Of course the article focuses on an egregious anecdote. That's how propaganda works. They imply with the anecdote that it's a typical case, when the vast major

Of course the article focuses on an egregious anecdote. That's how propaganda works. They imply with the anecdote that it's a typical case, when the vast majority is garden variety murky workplace sexual harassment shenanigans. Not defending any harassment, but most of it isn't stuff that justifies permanently ruining the attorney's life.