Sure, something the site this was posted on is extremely guilty of as well (see the article I linked at the bottom of my post). Don't get me wrong, I'm not say

Sure, something the site this was posted on is extremely guilty of as well (see the article I linked at the bottom of my post). Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the BBC were right in this case, but the difference between the reality and the headline was not as far as many, it was corrected (very slowly), and the conclusion wasn't something they created, but drawn from the paper. None of that makes it right, but it's worth asking why is this the particular example of 'fake news' this site wants to point out? The clear answer is because they want to imply that the opposite is true, or that anyone suggesting good things about women must be wrong. Arguably, if what they are saying is right, it shouldn't matter what the source is, except this article is overblown for the matter at hand, doesn't address the wider issue of this happening with papers all of the damn time (with papers of all types), and has some obviously leading segments designed to imply stuff. This article is obviously a small part of their agenda to scare and infuriate male readers, by making it look like 'SJWs' are a bigger issue than they are.