That's not what I'm arguing. What I'm arguing that when someone DOES try to empower straight, white men they are shot down as racist, sexist or homophobic. They are not allowed to either empower themselves, or each other as a group the way minorities can. A white director/producer that openly said they want to cast more white people would literally be blacklisted in Hollywood. The problem isn't the lack of people that want to represent themselves among what you might fall majority populations (although men are a slight minority actually) - it's the fact that the ones who do are oppressed and branded social pariahs.

Marvel also killed off captain America and replaced him with Bucky for a while was that part of the sjw agenda? There's a clear double standard here, whenever something involves a minority or women it's a political issue or pandering but if you do the exact same thing but make the main character a straight white guy then it's not an issue and no one bats an eye.

I agree with this, Ghostbusters got hated on because it's forced diversity, the film makers did it just to show how diverse they are rather than focusing on making the best/funniest Ghostbusters movie they could.

If someone like Melissa McCarthy or Kristen Wiig auditioned for the role and they were funnier than any of the men who auditioned and got hired for that reason I dont think there would have been a fraction of the backlash.

It shouldn't matter what gender, race or sexual orientation someone has, if they are the best for the role than they should get it.

Except they are. Right now in the present day.

This goes back to what I said before, you're already empowered what more do you need? White men already make up the majority of game designers, the majority of directors, the majority of CEOs, ect. There isn't a push to have more white men in positions of power because they already make up the bulk of those positions. A director pushing for more white people in Hollywood would be redundant at best and  remind historical standards when minorities flat out couldn't be nearly as successful as white actors at worst

Yeah. That'll teach companies to not put in a protag that isn't a white hetero cis male.

In all seriousness, I cannot understand the mental process going on when someone looks at a trailer for an action game, sees a woman as a protagonist (at least where they feel one should not be), and has an absolute total freak out and expresses a deep-seated "need" to bitch about it on the internet and threaten (or actually go through with) a boycott. So Battlefield V won't be a total sausage-fest. So what? "It's not realistic?" Again, so what? It's a video game. You fucking play it. Y'know, to have fun. You can't have fun because your WW2 shooter has a woman? Why? What's your malfunction? Video games are only superficially realistic, and they have to be because they wouldn't be fun. If we really wanted it to be realistic, why not ensure every bit of tech is absolutely period accurate to the day and functions exactly as it did in real life (including all the jams, breaks, limited ammo, no half-mag reloads, etc. And while we're at it, why not have realistic injuries and permadeath as features to really ramp up the tension of potentially getting mowed down by MG42 fire two seconds after the boat ramps come down on Normandy? Maybe disease and hours of marching and non-combat activities to give it that added touch of authenticity.

But I honestly doubt that "realism" was the driving force of the complaints. 18 years ago EA put a woman front and center in a WW2 game:

And we didn't hear a fucking peep. Then again, this was before social media, before the onslaught of manchildren that was Gamergate, before every wingnut on the internet decided to openly and loudly scream "ESS JAY DOUBLE-U!" at everything that offended their warped and fragile sensibilities. I've read the comments on Youtube and elsewhere in the months since the reveal. The whole "muh historical accuracy" is a smokescreen. And the whole "Well, that EA rep said such and such" thing, well, he wouldn't have said anything had the usual suspects kept their traps shut and not had a rage fit. Honestly, I wish everybody left, right, and center would learn to just shut the hell up and learn to enjoy a game, movie, etc., based on its quality. Is the gameplay and story good? Then shut up and play it. Seriously, it's shit like this that makes me wish the internet wasn't a thing.

"Again, people are misunderstanding what the issue is."

Let's examine this:

"No one has a problem with a woman being on the front cover.Or being playable in the game."

Contrasted with

"The woman in the first trailer was slightly questionable, but was given a pass by many (including me)."

Contrasted with

"Yes, we all know Battlefield was never THAT realistic, so whatever."

Contrasted with

"If those comments never occurred I (along with many others) would've probably given it a pass."

You keep switching from selective wording to all-inclusive wording. So is it everyone, or no one, or some people, or no people? If you admit that a certain amount of people do view the problem as the inclusion of women, then how could you possibly state definitively that people "just don't get it, man!" From what I've seen, the notion that women shouldn't be in the game at all is as popular as the "it just needs to be more historically accurate, mannn!" notion (which is probably just made up mostly of people who didn't want to see women in the game anyways).

Seriously, when you have to start making excuses because you know that admitting a large portion of the backlash is coming from people who are unreasonable, you should really think about what you're fighting against in the first place. It reminds me of something someone (can't remember who) said about Charlottesville.  (Paraphrasing) "I don't care if you were protesting taxes, if you are willing to march with white supremacists just to get a 'reasonable' goal done you should rethink your strategy."  I would never say that in regards to something as silly as a video game protest, but at least have some introspection. 

"Calling people "uneducated" and "sexist" for not believing that women were in the front lines of british forces having prosthetic arms and blue face paint and wielding cricket bats. "

By the way this is either A ) A straight up lie B ) A misinterpretation or C )  A cocky clever way to show the huge contrast between claims of lack of education while simultaneously showing off unrealistic things. But even C, which would be quite clever, isn't effective ... because it's addressed in the very statement you are talking about. 

""These are people who are uneducated—they don't understand that this is a plausible scenario, and listen: this is a game," he added."

You could make a case that the comment is pretty stupid because it isn't very substantive, but I think when he said people are "uneducated" he is clearly not talking about prosthetic arms. He even caps it off by punctuating that it's just a game, so even calling out the contrast doesn't work well. 

Sad thing is, the comments given by the developers and EA are just as dumb as what the fanbase have stated. Really, there is no defending a company as shitty as EA or a developer as lolbad as DICE. But if gamers won't be standing for the stupidity of these companies, they should at least call out the stupidity in their own echo chamber. 

Why would a group that's in power already need further empowerment? Look at most of the big movies of this year venom, mission impossible, Deadpool, infinity war, Jurassic world, Incredibles 2. Now look at the big games, red dead, Spiderman, god of war what further empowerment do you need? There's a push to have more minority groups in media because there was a lack of previously and thats become even more noticeable as the population as a whole becomes more diverse. There's no such thing as straight pride because there was never a time where being straight was look down upon or underrepresented. You arguing that no one is trying to empower straight white men is like arguing that wanting more RPGs or platformers is anti open world or fps. People are simply asking for more of what we have little of not trying to completely get rid of what we already have. 

Pardon me, but unless you simply need to rephrase your point, that's not a contradiction? It could be that I am just failing to understand, and if so I truly apologize, however what I am getting from your comment is that you believe I am contradicting myself by saying that EA and DICE's statements are dumb after criticizing Flashfire for making a comment that was a wrongful "interpretation" or exaggeration for the sake of criticism of said statement? 

Uhm ... if that is what you believe, that isn't a contradiction. You can believe a statement is dumb but then still say how people misconstrue it is also dumb. In this example if Flashfire said that the statement was wrong regarding women serving in certain territories, and it was factually correct, then nothing would be wrong with the statement. But he added onto it (and I believe purposefully to be disingenuous and exaggerate an already very large point) as if the statement was talking about prosthetic or cricket bats, which it wasn't. And even if he was talking about the full quote, by the end of the quote the developer exclaims it's a "game" which is obviously a way of saying that leniency is needed. So yeah, what is the contradiction?