Well it's basically always possible to claim that society has some hidden variable, but I'll bite. As a woman, if you want children/family you need to secure at least a certain baseline of living quality and stability before the age of 35 and realistically much earlier. This alone dramatically changes the timeline and priorities of women.
I'm not even suggesting some "hidden variable"; there are plenty of obvious variables that stare us right in the face without even having to look all that hard. Doesn't take much imagination to come up with a few.
The cost of freezing eggs is pretty small compared to tech salaries though, so if women's instincts are telling them not to go into tech because they need to hurry up and have kids, those instincts are out of date wrt what modern medicine can do.
With what modern medicine can do, sorta, kinda, in the West, if you're wealthy enough. Freezing eggs is nowhere near standard practice (though with ever growing credentialism, it may well just become such), and having kids (really: starting a family) involves a lot of other things than just getting some sperm and an egg to occupy the same space at the same time.
(Also, really, modern tech is currently one of the most family-friendly profession out there, because of demand surplus. I think GP is talking about women living a different reality than men, not about women not wanting to go to tech strictly because of it.)
