What I classify as "true" revolves about wheter you believe in the tenets you uphold or not. By my standards and what I know, Sarkeesian is a "true" feminist, Quinn is not.
It's not about defending herself but about her discrediting as misogynist anyone who oppose her regardless if it matters, as what happened when depression quest got rejected and she accused who didn't approve the game to be a misogynist while the game is really mediocre. After that accusation the game began to win awards and it's legitimate to think that some were out of guilt-trip.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil
But I'll accept your challenge and clarify that what I mean is that if someone is bad, being victim of something worse does not automatically make him better than before he suffered, while he may be better than who hurt him.
Let's say a thief is raped. Surely a rapist is far worse than a thief, but I'd say that the rapist should be tried for rape, while the thief should be tried for theft. It's even consistent as the sentence for rape is far harsher.
Or do you think he should be condoned because was a victim of some other crime himself?
You can se the top of my post for that.
Also yes I dislike her, but because she's a liar, not because she's a woman, if you try to deduce something like that.
Misrepresentation? It was her who referred to herself as "one of the few strong voices for feminism in gaming"
When she uses the ideas to discredit others or gain unrelated advantage I think that should be permitted to brought this up.
I believe that feminism is a good cause and is still needed in this world, but I think nonetheless that she's not a good person on her own right and I feel the need to point it out.
If I approve the ideas, but she does not believe in those ideas she holds up for her own image, I'm willing to contend the point she wants to make because I have reason to believe it will not be in line with the ideas she claims to endorse.
It's funny because you said you did read my post.