It doesn't matter what syndrome she has, it doesn't matter that she is a women. It doesn't matter that the "offenders" are male, or if they have any syndrome.
What matters is a person, reacting in offense publicly shamed two other people after eavesdropping on a conversation that did not involve said person.
What matters is that said person used a company linked public account to do said shaming, and did not make any attempt to rectify the situation through lesser means, direct or indirect.
Said person could have request the behavior be stopped, or if said person was unable/unwilling/otherwise incapable of of doing so privately contacted staff to rectify the situation.
Instead said person choose to make the affair public, with an audience of thousands and now millions.
Said persons actions cost a supporter of 3 minor dependents their job, over an inappropriate sexual comment that was not directed towards said person, not sexual harassment, nor was sexist in nature.
Said persons actions caused damage to both the commentor's and their own company's image by the public nature and use of company associated social media.
This is what this is about. Both sides acted shamefully, and one side decided to make it a public affair. That is all.