Well I can't resist can I?
Obviously not.
Sexualizes some of its women. But nobody had a problem until the tits came out. Maybe what you want is variety but that's not true of the ones bitching about quiet.
"Until the tits came out?" There were tits aplenty before. You were attempting to pretend that there's only been on sexualized character in the series's history. That's dishonest so I called you on it.
How do you know nobody had a problem? This discussion was largely ignored until the outraged, hateful response to a kickstarter to critique video games from a feminist point of view brought it a massive amount of attention in a very short period of time.
I never said my perception didn't match reality though. But you're trying to say I can't offer my opinion on it because I'm a man and your study shows that men incorrectly gauged the amount of women present. That again doesn't apply to me.
If that's the case then you ignored what I was actually saying so you could posture and rant instead. You're proving that it does apply to you by overestimating the gender parity of video game characters.
There are 4 characters in the core series. 3 of them are bad tropes and 1 of them is Mario. Also don't act like this series isn't the 1930s inspired shining example you cling to. 'Let alone the industry as a whole!' Few games have damsels, beta males, and tyrants as obvious as these.
There are three charachters in the core series? Not even close to true. That doesn't even make sense. What Mario games can you name that feature only three charachters? I think what you really mean is 'these are the three most prominant charachters who feature in the most games, so I'll pretend that one of the men is a 'bad trope' and pretend that's gender parity.'
Yeah but you're saying sexualization is a problem, while also saying it affects women because these games are marketed to men. If they were marketed to women as romance novels are, the men would be sexualized. So your problem really is that you aren't the target audience.
Nope. That's not what I'm saying. You're beating on another strawman.
Compliment, not substitute. Ad hominem doesn't mean the argument simply contains an insult somewhere.