I am the original commentator who wrote the comment on techcrunch.
I am not sure how I can be accused of sexism. It is somewhat amazing especially when I only alluded to technical training and implied ability, and did not mention or think of gender at all.
I think it is a reasonable question to ask about why someone who recently graduated (2013) had a sudden change in interest from religious studies/journalism to engineering. One plausible reason is is that it is because studying computer science and engineering is much harder than studying religious studies and journalism. So, arguably, the CTO either was not interested in a technical field of study, or couldn’t cut it, or perhaps didn’t need to study because she was already a ‘ace’ programmer / hacker.
As an engineer, why would you work for a person who was either 1) uninterested in computer science, or 2) Incompetent to study computer science. I guess the third alternative is that your boss is a expert RoR hacker and you want to be one too. I can see that being true, especially if writing RoR apps and wordpress hacking is a core competence that you value over other boring things like understanding finite automata.
Also, I am disappointed that both the CTO (in her blog post) and the commentators have pulled the gender card instead of addressing the technical competence argument. To me, this is another problem area because if I’m a dude who works for a women (and my boss is incidentally a woman), I wouldn’t want one who always attempts to explain my behavior as being biased on gender issues.