I've personally seen little evidence of her being a crank. I've seen many claims and they mostly tie to her running a sort of consultation company, but no evidence of her or her firm promoting objectionable ideas. Sure she might oversimplify some topics, particularly economics and sociology. But I think her main critique in the trans video holds up... a lot of the research is poor quality and while not directly the fault of the researchers (although many of them do promote it) it is used to support hypotheses that were never tested.

[–] RubberElectrons 1 points 1 year ago

I understand. Just keep an open mind, even negative people are usually trying to contribute in a positive way the only way they know how.