I took a college course on Hitchcock movies once, and on the first day, the professor laid out two ground rules: one, what the filmmakers had or have to say about this or that can be useful, but is never necessarily definitive, and two, there is never such thing as "reading too much" into a movie, for the purposes of discussion at least. Even mistakes and/or improvisations are preserved forever in the movie; ergo, everything is up for grabs in terms of constructing arguments. That said, not all arguments are justified or convincing.
So, how does this article do?
While the other soldiers passionately climb on top of one another to try and reach for the flag, Steve calmly undoes the pinions holding the pole up, sending it crashing to the ground. His reward for dispassionately reversing the phallic erection of the pole is to ride in a jeep with Peggy.
Okay, now that
's a funny and fun observation.
You could just as easily claim it shows out of the box thinking. The other soliders thought they had to climb the pole in order to get at the flag, whilst Rogers thought about it and brought the flag down to him.
One could argue the former shows that in order to get ahead you have to climb over people to reach the top, whilst the later shows you can get just as far ahead by not doing so.
As for Peggy remember the character was British and the British are generally percieved to be more reserved in matters such as Sex. So perhaps you could say it was reinforcing the perception about the British being reserved.