Implicit in every reply you've given is the assumption that OP is treating the criticism from this researcher differently because she's a woman. Do you have any basis on which you're making this assumption? OP explained that they have substantive issues with the organization of which this researcher is a member.
> I can see why it would appear that I’m saying that, but that was not my intention.
You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. In another comment on this same thread, you say this:
> [...]women in the field are more readily dismissed, and I think they shouldn’t be. It’s a moment to check our internalized biases and make sure we’re operating in good faith.
In your original comment you explicitly accuse the OP of operating in bad faith, presumably as a result of "internalized biases" as described above. How does this not add up to an assumption that OP treated the researcher differently because she's a woman? It is exactly what you are implying.
