I think commenters are trying to challenge her interpretation of events without critiquing her directly (individuals may or may not succeed).

I think the commenters who are doubting her interpretation mean well. They want to draw a very clear line around what is gender-related mistreatment, because if that line becomes unclear or logically inconsistent then that undercuts gender equality.

I think this is largely a good thing. It's too easy for people to automatically get swept up in emotions of an "us vs them" rather than analyze an issue the way a juror would.