I think the idea that women are somehow less capable of doing the "3-months in Silicon Valley" is harmful. I think that the (not directly) implied idea that it would be easier for men (men with families even) to do the startup dance on a string budget is harmful.
I think the idea that women just don't mature into people who are ready to tackle a startup until their 40s is harmful. I think that the idea that men are much more ready to tackle a startup in their 20s is harmful.
This whole article smacks of the idea that there is something fundamentally different about men and women and their capabilities at different points in their adult life. I think this idea is harmful.
I think these things are harmful, because I'd like to see the eradication of gender inequality as a social norm.
I suspect that while said differences may exist at this point in time, that they are cultural rather than physical in nature, and that if the goal is social equality, things like this do little more than reinforce cultural stereotypes about women and men.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very aware of the skew towards males in the tech world. There are a lot of reasons for that, almost all -- if not all -- of them cultural.
I assume that while only 7 founders have been female, that this isn't happening with 50% of applicants being female.
Perhaps doing a Y-Combinator style seed-funding ramen-profitable thing is only really appealing to people who are young. Perhaps we could use something like that for people who are older and have families and can't do the "drop everything for a few months in pursuit of this idea".
Perhaps.