She has said something about an academic slating her. I can't remember if it was bullying or something else.
It's definitely not just one. I'm a former academic and I think her 'work' is completely lacking rigour. Someone else has highlighted this but her presentation of stats is misleading and unethical, when she said X% of women rather than X% of those who answered etc. She will definitely have done stats on her PhD so there's no excuse.
The alarm bells started to ring for me when I read her poor explanation of why she doesn't publish her work in academic journals etc. Her reason sounds convincing to the average person - I'm not denying that accessibility with academic work is a problem, but there are ways around it, such as publishing only in open access journals or paying for open access to those where it isn't free. The fact that her 'work' has no institutional oversight, isn't peer reviewed and looked at by any ethics committee or colleagues etc basically makes it useless. Anyone can make up any old results in those circumstances, there is a reason that academia has these 'bureaucratic' processes and it's to ensure people don't get away with e.g. stealing people's stories and presenting it as academic work without consent. They're not perfect but it's better than nothing.
The way she tells half a story is intentional I think - it's meant to make your mind fill in the gaps.
I was going to say this, she definitely hints at things to lead your mind a certain way with the safety of being able to say 'well you made that assumption, I never said it.'