I have respect for the BBC but they have a story on their site that is head scratching.

[Igel]

1. I'm not sure that's the stance they take.

I mean,

Four years of war have forced Ukrainians to rethink nearly every aspect of daily life. Increasingly that includes decisions about relationships and parenthood – and these choices are, in turn, shaping the future of a country in which both marriage and birth rates are falling.

Seems that this is the focus:

According to the National Academy of Sciences, the effects of the war will last well beyond the end of hostilities – which, in any case, is not in sight. The result, it says, could be a population of 25.2 million people by 2051, less than half what it was in 1992. ...

Despite insistence from Moscow that it does not wish to take over the whole of Ukraine, many Ukrainians are convinced that Russia poses an existential risk to their country – and one that will outlast Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In this context, Ukraine's population decline should be seen as a security threat, says Hladun. "Russia is simply demographically much larger," he argues. "And in this sense, it has more resources for war."

The longer the war continues, the more the uncertainty will dent the country's prospects for long-term recovery.

That is, it's not about blaming women--it's about the long-term effect that the war will have on the country, as a security threat if nothing else, layered on top of previous secular trends.