I agree with these comments, but I also find the essay to be pretty persuasive. I recently watched an interview with Joe Johnston, in which he mentions that the movie's time frame is three years! As busy as Cap's schedule is, surely he could have found some time for R&R amidst all the fighting. The essay makes a very strong case that Peggy is against premarital sex, and Steve appears to be okay with that. Given how heroic and horny Tony Stark is portrayed as being, and how openly Jane Foster goggled at Thor's bod, this seems more of a throwback/homage to 1940s Hollywood than either the realities the time or a manifestation of contemporary prudishness.
I agree that Rogers' character is more conservative than others (which is consistent with the comics). He's basically a good-natured, virtuous young loner, with very little experience of popularity (with males or females). We don't see him in orgies with groupies because it wouldn't be in character. But nor do we see him palling around with male fans, being the life of the party.
This is why I don't think the discussion of phalluses and ejaculation is convincing - it adds nothing to the argument, and is overly speculative.
Put another way, the psycho-sexual stuff is necessary if we don't already have convincing explanations for poles, tanks, and the like. But as plot devices they're perfectly reasonable as they are. They don't stand out as sexual in any way, and only an obsessive Freudian interpretation (in which everything is touched with sexual meaning) sees otherwise.