I appreciate the advice. While I pay a lot of attention to many of the most prominent feminist in the US I haven't read any academic work on the subject. I guess I figured that what I've seen done in the name of feminism is so destructive that the academic material would have nothing to add.

Do you have a particular title that you think would be good?

So are you ok with you paying the consecuences of other people acts? Because I'm not, I will take responsability for my words and for my actions but never for what other people do, what you are talking here is similar to racial profiling and if the "game journalist" did all that " angry and gross white male living in a basement" talking about black or asian people they will be immediately fired and the website will send an apology letter getting as far away from the person and the shitstorm as they can. They fucked it up as soon as they started to generalize so agressively.

Who is talking? you and me? that was never a problem, the problem is that people with a huge following is not talking, they are just attacking everyone that doesn't agree with them...

Another funny thing, they yell more and get more agressive every time someone mention nepotism on the industry.

I can't relate to this, there has been a lot of gay people on the medio in my country one of the few things I can be proud of my country is that it has the highest acceptation of homosexuality (88%) one step farther away from the cave man I guess.

BTW I'm saying "they" all the time, I talk about "game journalist" whenever I say "they".

Kind of like it is now? Those "SJW" you keep mentioning are fighting against what you just condoned. Gaming does revolve around one group of people right now and always has. The huge push back against it is what has changed things. People getting around over the ridiculous portrayal of women as sex objects strictly for viewing pleasure. Tons of games have tried to have female characters and you know what? They got shut down because the current industry is telling us what we can play. You are buying into the same thing as the 'feminazi' label. those people exist but they're so far and few between compared to the average, every day feminist. They are a myth but for some reason people constantly invoke that word, even though they've never even met one of those people.

Sure there are stupid tumblr blogs where people scream about privilege and are generally assholes. But those exist for everything. Everything. You you continue to propagate is a sweeping generalization made by people who who feel threatened or criticized. These social justice warriors exist but you are conjuring up an army out of a small group of people. This is exactly what visibility is about. The only ones that are made visible are the bad ones, the ones who contribute to the negative portrayal.

Darnath, I really don't think you understand the depth of what you keep calling feminism. You've seen stuff, sure. But you're taking a slice of something to represent the whole. There are literally opposing branches to feminism. Where you see something you see as destructive, there is another group doing the near opposite. It is not one movement. It is not one ideal. Click "variants" and look at how diverse it is. You can then look at the prominent writers of that branch. "The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House" by Audry Lorde is an example of how feminism is self-criticizing. It weeds out its own weakness at times. Lorde was a black lesbian feminist. She saw inherent flaws in what many called "feminism" and wrote about it. That was a time when the term was fragmenting and turning into what it is today. It should give you an idea about why I'm making this into such a big deal. This is like when scientists are all lumped into that one category. people say, "Oh, well scientists say this". What a useless statement without context. Context is key. You have to know the background information to know what's going on. If someone keeps harping one portrayal of women then you find out all their books follow one specific branch, you know why they're so focused. It might not be that the area is more important, the writer is simply sticking to their specialty.

^Different countries will have radically different effects on how we view this stuff. I also don't face any consequences from other people because it is not about individuals. It's about a system. I'm speaking strictly of culture, not the specific incident within the industry. Systems do this and we all participate. By targeting white men because of their race and sex, someone is feeding the system they fight. Individuals can only work to less their participation in the system.

Sources for these recurring incidents please.

We used the invisible backpack concept a lot in my Intro to Women and Gender Studies class

I thought you had gathered these sources and compiled them using your own professional opinion and personal integrity rather than just using somebody else's work, that of a video game journalist, which has become a profession (Hobby?) accused of unethical conduct in an apparent corrupt industry and one that has been accused of using censorship in days most recent.

Infact, if memory serves me correct, the title and thread used to revolve around one certain allegation of a video game journo doing something supposedly bad, but I guess it was a fever dream considering it's not there anymore.

Your argument is a fallacy, pure and simple.

The situation with Naughty Dog is well known and is supported by the years of video games that lack women. The Last of Us was an oddity because it was one of the first to speak out against it. The Bioshock Infinite argument is still valid, regardless of source. The two main characters are Booker and Elizabeth. Elizabeth is actually the main character, despite not being the POV character. She is not featured on the cover and is instead relegated to the position of a secondary character on the cover. This was met with outrage as soon as the cover was released. It's old news.