Sarah Goode, and the Goode book...?

"I do not expect the description to be totally offbase just because it was written by someone else."

Keeping in mind that I'm not vouching for the book, merely reserving judgement until there's more to go on... If the book was neutral, and part of the description described it as neutral (the substantial part I quoted before) while the rest didn't, then it wouldn't be "totally offbase" just partially.

"I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if ... Sarah Goode ... has fooled some people here ..."

I would find it very frustrating to be betrayed again, but no, I wouldn't be surprised either.

"... into thinking that she actually respects the views and lives of that community."

I don't think she necessarily has to come to the same conclusions, nor see eye-to-eye with the pro-choice MAAs, to respect them and listen to them.

"it seems that based on your contact with her, Minstrel, she impressed you as being neutral about this subject and willing to give this community a fair shake. Are you sure she wasn't just acting polite...?"

Yes, I believed that she was neutral and would give us a fair shake. But no, I'm not sure she wasn't just acting polite while hiding her views. It's quite possible, though I see very slim evidence for it, that she began the research with a concluson she wanted to prove, and carefully hid her intent. On the other hand, I think that being aggressively insulting and denigrating to people with conflicting viewpoints is one of my worst character flaws, and not one I require other people to emulate. Also, as you often say, antis often give themselves away very quickly here, even when they attempt to hide their views, yet she didn't 'give herself away' to me in quite a long discussion.

Nor do I think it would be good research technique for a researcher to state his or her own views before interviewing someone. It seems to me that "neutral" research would require the very act of hiding one's own viewpoint that you seem to be (first assuming, then) berating her for.

Also, good research doesn't necessarily by definition come to the conclusion that I (or we) held before the research was done, does it? What would it say about open-mindedness to require the conclusions to agree with our original position? I'll judge the research based on the soundness of its logic and reasoning, its use of facts and evidence, and the neutrality of the presentation, not on whether I like the conclusions, and especially not before even seeing it.

"I await your reading of the book and your commentary/review of it."

Alas, given all the things I need that I can't afford to get, I certainly won't buy the book, and doubt it will be any time soon before I see it in the crappy library or bookstores I have access to, if ever. But if I do happen to come across it, I'll speak my mind in my usual aggressively insulting and denigrating way if I think she deserves it.

In the meantime, I might try to find back the email correspondence and see if it sheds any light on the subject.