Who, you ask? IEEE and the ones complaining that images of "attractive women" should not be used.
That is, quite ironically, discriminatory to women (you're literally arguing to involve less women) and a particularly-vague subset of women at that.
It is also indirectly discriminatory to men, because images of "attractive men" usually don't get as much complaints.
The women complaining using images of "attractive women" makes them uncomfortable also implies something very dark in their line of thought: That men in general are supposedly evil, sexual monsters for daring to like pictures of attractive women. Or the women feel an inferiority complex regarding their physical appearance and want to take it out on others.
It's all just ridiculous and a worthless waste of everyone's time. The model in the image doesn't want it used anymore, that's all the (and arguably only) reason we should use something else.
Where have they complained about attractive women being used? I've only seen complaints about the image being from a soft porn magazine. Maybe you can conjure up someone saying this, but it's not the common complaint.
So your whole rant is off the mark. As I said: a straw man. There is no discrimination going on here.
From the article this thread is about, emphasis mine:
>It is also a sexually suggestive photo of an attractive woman, and its use by men in the computer field has garnered criticism over the decades, especially from female scientists and engineers who felt that the image (especially related to its association with the Playboy brand) objectified women and created an academic climate where they did not feel entirely welcome.
Who are discriminating in this context? No one. You've just made that up.