Quick hypothetical here, how much evidence would you need to shift your position on this woman?

Wrong again, read the article

But they're not, that's the reason she gave for not appearing at this meeting, also youtube pays you

It's called economics, the cops don't follow up on her allegations, so she cancels one or two in order to maintain her victim status. It does beg the question as to why she isn't backing off or announcing her involvement in an investigation, like most people do when they feel that they're in danger. Instead, she…

She's living off the kickstarter, is looking for another wave of controversy and she knows that interest will wain if she just does videos

Get a dog and a gun, and then stop feeding the trolls

I agree, the whole angle that in this age of anti terrorism, that the police would largely ignore Anita's claims of personal danger, indicates that there is a lot more to this story then anyone is willing to report

Not so, why wouldn't it benefit her to use strawmen to push her agenda?

This, inequality is a dark specter within our society, but we shouldn't look to mercenary sensationalists like Anita to lead the way

This is out of hand, if the police won't protect her in any capacity, does anyone else think that maybe they couldn't find ACTUAL evidence of these death threats?

So how much are they paying you to do this? Seriously, all these articles came out at the same time, your editor needs a new hobby

Why do you feel the need to defend self admitted con artists like Sarkeesian and Quinn?

Case in point

You're a disgusting little hypocrite aren't you?

No that just means you're straight