It is very much twisting his words. There's no argument that he seems rather anti-management, but your claim is that an anti-management bias is an insidious proxy for minimizing fields favored by women . I'm familiar with this argument and it's not invalid per se (usually you see it targeting things like literature majors in college or whatever), but claiming that he's using management as a proxy for "soft skills more associated with women" is ludicrous. He's saying mayer's position is a waste of a good brain because she's a manager, not because she's a woman.