Paradox of tolerance. Extending tolerance to those with intolerant views results in that tolerance getting destroyed by the intolerant.

The amount of effort it takes to make these must be a Herculean task worthy of praise and admiration. $100,000 isn’t even a lot of money for a business to bring in, not enough to make the gamble of being found out worth it. Had he openly sold these as “replicas” there would be no problem. What a shame.

“These are incredibly complex personal issues and part of being an inclusive company means being inclusive of all those points of view,”

Ah.
Here’s how I believe moral choices work.
Something, that as a White person, it has taken me far too long to understand or accept, but when a moral choice is presented, say, to say I support trans rights, or to say I’m for BLM, and I do not do anything?
I am, unfortunately, supporting the opposite side, because NO…

Honestly, they never did. They just do it anyway.

The “other” view is that trans people make some cisgender folks really uncomfortable and force them to project their own flaws and demons onto others.

Unfortunately a lot of these people have an allergic reaction to reason or logic so it’s not like the bodily autonomy argument is effective most of the time either. So may as well call them out on all their bullshit if they’re just going to shrug off whatever you throw at them.

While I agree with the rest of it I disagree with those statements not having value. Hollow and relatively meaningless they may be they still have an impact. People will see them and feel supported or feel attacked, regardless of the fact that it’s not a real moral standing. Even if you say we shouldn’t impart values…

Counter point.

Don’t forget you also don’t get to call yourself something positive sounding like “pro-life” while supporting policies and politicians that are against things that actually preserve human life like socialised healthcare.

So EA has come out as explicitly against both trans people and women having rights.

Then EA doesn’t have a right to turn their logo rainbow colored next month.

One side in this equation wants to force people who can bear children to give up bodily autonomy and they’re willing to do so by murdering doctors, bombing clinics, and harassing anyone even approaching any sort of planned parenthood clinic. The other side is stating that people who can bear children should have…

Ya know, one of those things. Easily handled. And on the business dime!

> “...every single time one of these things comes up”

Ah, you mean when human issues get in the way of making money? One of those issues?

If we outlawed lobbying and actually got corporate money out of our legal and political system then maybe a company could say, “We have no statement, we just make nails,” and go back…

The gaming industry and gaming community as a whole has always had issues with fully recognizing women and people across the LGBTQIA+ spectrum as human beings who deserve all of the respect and privileges afforded to cis-het men.

This is some straight up Trumpian both-sides argumentation.
I can’t believe someone in this day and age actually believes accepting transphobia (which is basically what they are saying) is “inclusive”.
Actually, I don’t think they are so dumb that they believe that to be the case. I think they are just afraid of all the…

“being an inclusive company means being inclusive of all those points of view.”

All positions equals no position.
Several commenters have made this clear much more elegantly than I have, but to me, this sums it up, that by making no choice, by not making a stand, they ARE in fact, making a stand.
The cowardly back stabbing misogynistic racist one.
Below, Jhelter Skelter nails it re: bodily…

You don’t get to be neutral about when you think the basic right of bodily autonomy counts. Either you think a woman has the same rights as a corpse who hasn’t marked themselves as an organ donor, or you think the corpse should have more rights.