[waveman]

Her complaint here, one of many many complaints of sexism, seems to be that her manager is unhappy that she loads him down with complaints and too much detail that he doesn't want to know.

She puts this down to sexism. It's not clear why this is sexist. She is wasting his time. If he is like most managers he is very pressed for time and he doesn't need his time wasted.

In this case, sexism is a redundant explanation because other, better, simpler explanations are available. in Bayesian theory this is technically called "explaining away" and it is a good thing. Fact A is not evidence for claim B if explanation C is better.

http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~murphyk/Bayes/bnintro.html

[wpietri]

Note that you've gone from "It is not clear to me that it is sexist," to "She is wrong about the explanation."

That something isn't clear to you only means it isn't clear to you. She is in possession of an enormous volume of information about the situation. You aren't. The reasonable conclusion isn't "sexism is a redundant explanation"; it's "perhaps she has not revealed the information the led her to her conclusion".

Now ask yourself: why did you so quickly leap to the particular erroneous conclusion that sexism was not the problem? There are a lot of erroneous conclusions to come to. Or you could have come to none at all.