I think I do, but feel free to educate me if you believe Im wrong.

Honestly, a few things annoy me as much as the bolded. People saying that EA is raping is all sorts of wrong (same with MS and drm). I find it absolutely disgusting considering how awful rape is and how much control they have not to buy a game (which worst case scenario will be bad and a waste of money). 

The difference is, that issue exists between two people.  This issue exists between hundreds of millions of people, where people can influence the industry in a negative (or positive) manner.  If that person who loves the other chooses to remain with them (and you're right, trying to tell a friend he/she's no good for you doesn't work...been on both sides of that coin), that effects their lives...not a good chunk of the populace.

And this situation is also slightly more deceptive, because if you make a bad games purchase, you're just out $60 bucks.  If several million people make the same mistake, however, it tells companies they can continue on as they have been, without repercussion.  We have to show them there's repercussions.

I dunno if serious, but the way I see it is that if you knew what it is you wouldn't have said what you said. Refer to the part in your OP that I bolded here. Early access isn't a service sony is going to make you pay for like you pay for PS+. Its just what it is as defined by its name. You get early access into a game on a game by game basis, not that you pay for a service called early access that lets you get into games before others. Its basically like buying a game before its finished.

Take titanfall for instance, if they plan on making the game with 10 maps and are mostly done with 5 of them, they could sell that "half game"/beta for $20 as a near feature complete game with just the five maps then you pay another $20 for the final game when they have the remaining 5 maps done. Its kinda like paying for a very big beta or a very big demo. The upside is that not only do you get into the game earlier if you are that impatient, you should ultimately pay less for the full game and have more of an input in how the game turns out than those that wait for the full game to be finished before buying.

So yeah, its not a service sony is offering or something that can be made part of PS+ or whatever... its a completely different kinda thing. Having said al this, don't for a second think I am in support of this cause I feel it will pose more harm than good.

Someone who gives me the finger, without my knowledge, is about as important to me as an anthill in Africa.  It's simply not.

Drawing a parallel to rape here is woefully inappropriate, and stupid.  In every avenue of business, the consumer controls the market and the companies react to align themselves with consumer demands, those companies who do not react quickly enough, find themselves in pretty poor financial states, and have to rethink their strategy.

Let me ask you, do you buy cars, houses, or other electronics with zero research?  Why do the same for games, or consoles, or other hardware, just because the pricing is lower?  The 'Oh poor consumer' line is total bullshit, and a cop out of your responsibilities with your money.  Nobody makes you buy anything, nobody forces you to play anything.  If you buy a shit game, that's your fault.  Not the companies.

My point is that what happens if you dont like the way the game is shaping up and you have already paid for it?

Probably the same as if you bought the game and did not like it? I mean this way you actually have a chance to influence game development choices.  This is NOT a bad thing.