In this case the author is talking about the person the article is about. It is relevant that the operatic Brünnhilde is more an object of ridicule, in contrast to the queen on which she's based.

Every single story?? Why does this upset you so much that you would completely exaggerate the truth? It was one sentence at the end of a minor paragraph in one article, written by a poet. Who cares?

I remember the term as being popularized in the 1970s, in regard to the Washington Bullets' chances of winning the NBA championship. I thought that it was the coach who coined it, but Wikipedia says not. Anyway, Wikipedia traces the expression "The opera ain't over till the fat lady sings" no farther back than the middle 1970s. The Ring Cycle had a fair bit of history by then; and I'm not that confident in the ability of guys in the 1970s sports world to name the soprano roles in opera.

The number of people who will share when you appeal to woke ideology + those who will hate share in order to ridicule any such instance = more engagement.

You may not agree with the line, but it's not shoehorned in, it's what the article was written for. It's literally in the lede:

> Over the centuries, Brunhild and Fredegund were dismissed and even parodied. But a new book shows how they outwitted their enemies like few in history

Have you seen even one other article mention the origin of that phrase? I haven’t.

How can you be so triggered about people talking about the things that trigger them that have nothing to do with you?

This morning I was watching a 60s comedy about a bunch of ambassadors at an international UN-like meeting. There was one black ambassador from Africa, and every time he said anything, the other ambassadors made jokes about him eating the other people in the room. It's just a joke, but it's just a joke about how the one black person in a room full of white people must be trying to eat them.

I can either be sad about that, amused by that, nonplussed or indifferent. The weird thing is how mad you get based on how I feel.

How else is she supposed to sell Germanic history to the academy?

It fits nicely with an observation she made herself:

> [Brunhild] appears unnaturally tall and pale in illuminated manuscripts from later in the medieval period; voluptuous and glowing in Renaissance portraits; pensive and windswept in Romantic-era prints.

Well, this portrait, made today, says "yasss queen".

Anyway, the article is structured as a sandwich, and if you skim past the "bread" at the ends, the "meat" is worth reading.

So, one factoid, small and relevant (contrasting the fate of the operatic character vs the actual history on which she was bases), so annoys you by highlighting your misogynistic worldview that it is the only thing in the entire article that you find worthy of comment? Why so threatened?

Good point, or it would be, if only the world had not shoehorned misogyny into almost every little bit of our history.