Cue the pseudo-intellectual OoTP wank
Hoo boy. This is an essay explaining why Harry is an antihero. Well-written, I think, but lacking the understanding of opposite viewpoints and constructed by someone determined, it seems, to show how right she is, combining psychology, sociology, and case studies into the analysis of a fictional character. (I wonder where the literary theory went . . . ) The wank is in the multi-part, incredibly long-winded comments between vesania_aeterno and an anonymous poster, wherein vesania seems determined to not only be right, but to have the final word.

And to think, effective rhetorical arguments are supposed to take into account the opposite viewpoints . . .

Edited to remove the italics that were diverting the focus of the wank. (Hint: the wank's in the comments.)