Sure, different situation. While those differences might be important in the context of evaluating player culpability, they really aren't that relevant if the argument is "WNBA players are acting violently and the league needs to do something about it!" The point I was trying to make is in essense what you have written down below. The people jumping on this current situation aren't "concerned citizens who want to ensure the safety of WNBA players and were shocked by the hard fouling going on." Because hard fouling is not new. But unfortunately, the outrage does tend to be selective.
For example, there have been 3 F2 fouls called this season in the WNBA. Two of them sparked some significant outrage - this one and the one against Caitlin Clark. The third one got like no attention at all. Why? Because the foul was committed against Angel Reese, a player who seems to be largely despised by the same types of people that get activated every time Clark is fouled. Trust me, nobody is going to threaten assault charges for any kind of hard foul if Angel Reese is one the receiving end.
Yes, absolutely agree. Reffing is not great at that level, but also not sure why anyone would expect it to be. If you are good enough to be a ref anywhere, you're not choosing the WNBA. Major college conferences pay better, and wouldn't be surprised if some of the mid-majors did as well. And of course the NBA is where the best refs go. NBA ref is a full-time gig paying up to $550k a year. WNBA and NCAA refs are paid per game, but the WNBA earnings are low compared to better NCAA gigs. So, you're just not getting the best refs.