And the article is counting stats on how many women apply. That runs headlong into the fundamental problem with diversity metrics: proportions in an organization not matching proportions in society are by themselves a genuine problem, but it's taken for granted that this means something terribly dire. Then when you do some stuff and those numbers change, you have no idea if it's due to anything you did, or if things are actually better. And you're playing tribal politics, so it's hard to see that "my tribe benefited!" is better for society as a whole.
I have about six years of college. I have over five years of corporate experience. This detail is vastly more problematic to my mind than supposedly subconsciously gendered language.
I was a homemaker for a lot of years. I tend to feel like it's me, not the advertisement, as if I'm somehow missing important job hunting skillz or something. So I'm really happy to see that snippet in this article.