

I know that's not the only implication of "men-aren't-good-at-creating-technology-for-all". (And you spell out the alternative that you do mean, and which is justifiable, in the article.) But it is one implication.

Culture is full of these sorts of implications (or flat out statements, many much stronger than those in your title).

So it's worth a bit more thought about the issue that Kevin brings up. Fundamentally, confrontational messaging makes it harder to achieve a richly harmonious cooperation (which is where you actually gain benefits from diversity)...but things also tend not to change without any kind of pushback at all, so it's tricky. I think it deserves a little more attention, not just dismissal.