The way I understand it, he was trying to state (in a clumsy way) what kind of team they have. Indicating that it's technical staff does not consist only of men.
Everything else on the list is proffered as transactional compensations of talented engineers renting their labor to the CEO. Highlighting the youth of these engineers while including them on a list of perks implies specific things about how they are valued.
If he had separately described the work environment, and had included these engineers in that description, and had not focused SOLELY on the young female engineers, then this wouldn't be a story.
But I do think it is just clumsyness - I don't think he thinks of women as objects, he is probably just happy to have them around for what they add as a person.
Or am I being naive?
The intent and perspective of the author do not make the problem go away any more than a hunter realizing he accidentally shot someone in the wilderness that he mistook for a deer makes the victim's bullet wound close.
Part of the concern is that the youth and gender are highlighted prominently for these engineers, and ONLY the young woman engineers are listed as perks. I absolutely value the contribution women engineers bring to my work environments, they are valuable additions to our team, but some of them aren't young.
Again, IF the engineering team was described separately, OR if other engineers were included as 'perks', e.g. "We have a senior Rails contributor on staff whom you can learn with", OR if the perk wasn't specifically calling out their youth and gender (we have a multinational team of many races and genders), then this would be a non-story.
I actually believe that more companies should do that, I like to look at the Github profile of future colleagues, and see the team I am going to be a part of.
My current employer have this page: http://billetto.co.uk/pages/about which gave a good first impression (sorry for the danish page).