No, there isn’t (nor here either). You aren’t even consistent about what you mark as your choice in that supposed “trade-off”. In this comment you call the suggestion “austerity”, yet in another dismiss it hyperbole (pot, meet kettle…)
The point wasn’t even that there’s something wrong with a little ping-pong and beer at work (read: “nobody’s trying to harsh your buzz, brah”). But there is something very wrong with making it a hiring litmus test, and limiting social bonding exclusively to one-dimensional bro activities. If shallow party-animal antics is what passes for “culture” in a company, then it has already hard-coded its misogyny problem, and no “other ways” cop-out is going to be effective. Incorporating a diverse array of options isn’t austere- it’s simply reasonable in a non-homogeneous population. Beer is great for those who want it. Everyone actually enjoying themselves and feeling accepted as a full member of the team is the appropriate goal.
Even if rank-and-file employees like Johnny continue to dismiss the problem, it’s an issue investors should be anxious about. Because they’re missing out on talent (and not just female), who have no interest in working under such conditions. Spend any time on GlassDoor reviews, and you’ll see engineers telling you they left inhospitable companies for greener pastures.