Some net sleuths on Anita Sarkeesian

[Lord T Hawkeye]

http://anongamer.tumblr.com/post/59377532391/this-information-is-backed-up-here

I gotta get to bed so I didn't have time to really look at this in detail but it may paint a clearer picture of Anita.

[Ibrahim90]

http://anongamer.tumblr.com/post/59377532391/this-information-is-backed-up-here

I gotta get to bed so I didn't have time to really look at this in detail but it may paint a clearer picture of Anita.

anyone tell me what it says? domain is blocked here on the rig site.

[MrBogosity]

anyone tell me what it says? domain is blocked here on the rig site.

Duplicate text here: http://freetexthost.com/iepxauk1kr

[Professor_Fennec]

I have a libertarian friend who is also a social psychologist.  He has gotten very frustrated with the tactics he's seen against Anita Sarkeesian, calling them "Fox News style gorilla warfare" and would appreciate some hard hitting criticism of Anita's arguments, criticism of Anita the person.

Though I appreciate his attempt to avoid personal attacks, as these are not counter arguments, I still feel that her character as a person is relevant.  How do I convince him that pointing out her numerous character flaws are a relevant issue and in what context. 

[evensgrey]

I have a libertarian friend who is also a social psychologist.  He has gotten very frustrated with the tactics he's seen against Anita Sarkeesian, calling them "Fox News style gorilla warfare" and would appreciate some hard hitting criticism of Anita's arguments, criticism of Anita the person.

Though I appreciate his attempt to avoid personal attacks, as these are not counter arguments, I still feel that her character as a person is relevant.  How do I convince him that pointing out her numerous character flaws are a relevant issue and in what context.

I don't see how a history of promoting pseudoscience isn't relevant to her current campaign of pseudoscience.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

I have a libertarian friend who is also a social psychologist.  He has gotten very frustrated with the tactics he's seen against Anita Sarkeesian, calling them "Fox News style gorilla warfare" and would appreciate some hard hitting criticism of Anita's arguments, criticism of Anita the person.

Though I appreciate his attempt to avoid personal attacks, as these are not counter arguments, I still feel that her character as a person is relevant.  How do I convince him that pointing out her numerous character flaws are a relevant issue and in what context.

Simply explain that while bias is not itself proof of error, it does shed light on how they've gone wrong.  It's also a matter of trust.  I'll trust people who have shown themselves to have honesty and integrity over those who have been caught lying and have a history of it.

And if you're friend would like criticism of the actual arguments, I've done that before.
[yt]0G9KBu6XgL8&feature=c4-overview&list=UUM1VVwFyRtb_tob5uPz6DeQ[/yt]