I don't think it was necessary to include that it was her fiance who made these decisions which destroyed so much of what she had worked for. Certainly, it adds an element of human interest, but to mention that it was her fiance seems to imply that this was largely the result of a domestic drama. I think it is important to remember that even if it had not been Fowler, he could have been replaced by literally any other man at the time and there is a fair chance that the results would have been much the same. This situation resulted from a society that denigrated and oppressed women for being women, not just for being a woman who refused to marry Fowler, in particular. It was surely an extra twist of the knife that these changes were implemented by a man she had once trusted, but we shouldn't forget that this is a system which allowed #historicalshitheads like Fowler to destroy the work of women on a whim.

Here are your choices, shitheads!