That is a really gross misrepresentation of the article. The complaint is that women who spoke out about gender discrimination were retaliated against, and they

That is a really gross misrepresentation of the article. The complaint is that women who spoke out about gender discrimination were retaliated against, and they are the only ones who were laid off on their team: > After she was laid off, Ho learned that she and two other female employees who had spoken up about discrimination were the only ones laid off from the team she’d been on, the complaint said. I'm not sure how you could read the entire thing and then end up quoting that sentence as the only thing that sticks out. And either you stopped reading there or you intentionally left out the next paragraph which would explain that these aren't even the same cases: > [Wallander] clarified that the “two women” mentioned in her post were laid off months before Ho. FWIW, those 400 layoffs also almost certainly included more than five women. You need to learn to assume good faith, even if the counterparty politically disagrees.