You literally answer your own bafflement in what you typed. You said it’s a flimsy case for any systemic issues, indicating you believe this to be a collection of one-offs rather than systemic ones if you then believe the individual cases.
I’m saying your top level statement quoted below is harmful regardless of your motives because it works to minimize and excuse the impact and veracity of the accusations (which you yourself are not disputing individually). What your motives are for doing so is besides the point.
Your personal bar of it being “as broadly, uniformly terrible for all women in the company specifically” is irrelevant to just about anyone’s people’s definition of systemic harm, to the point that it’s very hard to take your argument as being in good faith.
> it's kind of off-putting how many different grievances are bundled together here—many different accusations about a wide variety of topics intended to paint a very broadly negative view of the company culture, everywhere from management to lower-level (male) employees. while I don't doubt that many of the grievances are true and merited, I have a hard time believing things could be as broadly, uniformly terrible for all women in the company specifically as the overall picture depicted here
