I'm quoting myself for emphasis.
Baggy, tight, men's, women's. It entirely depends on what/how you ski. As long as you can perform well in what you are wearing, you're golden. If you get a solid outfit such as the photo of the girl above, awesome. It looks pretty awesome. I'd probably rock the same outfit if I had it. If you are doing a long tour on a warm day and the best thing suited that you own is a bright orange Mountain Hardwear Soft Shell and horrendous lightweight pants that a pen exploded on, wear that shit.
But if you think wearing 6 tall t's and 4 baselayers on a 20 degree day is a good idea, then you've got a problem (unless this is all you can afford, but I doubt that)
If you think that functional is defined by the level of waterproofing of your jacket, you may also have a problem.
Functional is whatever is best suited for your day's activities. If I'm going into the BC for 5 days in the PNW, maybe I want gortex. However, if you ski in a dryer climate and keep your gear in tip top shape, function for you may be 10k. If you have a locker, you probably don't need lots of pockets. If you're always in need to do business, maybe you need a jacket with phone buttons on the sleeve. Functional is relative to you.
That being said, there are plenty of companies that make women's tech gear. Eider, Spider, Marmot, HellyHansen, Peak Performance, Mountain Hardwear, Cloudvail. Given, I'd probably only wear Eider or Peak Performance out of that, but it does exist.
Who cares if Oakley makes 20k women's pieces or not. The profit margins on that stuff must be pretty damn low. The amount of women skiing aggressively enough to need a gortex piece is low enough and satisfied enough to go with one of the aforementioned brands or a men's item. As BC skiing grows, the number of companies making a women's tech item will increase. Supply and Demand.
Oh, and here is a group of girls looking like girls, but being uber badass.
You don't need to look like a dude to get respect.
My beloved pants.
