^Again, that's the textual, in-universe analysis. What I'm saying is that when you look at it metatextually and analyze it in terms of the storytellers' probable intent, there's an implied chauvinistic message. So there are two different levels of critical analysis to consider here. Obviously the underlying gendered assumptions of the story don't make a lot of sense, and that's part of what makes it a bad episode. But as I've said, it is fortunately possible for the viewer to disregard that subtext and interpret the text as you have. It's easy to believe that, in-universe, Lester's claim of institutional sexism is merely a symptom of her paranoia and denial. But I don't believe for a minute that that was what the writers intended.