The context to which I was responding to was that in the article the women were suggesting that people who have children should be given special treatment. Things like, if you choose to work less because you have a child you should still get the same raises and promotions as someone who didn't choose to work less (regardless of whether they reproduced). Things like your employer arranging for emergency daycare for you if your kid is sick, or otherwise allocating company resources (space) for kids to hang out in when they're out sick from school.

You're still defining that as special treatment. Why is that considered special treatment?

In what way is expecting the same pay and promotions as someone who works more than you not asking for special treatment? I really don't understand what you could be missing there.