Believing a piece of information just because of the source is deemed as reputable or respectable is an fallacy of appeal to authority, not critical thinking.
Yeah, it may look not credible, but you should everytime judge an argument due to its own merit, not because of its source, because what's respectable or reputable is often a power or a social decision, and as such it's almost never rational. In the early XX century even if a women had a good argument, she was dismissed just because she were a women. That's what you're defending too, because it's exactly the same principle: women were looked as if they never were reputable and respectable. But that can never happen to the logical coherence and consistence and the correspondence with reality of an argument.
Even a broken clock can give the correct hour twice a day, and even the most prefect clock will at least once desynchronize.