But, but...

If a straw man argument is when someone invents an easily tackled enemy that isn't actually there, what do you call it when someone completely ignores highly visible evidence that refutes their thesis? An 'ostrich man' argument?

Here's some dimwit in the Guardian writing a moany piece about how the Bourne Ultimatum has no strong characters, while almost completing ignoring Pamela Landy.

I mean, she actually asks the question 'why can't women in action movies ever do anything useful?' I won't spoil the film, but let it hereby be noted that 'doing something useful' pretty much sums up the Pam Landy character.