That's where the problem comes in, the article specifically mentions trying to bring about change to the idea of women characters in gaming, without offering a counterpoint. The article is asking for a change (that I personally don't see a problem with) but does not say that the current characters can co-exist with more feministic characters. How about instead of changing Lara Croft entirely, we offer two versions, one that is like the iconic Lara, and one that doesn't insult every woman on the planet? Does it have to be one or the other?
oh man, not even worth writing this, too much of a headache... equality and freedom are like the symbols of Yin and Yang. On one side everything is bright and good, on the other it is dark and evil. Even still, one cannot exist without the other... my point being that for humanity to co-exist and to progress we must find a balance between the good and evil.
The U.S. Constitution, on paper, does this well, but in practice, there will always be someone who feels as though something has offended them and they will complain, as is their right to do. HOWEVER, going beyond that and looking at NATURAL rights of human beings, this is also true. But since they have to right to be offended, I have the right to disagree and say I prefer the social norm that offends them.
IF they cannot tolerate it, then they have the option to ignore it, remove their person from the situation, OR inform me of what I can do to compromise. Thus debate insues and eventually everyone can reach a consensus. But this is only a minor number of possible solutions to the problem, WHILE maintaining everyone's rights. The reality is, when any arguement of this demeanor comes about, the number of solutions are infinite, but the easiest is to try and force conformance. Humanity has tried this approach for millenia and it has worked, to a certain degree.
However, as we are more progressed, natural rights do exist in the world, and people are more open to express themselves, isn't it about time we looked for solutions beyond conformance, beyond simply demanding we be treated a certain way? Can't we simply treat our interactions on a more literal scale, rather than on a imaginary worldwide scale? I don't know if this is circular thinking or wishful thinking, but that's my two cents.
And people wonder why economies of the world are failing today... sheesh, if the governments aren't spending more than they can afford, then you have idiots killing companies for no reason. What happened to good, old fashioned elbow grease and PRIDE FOR THE COUNTRY! oops, I think i meant company, oh well...
Wow, I think I'm more impressed by the comments than I am with the article itself. Good job folks, most of you have proven that the human race still has a worthy mind. As for the article itself... I think the editor let his own misconceptions get in the way of his job. As many others have said, if your job is getting to be a boring and taxing endeavour, then go find a new one. Plenty of people are out there who would love to take your place...
NoR4Me's comments