I'm not the person you asked, but I don't see how Senator Warren speaking has much to do with women programmers. While there are lot of challenges, I don't think Ada Lovelace was denegrated. In fact, the quote about her is kind of nonsense as it refers to her historical significance as related to her actions at the time. Is this trying to say that she coded despite computer science historians trying to belittle her contribution after her death? Or is it poorly worded and intends to convey that people kept trying to stop her and she persisted (which is true as it was very difficult for her). "Despite continued assaults on the credibility of her contributions to modern computer science as the world’s first computer programmer, Ada Lovelace coded."

I also don't like how the article equates programming and its value system of efficiency and beauty as factors of value and correctness with the political aspect of Senator's Warren actions that uses a different value system. If you agree with Warren, then this article makes more sense because you think Warren was right, but was stopped. If you disagree with Warren, then you may think that she broke whatever rules of the Senate and was properly stopped.

Finally, I don't like how it equates all of these awesome female and non-binary programmer examples of success with Senator Warren's failure. She was stopped and Sessions was confirmed as attorney general. It would be cool if there was a better example that resulted in success, like Senator Warren's own story of how she became a senator.