To paraphrase: "Women who didn't get a CS degree in their 20's can shove off, they're beyond hope and shouldn't try to break into a profession where they aren't qualified"
One man's (heh) objective and rational criterion is another's instrument of oppression.
All we hippies want you to do is just evaluate candidates on their own merits and not use shorthand like "no bootcamp applicants!" which can be easily construed as discriminatory. And it wouldn't hurt if you could try to see things from other people's perspective too, but that's optional.
Don't sacrifice the quality of education just to pursue an egalitarian end, it will backfire and get you the exact opposite result of what you want.
Whoosh, as it were. The point is that when you say that, it is what some other people hear. And that forcing disadvantaged demographics to read your mind to tell whether you're simply naive or a sexist jerk is hurting all of us. There are principles at work here beyond "sacrificing the quality of education".
The bottom line is that you aren't being nearly as welcoming as you think you are.
The interviewer will never know your entire backstory and needs to make a decision relatively quickly. If I would start to be overly empathetic or sensible, I would arguably start making biased and bad decisions based on personal gut feelings. That's what I need to avoid, not encourage.
But don't mix those things up when it comes to the bootcamp issue. I would rather state it the other way around. Women can complete and do deserve to get a full education. We do not need to funnel them through rushed education systems, or be afraid to evaluate candidates candidly. It is not productive to keep bad and often expensive programs alive that market themselves to people looking for a career jump.