Yeah....

Bullshit.

If you are arguing that "Oh it is because she wanted Link himself to be female in the next game and not a second char that seemed like him", then she is simply a hypocrite of her "Ms. Male" position. You cant have it both way.

Here is the problem with your originally downvoted comment.

Link is a recognisable character. Thus he has characteristics (because that is what what defines a character).

If we go with your interpretation of statements (and I dont buy your interpretation. It seems like rationalization post fuck up. But we are going with it nonetheless for the sake of argument) it depends on the assertion that Links inherent Characteristics doesn't include "male" (same way you would assert that Samus isn't inherently female). Nither you nor her have the authority to make that assertion.

But even if she did have the authority she would still be a fucking hypocrite since she would violate her "Ms Male" position as well as the statements made during this year E3 on the notion of having both genders enabled (to summarize her point from back then she was arguing that lack of a character written exactly as female it didn't properly represent female).

The only way to avoid this would be to establish a Link char, that was inherently female in its characteristics.

Case and point "Linkle". But hey that is a problem right?

Now before you waste both of our time going "Oh I am not here to play Anita defence force. I dont share her opinion, I simply point out a specific interpretation that makes her not a hypocrite" this isn't our first encounter. So hello again I should say.

Turns out you spend a hell of a lot of time going around making rationalizations for Anitas bullshit logic, while at the same time claiming you dont support her views.

So please dont waste your time painting that out to me again. It wont be more convincing the second time.