Sure, but this particular woman was clearly not in any kind of back seat when she's up in front, teaching the lesson, responding to the question herself.
And she chose an ill-considered response and now she very well may have to face the consequences. I thought that was a pretty standard social justice principle (or, if you will, a plain justice principle, since it's not like it only applies to those who bring this social justice stuff into their workplaces, as this woman tried to do): "freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences". I don't really see any reason why this shouldn't also apply here.
I agree that the male officer was essentially being a pearl-clutcher, but who would say that this tactic hasn't worked over and over (and over!) for people espousing the very ideas that the female officer herself was trying to assert? To allude to Douglas Murray's recent book on how this sort of thing is ruining western societies, The Madness of Crowds, there comes a time when the majority simply stops seeing any compelling reason not to use the same tactics that have worked so well for others.
I'm not involved in any of this political stuff, but I worry that this may be happening.
