Don't think it's obvious, if you just look at the headline. Is the integrity of the quote more important than looking non-biased against women programmers?
I usually come out pretty strongly against programmer-culture misogyny, however subtle, but here we're talking about a pretty famous quotation and I would answer to your question, "yes". There's a difference between sexism and historically-weighted badassness.
One could argue there's a literacy-filter being applied here more than a gender-filter.
> Yes, absolutely. It also pre-selects for those that have a sense of humor.
Why do minorities need to have a sense of humour about themselves? I do, but why do I have to to get into your club?
FWIW, I've made countless raunchy jokes that would have gotten me flagged by HR in a staid shop. The thing is -- I take responsibility for that. I.e. if I offended someone it's not necessarily because they have no sense of humour.
Because if the majority can't universally dismiss someone else taking offense as "having no sense of humor", then they run the risk of admitting that they might have said something wrong, or that they could have said it in a better way.
Dangit, answering rhetorical questions again...
Personally, the funny part to me is people arguing that the "integrity" of a quote that's already been hacked up must be "maintained".
The men who posted the ad would have laughed their socks off if a woman responded. Sure, it's immensely inspiring, but I wouldn't have been allowed to go on that expedition back in the day and it kind of makes me feel like I wouldn't be allowed to work at AdGrok as well, or at least looked down upon ("A woman programmer? Psh! Get back to the kitchen.")
One could argue there's a literacy-filter being applied here more than a gender-filter.