She never claimed, in the accounts she gave later in life, that she had been treated particularly badly.

She was matter-of-fact about the barriers rather than dramatic about them.

She was also clear, in the advocacy work she did in retirement, that those barriers had been real and that their continued existence for Native women in STEM fields was a problem worth spending significant energy to address.

Her matter-of-fact quality is part of what makes her accounts credible.

She was not performing grievance.