Interesting perspective. I've added it to the appendix at the bottom of the article

... I'm very much not sure how I feel about that article. And I don't mean that in a negative way, it's just very... huh.

But why is CSS so undervalued when it’s a necessary component of most websites and applications? Heydon Pickering writes that it’s partially due to the femininity of CSS: In my experience, men especially earn kudos for their knowledge of JavaScript or Python, but little from CSS skills. CSS, which makes things look ‘pretty’, is considered feminine (don’t tell that to a peacock).

Uh, what? I've never seen or heard that kind of perspective. And I don't agree with it.

Technical teams certainly often focus on the more technical aspects. With requirements and [time] pressure, technical teams often remain within that view scope.

But as soon as you get other people on board technicality loses its importance. What you see is what you discuss and present and has impact.

I would have never thought of putting a gender on one or the other, or on a language.

CSS being a feminine language isn’t a bad thing. Quite the contrary, I’d argue that all programming is feminine as it was pioneered by women (who were then pushed out by men).

This argumentation seems pretty pointlessly far off of the topic at hand. Why do you feel the need to categorize programming - and even all of programming - into a gender? That's completely misguided.