I have two concerns with the ideology espoused in this article; the first is that a majority female program is lauded as "diverse", whereas a majority male program, even by a similarly small margin, is considered problematic. I don't buy the idea that any given subset of students has to either exactly match or disfavor men compared to the general population.

My second concern is with the stubborn insistence that we must force the demographics of different institutions to adhere to some arbitrary constructed criteria. Whether we like it or not, there are social differences between men and women that cause them to have different interests. Here's a recent article that speaks to this point (although taking the opposite stance as me): http://qz.com/823162/a-new-study-shows-how-star-trek-jokes-a...

The article I linked basically advocates some sort of planned social manipulation to make CS culture more appealing to women. That doesn't sit right with me at all. No one suggests that we should go and macho-fy teaching or nursing or literature so we can get more men in those majors. I think it would be very destructive to do something like that.

The reality is that different fields have characteristics that tend to match (or not match) with the unique social characteristics of different groups. I think it's fine if you don't like those unique characteristics (maybe you think everyone should have the exact same culture), but don't try to force the world to adhere to your vision by lowering educational standards or trying to manipulate the academic culture of whatever group you're targeting.