Deep Silver Issue Apology Over Dead Island Torso Debacle

Deep Silver, in response to an enquiry from Polygon, have issued an apology for the Dead Island Riptide: Zombie Bait Edition. As we reported earlier this afternoon, the EU special edition of the game features a remarkably offensive statuette of a headless and armless bikinied figure, streaked in gore. Since the internet became aflame with the discussion, the publishers told Polygon, “We sincerely regret this choice.”

Whether this means the special edition will be pulled remains to be seen. Deep Silver told Poly that they are now “collecting feedback from the Dead Island community, as well as the international gaming community at large, for ongoing internal meetings with Deep Silver’s entire international team today.”

However, their tone is remarkably contrite. The comment concludes:

“For now, we want to reiterate to the community, fans and industry how deeply sorry we are, and that we are committed to making sure this will never happen again.”

It’s great to see the company responding in such a forthright manner (although an odd line explains that the torso figurine “was cut up like many of our fans had done to the undead enemies in the original Dead Island”), but it’s hard not to raise an eyebrow at how it was that this went from concept to promotion without anyone at the company pausing to query if it was an entirely brilliant idea. As is often the case with these stories, you’re left bemused as to how it took a press/public reaction for the offensive potential to be acknowledged.

Anyhow, it’s looking like some sense might be permeating the situation. We’ll keep you posted.


  1. Rapzid says:

    At first I didn’t really understand what was offensive because the article didn’t really explain it. I had to read the comments to see that this was just more of the #onereasonwhy fire that hasn’t died out yet. For some reason I actually needed to visit a different site to see a picture of the statue? It’s not something I would want, but it looks better than all the hoopla would lead you to believe. The boobs are actually kinda small looking. Like an A or B cup with implants. I’m more of a natural boob guy. Well, I’m an ass man any way. Meh.

  2. ZephaniahGrey says:

    This is really more press than this POS game deserves. I’m more appalled by the fact they think their awful, boring,and completely unfun game deserves a “collector’s edition”. Just glad I tried it on a Steam sale so I didn’t have to pay full price.

  3. Rian Snuff says:

    Well as a horror fan, a zombie killing fan and a fan violent as all fucking hell video games..
    I was totally going to buy this. Dammit..

    You can also witness countless manged corpses, some of which are in bikinis in the game..
    Why is that acceptable and not this statue? GUH.

    The world, it saddens me.

    • Zanchito says:

      Yeah, I agree. Also appalled at the people calling this sicko and perverted, guess it’s bad to dehumanize people, unless they like different types of movies than you. As I see it, it is exactly the same kind of situation when non gamers attack gamers as sick violent sociopaths.

  4. D3xter says:

    Hurray! The RPS censorship machine has done its job once more and returns to its deep slumber to return another day.

    • vondas says:

      It’s not censorship, just (for the most part) good old fashioned moral outrage: left-wing edition. But it is not as though they could actually censor anything, even if they wanted to.

      • D3xter says:

        If they remove the statuette as an effect of the moral outrage, it pretty much is. xD

        Next thing the game comes out and Mr. John Walker writes another piece full of invective and the highest form of hyperbole regarding the game itself: link to energized by his last success and he’s already got the devs/publishers attention, with them being on the defense too since they already admitted they did something “wrong”.

        Meanwhile, the Walking Dead BluRay Special Edition: link to

  5. yazman says:

    I don’t get it. It’s a statue of a decapitated torso with a bikini on and some blood.

    What’s the big deal? Why is everybody outraged by this? It’s not something I would want but I seriously don’t get the outrage.

  6. f1x says:

    After reading all the comments, I find myself agreeing with all the parts, the ones that find it offensive, the ones that find it sexist and the ones that don’t see a problem….

    What does that means? That I don’t have an opinion :(? or maybe there are good arguments all around… hummm, damn!

  7. Lars Westergren says:

    Good way to start the morning. Thsnks RPS!

  8. breakfastcereal says:

    Actual news: Deep Silver celebrates the success of Operation: Journalist Bait.

    • Kobest says:

      You nailed it man, I always wondered why journalists go for the low-hanging fruit. This journalist bait was so obvious it hurt my eye. Do you really, honestly think that no one raised a hand during Deep Silver’s promotion material meetings against this? Or what about that stupid promotion for Hitman where you could assassinate someone because of “her small tits?” Do you think it wasn’t intentional to get some bad press? Of course it was!

      Don’t get me wrong, I find this whole special edition utterly disgusting. But I don’t understand why people immediately jump on this crap.

      It’s also interesting that the internet blows up at anything that has to do with women, but when yet-another-manshooter comes out that has you assassinating other countries’ leaders and murder the inhabitants, no one says a thing.

      • Premium User Badge

        gritz says:

        Judging by the amount of comments, here on RPS of all places, that said to the effect of “I don’t see anything wrong with this”, I think it’s entirely possible that everyone involved in greenlighting this thing genuinely thought it was a good idea.

  9. Jim Dandy says:

    What if the fetishizing of extreme violence against women is, you know, kind of good? Like this:

    link to

    As far as I can tell there’s no contextual framework that makes this politically acceptable, but I’d be bullshitting if I said I didn’t like it.

    • f1x says:

      Interesting point,

      Suehiro Maruo is awesome actually, I love that artwork and would gladly hang a poster of it, definitely provocative and “indecent” and you can see all the purpose on it, it is done to be incendiary
      as much as the artworks from Rockin’ Jelly Beans which is an homage to 80s pin-up exploitation images

      But the torso is in a different context, of course this is a muddy terrain to walk, but the Dead Island torso (in my opinon) is just lame (in artistic terms if thats even possible) and I find it disgusting rather than provocative, if I had to mention something similar I would mention The human centipede movie, which was utterly crap (even tho the human centipede can be percibed as something over-the-top-cheesy)
      What I mean is there is poor artistic value or any sort of statement, subculture link to be found in the torso, no matter how you see it you cannot stop thinking its only about “big-fake-tits”

      From part, its not about being political correct but rather how cheap this torso is as a “cult piece”

      • Jim Dandy says:

        Which kind of leaves us with ‘if a degrading, dehumanising work of art isn’t crap, it’s OK”. Which isn’t very satisfying. Who gets to decide if a given item is crap or not, or even if it qualifies as art? We could question the creator’s motives, but motives are slippery like the eel.

        (BTW, love the Rockin’ Jelly Bean)

      • f1x says:

        Of course, no one can decide in a definitive way, what is crap and what is not
        but opinions are still there and things can be analyzed and argued, I think that visual and artistic criteria still exists
        Its just that nothing will be definitive, its subjective even if you stick to the pure visual analisis

        My personal argumentation here was that when you compare the illustration you linked with the dead island torso, its easy to see a value on the illustration but its hard to see a value on the torso, in terms of lets say artistic quality, content, tecnique, visual impact, etc
        For example when you see the illustration the first thing that comes to your mind is that it is a clever gore take on the Ukiyo-e tradition
        Not gonna extend anymore, but my point was that the torso is quite ugly (from a personal point of view) already in the realm of aesthetics before even getting to discuss if its sexist or not,
        (On the other hand If I had to value the torso for the debate it created would give it five stars tho)

        If it was actually a really good piece of “art” I would have a hard time discussing with myself if I should like it or not, now thats where your comment made me think but then I derailed,
        If it was arguably sexist and also a fantastic piece of art, I think I would have to split myself in two, in order to praise it and hate it

        • Taidan says:

          A sexualized decapitated and limbless female torso, wearing a bikini featuring the British flag?

          Taken out of the context it has been set in, (ie. thoughtless, tasteless promotion for a second-rate game) it could easily be seen as a very strong, provocative artistic statement, if presented as such. (preferably by an “artist” of reputation, in order to just plain get away with it.)

          Critic A: “I mean, it’s clearly an ironic statement on the state of the disconnect between modern consumerism and the way it interacts with a society intent on pushing modern ideals of feminism. It’s the anti-Lynx advert, if you will. Very strong.”

          Critic B: “No, I see it as more an overt criticism of the history of Empire and colonialism, and the human wreckage that has resulted and is still occurring today. The female form, especially with regards the the undamaged breasts, symbolize the nurturing intent that many of the men of the era naively exhibited when attempting to bring their “civilisation” to other lands, but the clear damage to the rest of the form represents the very real harm the the existent cultures and peoples suffered as a result.”

          etc. etc.

          That’s the thing about Art. You can get away with all sorts of bollocks in its name.

          • Jim Dandy says:

            Can ‘quality’ override ‘decency’? It’s not just sexist art, there’s a swamp of vile shit bubbling beneath lots of irresistibly likeable or popular art. Wagner was a blatantly anti-semitic fascist whose philosophies were deeply embedded in his work, but damn if those horns don’t kick some arse. Some of the best hip-hop is truly repulsive. What are we supposed to do if we respond positively to a piece of art, then find out at a later date that there’s some hideous ethical abscess in the creator’s world view (regardless of their skill or dedication)? Do we somehow un-like the work?

          • f1x says:

            Yeah that puts me again into the line of thought,

            The question you expose is something thats been out there for quite a long time, maybe forever
            *Can a controversial subject or morally wrong content nulify the artistic quality of something?*

            I don’t think there is only one answer to that, or a simple answer,
            I’m my opinion, it cannot, the artistic achievement remains, then society (us) will see how to absorve the controversial part or how to deal with it
            There are exceptions tho, I stand firmly against any form of “art” that includes the torture or death of living beings (thinking about some “artists” of today, you sure know what I’m talking about)

            You mentioned Wagner, there are lots of them, Triumph of the Will by Riefenstahl stands as a cinema classic, and a very influential one, or The Birth of a Nation by Griffith
            Its easier to judge those movies tho (artistically) because of the effect of time,
            judging something contemporary is gonna be harder, but it should be the same

            On the other hand as I said previously, I dont think this Torso has any artistic value tho, its more like a common kitsch object

        • f1x says:

          exactly, well…
          at this point I’m not sure what I was trying to say anymore

          The only thing I’m still sure is that I, personally, don’t like the Dead Island torso even if its starting to turn into a classic

  10. Zanchito says:

    So videogames provoking violence in youths is bull, but (admitedly tasteless, although totally in line with the genre) gory tits turn them into chauvinistic assholes?

  11. Lobotomist says:

    I have a mutilated bikini wearing woman bust,
    in my collector edition of the game about zombie mutilation of bikini wearing woman
    that i preordered !!!!

    Boycot !

  12. Spacewalk says:

    That image is all wrong, it should be brisket and not T-bone.

  13. grable says:

    I guess Deep Silver is just a bunch of pussies.

  14. Kuroko says:

    Its only sexist when men do it. So much for gender equality.

  15. namad says:

    this just in: the press is now the bad ideas police and won’t allow anyone to do anything dumb ever again.

  16. Juuuhan says:

    I think the better question is who the balls care? If you want a mangeled statue then fine, it’s not like you become psychopathic by having one just as you aren’t (necessary) one by wanting one…. And if it boost sales it’s a good thing for the developer no matter what the media think (granted the outcome would state the opposite… Shocking huh).

    Can’t say that I myself would want one, but I’m certain a lot of people would, without the need to then become a murderer. This of itself though have generated an extra amount of controversy as it’s a female body related to a video game which is a large demographic (middle aged to older women that is) of the people who think that video games make you violent.

    Like the fact that the box say, Warning includes content that may cause offense, seeing as the word “offense” have no real value in the english language and are essentially just a whine.

  17. wodin says:

    PC brigade goes ape again..dear god get over it..

  18. solidsquid says:

    Wait, their reason for this was that it was supposed to be like a chopped up zombie? I thought it was supposed to be zombie *bait*, which would imply this was a regular person who’d been chopped up (with sharp objects from the look of it, so not by zombie) rather than a zombie

  19. SooSiaal says:

    So, does this mean the internet is going to get uptight about PVC anime characters that barely wear anything and boobs the size of skippy balls as well now?

  20. Laurentius says:

    So if we fast forward few months ahead i won’t see RPS full covered in DI:Riptide ads and then later that week and WIT emerging most probably done Mr Adam Smith where he casually mention this incidents providing links and then moves on to presnet why game is bad ( or good, depends his personal feelings ) , eh ?
    Oh who am i kidding ? That’s exactly what will happen.

  21. int says:

    Jesus H Corbett! This is disgusting (no not the torso). Too many PC PC gamers.

  22. aergistal says:

    Is this becoming a new trend in game advertising (see Hitman Absolution)? Release ads with potentially offensive material, enjoy ensuing shit storm and free media attention, fake some apology and pull them off as planned.

    • derbefrier says:

      I can totally see some marketing exec sitting in his office seeing this article saying “dance monkeys, dance.”

  23. Premium User Badge

    Bluerps says:

    Well, at least they took it back pretty fast and apologized.

    Also, this thing reminded me how awesome Jenn Frank is.

  24. The Magic says:

    Dead Island was one of those games where i genuinely believed the developers had no idea that girls play games. It got so strange, i was playing as a woman and being repeatedly called brother… i mean that’s just bizarre.

  25. Renevent says:

    Chopping up half naked men and women in game? Ok! Decapitation? Just dandy! Homosexual sex in Bioware games? Visionaries! Sex card rewards in The Witcher? Greatest RPG of all time! Murder and death on an epic scale in every shooter available? That’s the point! Torture? Stealth kills? Running over pedestrians? Hey gaming is fantasy!

    Bloody bikini statuette as an optional reward in a collectors edition? OMFG the misogynous pig bastards!

    The fake outrage is sickening…hypocrites of the highest order.

    • Squirrelfanatic says:

      Obvious troll is obvious.

      • Renevent says:

        Obvious person with nothing to say is obvious.

        Fact is, what I said is true. This site will defend all the above violence, sex, and gore from detractors of gaming (like politicians) in an heart beat. The people outraged over a bust will go and play games with ultra violence and defend it by saying it’s just fantasy.

        A silly bust of a bloody girl in a bikini now is somehow supposed to be crossing the line? In Dead Island you chop up half naked male and females THE ENTIRE GAME! Yet somehow this bust is misogynistic?

        Sickening how hypocritical the fake political correctness crowd is.

        • Squirrelfanatic says:

          Where to start. Ok, apart from the fact that the list of things in your initial post is just ridiculous to read (I guess that was the point?), most of them cannot be attributed to the stance / point of view of any of the RPS writers.

          Noone said that decapitation is great or “just dandy”. What is wrong with depiction of sex scenes in media? What has the gender of the persons involved in such scenes to do with anything? Who said that the sex cards in The Witcher made it the “greatest RPG of all time”? I dare you to find an article where torture as an activity in games is being defended or applauded.

          Violence as a way of dealing with conflicts in video games obviously isn’t free from critic. Nobody said it was. What makes this promotion campaign at hand so repulsive is not that it features any mutilated torso (which in itself would stand out as unusual, to say the least) but presents us with a (gory) body of a young female reduced to its sexual characteristics. How tasteless is this?

          Do you really want to say that “anything goes” because video games feature violence and sexual themes and that these themes are “merely” discussed, criticised, commented on but not condemned from the get-go?

          • Renevent says:

            Oh so what happened to the troll bit? I guess your response goes on to prove it was in fact, a worthless comment.

            To the actual discussion, the things I mentioned are absolutely central to the discussion, in fact a lot of it deals specifically with the game in question (and the bust). The entire premise of the game is hacking up half naked men and woman…why this is dandy (no fake outrage RPS articles, are there?) yet a bust that depicts EXACTLY what goes on in game is somehow supposed to be misogynistic and utterly unacceptable? That is the definition of hypocrisy!

            Almost all of the things I mentioned weren’t some display of conflict either? Running over pedestrians? Since when is walking down the street of liberty city putting you in some kind of conflict? Or the countless FPS that not only involve gratuitous violence, but do so with little (or any) pretense of justifiable conflict?

            The Witcher, in particular, didn’t just involve sexual relationships but actually rewarded the player with cards as a REWARD for their sexual accomplishment! Objectification? Sexism? Look no further than The Witcher!

            By acting outraged over a bust, mind you a bust that is totally in line with the game’s content, RPS (and the other faux outrage crowd) have stooped to the level of politicians and soccer moms outraged over things like Postal and other silly non-issues.

            Not to mention in a newer article, RPS doesn’t seem to mind promoting Leisure Suite Larry , a game ENTIRELY revolving around a perverts quest to have sex with objectified women.

            The outrage on display is entirely hypocritical, and utterly without merit. It’s inconsistent and frankly ridiculous.

          • Squirrelfanatic says:

            The troll bit was dropped when I saw that the list of arguments you made in the first post apparently were not simply flame bait but your opinion. The tone of the post wasn’t very helpful for telling the difference.

            Obviously, my comment on conflicts of interest were aimed at the FPS & violence in video games part.

            I still can’t see how the sex cards in The Witcher made it the best RPG of all time (which some people might even argue about). Personally, I didn’t see the point in their inclusion into the game. But I also cannot remember when someone of the RPS crowd said they would make the game any better.

            Concerning Leisure Suit Larry, if you are referring to this post link to, how is this promotion? Have RPS not reported on Dead Island? Or any other title worth mentioning?

            Finally, the thing with the bust is that it is a fricking bust, something meant to be put on display. It’s not a zombie with a sword stuck in its bowels (which would be bad enough), nor is it a player character, it is a lump of flesh with a pair of breasts on it. If the whole game (which I haven’t played) consists of hacking at torsos with breasts on them I would be just as repulsed.

            I can totally see that you don’t agree with everything RPS writes or that you find it curious why this is criticised but running over people isn’t. But seriously, I’d rather refer to things like this bust as “sickening” than kind of latent “double standards”.

            Edit: I just remembered that Nathan recently wrote a column about violence in video games. What about that? Does that count as a critical debate on what’s ok and what’s wrong with video games?

          • Renevent says:

            The troll bit was a mindless reaction to an opinion you didn’t like, simple as that. The list of arguments I made were absolutely relevant, and some even dealing with the very game in question.

            I never said the sex cards made it the best RPG in history, that’s more or less RPS’s reaction to the game though. Some how the sexist and womanizing Gerald gets a pass though, yet a bikini bust automatically means the Dead Island guys are a bunch of misogynists pigs. Meanwhile, the bust represents content and the game itself…it’s an inconsistent and hypocritical stance…absolutely reeks of fake emo outrage.

            Yes, they promoted LSL in a way and absolutely no mention of the fact that the entire premise of the game is sexist and perverted (I love it, BTW). Inconsistent again, where’s the outrage?

            Who cares if it’s a bust? How exactly does that change anything? It’s ok to hack up half naked woman inside a game but if a plastic bust that represents that gameplay is made all the sudden it has to be sexist and misogynistic? Not surprised you haven’t actually played the game, though, actually makes a lot of sense. A lot of times the faux outrage crowd have very little experience with the subject matter they so happen to be outraged about.

            Seriously, think about that.

            Anyways it’s more than a disagreement in opinions, this is a blatant double standard being put on display by RPS (and some of it’s readership). That’s the sickening part. Totally inconsistent and utterly ridiculous.

          • Squirrelfanatic says:

            No, it was not a mindless reaction to an opposing opinion, your first post is nearly indistinguishable from flame bait posts written on various sites throughout the internet.

            The list of things were relevant? I fail to see how the depiction of (homosexual) intercourse is in any way underlining your argument. I guess you also know that the sex cards were removed in TW2 which in my view shows that the developers have learned something from the first game.

            The reason why the bust thing is relevant is that it is promoted as something to put on display, simple as that. This is a bonus item which is used as a marketing tool. If it was a poster of a nude and mutilated zombie Mona Lisa, I would also find it horrible to look at.

            As I said, hacking half-naked people up in a game isn’t my thing as well. I really don’t need to have played the game to understand that. It’s not as if I have no clue about what the game is about. I have read reviews and discussions about it and also seen videos of the gameplay. Why does that “make sense”? Why do you assume that I have no experience with the subject matter? Believe it or not, I have played games in which you kill zombies (Left4Dead2 for example), but that doesn’t mean that I am ok with sexualized gore, if such a thing exists.

            Edit: However, I agree with you that we are arguing over opposing opinions here.

            Editedit: Misread your post. So, we do not agree to disagree. What a shame.

  26. Aaarrrggghhh says:

    Whenever something like this happens, I always wonder if there is not a single person in the office that speaks out and says: “Lokk guys, I know you think this is cool but we will be so fucked if this ever gets real..”
    Noone? Not a single person? During the whole process?

  27. InternetBatman says:

    From the marketing group that brought you Dante’s Inferno…

  28. LockjawNightvision says:

    Tom Chick says everything that needs to be said about this:

    link to

    • Sami Hamlaoui says:

      Thank you for this article – sums up my feelings on the issue perfectly.

  29. Valerius Maximus says:

    It’s a dead lady’s body at a beach, what did you expect it to look like?
    You goddamn newage turbo feminists get your panties in a knot over the most trivial shit.
    How would this have played out if it was a dead man’s torso? “Oh neat, what a cool statuette.”

    How do you still have a Job, John? Although congratulations on not using “bigot”, “vile” or “er” this time.

    • QualityJeverage says:

      I expect it to look like a dead lady’s bloody torso, which is maybe why they shouldn’t have made a statue out of it.

      If it was a man’s torso? I expect the reaction would be “That’s stupid and silly,” but you’re right, the offense would be lower. Because males aren’t the ones being habitually harassed and objectified in games and game communities.

      John has a job because he’s a smart man. But don’t worry, with gems like “newage turbo feminists,” I’m sure you can find some work yelling into a microphone on a local radio station.

      • Holdthepickle says:

        Smart people don’t get upset over plastic statues.

      • Valerius Maximus says:

        You really think people were offended because it was a statue of a dead body intended for an audience that are about to play a game about beating walking dead bodies?
        This whole fuss is a prime example of feminism for the sake of feminism. No gain, just trouble for everyone because my rights end where your feelings begin.

  30. f69 says:

    link to

    So where was the outrage guys? Oh right. No woman parts.

    • Squirrelfanatic says:

      Are you serious? Of course there are people outraged about this, they just don’t post here. It’s a video game site after all.

      • f69 says:

        And Resident Evil 6 is a video game in case you didn’t know. I’m guessing you didn’t read the title:

        “Wesker & Son, A Resident Evil 6 Butcher Shop Featuring Edible Humans”

        • x1501 says:

          I see some severed penises, but the lack of “globular” breasts makes it neither appalling nor misogynistic. So we’re okay here.

          • f69 says:

            Must be the size of the penises. Not big enough to be exaggerated like “globular” boobs.

        • Squirrelfanatic says:

          Oh I read it, it’s just that this is nothing that gets posted on RPS, so no outraged comments, well, here.

  31. farsighter says:

    Ah, RPS, all this after naming Far Cry 3 last year’s game of the year.

    Pretty woman? STAY IN CAVE.


    Pretty woman with different race? YOU WANT ME

  32. Holdthepickle says:

    John Walker is turning this site into Kotaku.

    • Sami Hamlaoui says:

      Or could it be that not everyone agrees with Mr Walker and co?

      Personally, I would like to see some actually unbiased analysis/reporting of the issue other than THIS IS WRONG STOP IT, when it seems quite a few people (yes I know, probably men) find the whole thing hilarious. And I’m sure some of those men are able to see a woman in the street and not suffer a burning desire to rape her (reference to Kotaku comments there before anyone blows their lid on that one).

    • vash47 says:

      Woah, let’s not even go there chief, RPS hasn’t stooped that low… yet. But it wouldn’t surprise me if they hire Patricia Hernandez next.

  33. D3xter says:

    Found these pictures of people lovingly hand-painting them, apparently they’re limited to only 8000 pieces.
    link to
    link to

  34. BoozeHound59 says:

    A misogynistic campaign? Really?

    So if it was the torso of a man would it be misandristic?

  35. Slinkyboy says:

    Someone in the industry is a Necrophiliac and wanted to share that with us.

  36. Rapzid says:

    After reading the comments, and verifying my interpretation of the words “sexist” and “misogynistic” in the dictionary, I am unsure how this statue by itself could be considered either.

    Allow me to provide the definitions of both words from
    1. Discrimination based on gender, especially discrimination against women.
    2. Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender.
    Of or characterized by a hatred of women.

    As for sexism, I’m simply not aware of any stereotypes of gender based roles this would be promoting. It is after all just a bust. If it included the writing “Zombie Bait: Number one use for broken dishwashers” then I could see how it would be considered sexist.

    For misogyny, I’m not sure how this statue alone could be considered the product of a hatred for women. It’s possible the person, or people creating it, hate women and that’s why they made it… But I’m not aware of any information released to that effect and the statue itself does not reveal that as the motivation. As another example, if the statue had the text “Becasue the b**ch wouldn’t shut up!”, then I could see how it could be considered misogynistic in nature.

    In either case, as is, I simply see a bust that is, as mentioned in another posters link, a riff on classic bust sculpture and a not so appealing statue. Gross? Sure. Not for everybody? Definitely. Sexist or misogynistic? I believe those concerns are manifestations of peoples own minds and not inherent to the statue.