I am not going to watch a 30 minute video in order to hear over and over again that someone who disagrees with someone else harassed them.

Which isn't what Thunderf00t was saying at all.

The person in question did a lot more than disagree with him.

I do not believe that this makes anyone who criticizes thunderfoot a harasser,

Okay, but would you be okay with people generalizing fans of Anita or critics of Thunderf00t as harassers, the way that critics or Anita or fans of Thunderf00t are judged right now.

but more importantly I believe that going public with any threat does not make him a professional victim.

False equivalence.

Speaking up about harassment doesn't make one a professional victim, but saying things like "Donate money to my kickstarter if you oppose harrasment" does.

What is shitty is to have to talk about whether there are false flag threats, whether > she is a 'professional victim', any small or moderate mistake that is made becomes further proof that Ms. Sarkeesian is the devil incarnate.

I agree that those are shitty criticisms of her, but I've definitely seen people who express even moderate criticisms of her videos (myself included) get accused of supporting harassment before.

I think this is your views on Anita Sarkeesian

She has continued to beg for money long after her donation goal was reached (even though she didn't even produce what she promised), and has even said things like "Donate to Tropes vs Women if you oppose harassment before.

Why is this a strawman?

I think if you can point to clearly gendered threats and show that the threats that he recieves are due to his gender and not anything else then sure you could make that argument - that is going to be a difficult task to prove but if you want to > gather evidence and make that argument feel free.

So does that mean the threats against Anita aren't gendered either, since people certainly haven't met the kind of massive burden of proof you're talking about in that case.