Oh.
Up to this point I was keeping notes with my criticism of this article, but this caused me to stop and reconsider.
If I may advise the author, I understand how difficult it is to balance life decisions that seem to be at odds, but trying to deny the very reason why those life decisions are hard to combine will not make the choice any easier.
It is stupid and sexist that you have to think of pursuing a PhD and having two or three kids as an either/or option, when the (probably) man you'll want to start a family with will not have to do that, even if they are also a PhD in STEM.
This is part and parcel of the sexism that people complain about. It's not just inappropriate behaviour by senior male academics. There is no reason why a woman must put her career on hold to start a family when a man in the same career does not need to. There is no reason why women are expected to be the ones most concerned with the business of having and raising children when men are expected to be the most concerned with advancing their careers. How is that not sexist? How is that not the sexism that's keeping women from advancing their careers in STEM academia?