I was just pointing out that your only options were not the only options. Also, that there is a case for a wider study does not invalidate the first study.You've proposed a totally different study though that might be legitimate. The point is that questioning a study which only focuses on a subset of that is not inherently.misogynistic especially when you can easily find reasons to study the much wider phenomenon of stereotyping and tropes in video games without the need for the gender bias.And now you are trying to push anyone that disagree with you in a corner.
It's an incredibly powerful debating tactic if your opponent accepts how define the debate framework. In this case he threw up such a large number of strawmen that he's defined nearly every conceivable counter argument (legit or not) is already solidly covered under a single label he's defined as "unacceptablex.
He can sit and respond to anybody he's "defined out of the debate" with no trouble because nobody challenges the framework of the issue
Note, for example, the lack of response to the point that males are similarly ridiculously unrealistic in video games. The only possibly response is that its a continuation of the "male fantasy' whichwould require (1)because claiming women aren't gamers (a bad response became a negative definition of women is defined as misogny) or (2) that video games simply aren't realistic, which defeats the purpose of exploring tropes as minstereotyping only women.
Let's instead ask why that matter when it comes to women in games? Does two wrong make a right?
Or we could ask, how does those male and female stereotypes affect people? Is there a difference on male and female stereotypes, why is that and what effect does that have on females and males playing? And are those good/bad? Are there perhaps more stereotypes that are "good" for male characters than for females?
Leave it to lall m8, you lost the argument in the first response by admitting the worth of a less-one-sidded look at the issue