The Hawkeneye Initiative: Meteor’s Sexy Poster Mishap

I love stories with happy endings. And uplifting middles. And only sorta upsetting beginnings. This is the rare tale that both rides that grin-coaxing emotional rollercoaster and focuses on issues of gender inequality in the gaming industry. A rarity? You don’t even know the half of it – mostly because I haven’t told you about any of it yet (jeez, hold your horses). But in short, Hawken publisher Meteor – whose executive branch is apparently half female – had a minor kerfuffle involving a monolithic poster of a scantily clad, Rosie-The-Riveter-esque character smack dab in the middle of its offices. So a few employees played a prank involving an equally nonsensically dressed male technician, and the results were, well… just delightful.

The offending poster took up such prime office real estate because CEO Mark Long apparently adored it. The same, however, could not be said of the anonymous employee who told the tale to Hawkeye Initiative (a wonderful, often hilarious project in its own right) and many of her coworkers, so here’s what they did:

“We blew (ahem) Brosie up poster sized. We framed him. And then, at 7:30 on Monday, April 1st, we snuck into our CEO’s office and switched them. I stood in the entryway, dizzy with joy. It was glorious. There Brosie stood, proud, nipples testing the air like young gophers in springtime, the post-apocalyptic breeze gently swaying his banana hammock. Brosie said, loud and proud: ‘Get ready, world! I am here to lubricate your joints and tighten your socket.’”

But then, stomachs started sinking, euphoria-enforced hulls no match for the possible ramifications of harsh reality. What if their boss got pissed? What if he was too stuck in his ways to take the joke in good humor? We are, after all, talking about “a late-50s ex-army guy who happens to determine our employment futures in an at-will state.”

Here’s how he replied:

“That was a brilliant prank. You called me on exactly the bullshit I need to be called on. I put up pictures of half-naked girls around the office all the time and I never think about it. I’m taking you and [the artist who made the poster] to lunch. And after that, we’re going to hang both prints, side by side.”

There are, of course, tons of takeaways here, but Meteor’s anonymous Prankster Of Great Justice outlined them just as well as I ever could’ve hoped to. The short version? Many people who seem like they’re being jerks just aren’t aware, and some of them even want to help but just don’t know how. “We just haven’t been around enough for them to notice,” she pointed out, before concluding that the only way to get everyone on the same page is to make it happen.

“It’s hard work, and yes, there are a couple genuine assholes along the way. But if Ruby Underboob can brave the occasional droplet of molten metal, so can we. Speaking from experience, it’s worth it.”


  1. Mctittles says:

    That poster makes a great point. It’s funny because I can easily imagine the girl on the left being an engineer in a game and not even notice, but the guy on the right stands out like a sore thumb.

    • Gap Gen says:

      Yeah, it’s kinda sad that we’d suspend or disbelief that standard issue engineer uniforms would be bikinis. Although it’s entirely possible that someone would take their shirt off to work on something in a hot country if it was safe to do so.

      • maweirhas says:

        Careful with that:

        • Gap Gen says:


          • Ultra Superior says:



        • DRoseDARs says:

          Clever girl…

        • nitehawk says:

          Wait the forum code is so weak to allow this bullshit?

          • Premium User Badge

            Phasma Felis says:

            RPS is probably the best gaming news site on all the internets, has the best commenter culture, and some of the worst comment code I’ve ever seen. My favorite is the part where it won’t remember your login for more than a few days, but it also won’t let you re-log on the same page, so it seems like every time I want to comment I have to go to some other page entirely, log in, hit Back a couple times, and try to find the bit I wanted to respond to. Completely brain-damaged.

            Such are the hazards of point buy, I suppose.

            It could be worse. Look what happened to Kotaku.

      • UmmonTL says:

        Honestly, if the guy was wearing shorts or cut-off jeans like the girl instead of a speedo and maybe a toolbelt I wouldn’t even give him much of a second glance. As an obvious pin-up style poster it seems quite normal as long as you have both the male and female version.

        • UncleLou says:

          I think it makes more sense to compare his speedo with her several sizes too small top. They were even pretty generous to him, because his balls don’t hang out. :p

          • saginatio says:

            Modern gender equality studies in practice: How much clothes can a man have to be as nude as a girl in a bikini top and shorts. :)

            You can also make a psychological auto-evaluation test:
            -If you feel offended by exactly one of these posters, then you are a sexist.
            -If you feel offended by both of these posters, then you are a puritan.
            -If you feel offended by none of these posters, then you are a libertine.

          • darkChozo says:

            I think we’re pretty clearly in dire need of an accurate metric for revealingness of clothing. I propose:

            1/(∫(over A) s dA) ∫(over A) sc dA

            where A is the surface area of the body, s is a community-determined “sexiness” rating for a given infinitesimal area, and c is a fuzzy Boolean representing covered-ness.

        • Kitsunin says:

          Absolutely with you. Although it’s important to remember that the crotch bulge would need to stay, even with slightly thicker pants. Otherwise it wouldn’t quite be equivalent.

          • thrawn says:

            Normally yes, but this was a parody, so exaggeration is part of the point.

        • Legion23 says:

          Interesting I had the same thought about his speedos, they don´t fit the Engi theme while she looks like an even more oversexed version of the WWII “women to the factorys” pinup pictures. Now that I think of it: The city I was in last summer (in Germany) had a lot of construction sites and I remember alot of guys working without shirts when the temperature spiked. My thoughts back then were not about looks but the danger of skin cancer though.

          • JarinArenos says:

            If she was in a tank-top or t-shirt (maybe even a tight one with midriff), the shorts/toolbelt combo on the guy would be equivalent. Honestly, I’d like to see both in those versions.

      • aldo_14 says:

        Isn’t she running a fairly high risk of burning off her nipples?

      • Taidan says:

        I got the impression that the poster isn’t showing a literal representation of a female engineer in the Hawken universe, but is more of an in-universe poster of a pin-up girl in a classic pin-up girl pose, which kinda fits with the rest of the almost future-retro 1940’s-ish aesthetic that the game is rocking.

    • TheMopeSquad says:

      I get a mental picture of these two in the mech-hanger, flirting, checking each other out. Its a wonder they get any work done.

    • Ultra Superior says:

      The worst thing about all of this is….. the male poster is much sexier than the female one.

      Her body is disproportional, her face looks sad (maybe because of that weird vertical C-scar there on her gravid belly?) and she wears a completely absent-minded stare like a plastic mannequin.

      The guy’s making a flirty eye contact, smiling his chubby testosterone-filled cheeks and his body is copy pasted from an underwear commercial.


    • Dave Tosser says:

      link to
      The Men-Ups! set of pin-up style photos with men mirroring the classic poses is quite similar. What’s interesting to me is just how extremely silly so many “sexy” poses are, not to mention how utterly unnatural.

    • maninahat says:

      Which part of the poster stands out like a sore thumb?

    • LockjawNightvision says:

      Exactly. Which is why doing something clever and subversive with a sexist thing is often infinitely more effective at addressing the actual problem than shrilly yelling about it on the internet.


  2. Kollega says:

    I think i’ll be speaking for everyone when i say that this is both hilarious and awesome. Definitely a great idea for a prank, and the fact that it all went well is even better.

    Of course, if it was actual promotional art, the technician would probably look better shirtless but with some pants on, as it’s more logical. But since it’s a prank, it works as it is, perhaps even better.

    • lijenstina says:

      Mechanics without chest hair ? So unrealistic.

      • tehfish says:

        It could be argued that it’s also a parody of the whole “women must shave off every bit of body hair” thing that a lot of society seems to have ;)

      • Premium User Badge

        phuzz says:

        He had chest hair, it got burned off.
        Or maybe he just doesn’t have any chest hair, no all men do.

        • arccos says:

          How can one be a man-beast without chest hair? Next you will tell me that saliva does not have to be liquid testosterone.

    • dahauns says:

      I’d go a step further and say the hilarity is a big part of what makes this so awesome.
      Don’t underestimate the power of laughter.

  3. Synesthesia says:

    haha! I love this. There should be some sort of meme of this, and make a mirror image of every ridiculous bikini armor poster. DO EET.

  4. SkittleDiddler says:

    “Wait a minute! How dare he keep both prints! What a chauvinistic pig!”

    -some random internet jockey

    • mfcrocker says:

      Said nobody, ever.

      • SkittleDiddler says:

        It’s the internet.

        • JackShandy says:

          I guess you’re right. Someone, somewhere on the internet has said something stupid at some point during their lives.

          • Lusketrollet says:

            Said nobody, ever.

            …Is probably about to be said by somebody, quite soon, knowing this community.

    • DXN says:

      Well, I’m gonna go ahead and say this because it’s what I think.

      Keeping both posters up is better than freaking out and firing someone, but it’s not really the best solution, is it. Having random cheesecake art — male or female — in an office, is still not really a particularly nice thing to impose by fiat and by the power of being the boss. I mean, that’s the whole reason behind this prank in the first place, right? So now ‘Brosie’ is just being used as an excuse to keep ‘Rosie’ up — and presumably other pieces of cheesecake art, going by the boss’s words (he puts these pictures up ‘all the time’).

      Sorry this is not a happy-lovely-glowy-feelgood reaction that we can all hi-five over. I guess some people might think it’s horribly puritan to think sexy stuff, even softcore sexy stuff, is kind of not really appropriate for a workplace (I mean, unless maybe it’s a directly sex-related workplace). But I think it’s just common decency and respect. I just don’t think the workplace is the right place for it. And I say that as someone who gets up to some extremely non-puritan stuff — just not at work.

      • arccos says:

        It’s definitely an interesting discussion. Who decides what is appropriate for an office, and who should decide? What percentage of the office has to be uncomfortable with something in the office before it becomes inappropriate? Can low-level workers as a group decide appropriateness, or are all decisions trumped by management?

        Group dynamics get complicated pretty quick.

      • 00000 says:

        I don’t see why a workplace should conform to prudism in this day and age, unless your office is located in the Bible belt or you run a kindergarten.
        This is gender-equality just the same. Albeit by doing the opposite: representing both sexes as sex-objects. This is not necessarily worse. Both sexes lust. Depending on your values, you will either accept or stigmatize this behavior.

        The real kicker is that we should represent both sexes equally, and not wreak havoc to prevent either one of them from being represented in a certain way. Because if you do the latter, even Shigeru Miyamoto can be portrayed as a misogynous asshat. (I think we all get my reference.)

        We need more female protagonists and stronger role-models, not less Princess Peach or Lara Croft fan-service. Call me a chauvinist pig for wanting it both ways, but if we drop the false dichotomy we can have a more healthy discussion, and voice substantial criticism at the structural lack of representing women as anything other then sex-objects and/or victims. The ad hominem attacks and Walken(TM) neo-criticism is doing more harm then good when it comes to building a female friendly community.

      • DXN says:

        No, it’s not about ‘prudism’. It’s about basic professionalism and respect. You should be able to go to work without having to be confronted with the lusts and fantasies of your co-workers. You know why? Because being confronted with the lusts and fantasies of your co-workers is not always some kind of mutual liberated respectful sexytimes happyland. Sometimes, when it’s actual real people doing it, it’s creepy and hostile and oppressive. It enables and encourages an atmosphere where lines can too easily be crossed. And when it takes the form of a giant sexist poster taking up prime real-estate in your CEOs office, it makes it clear that this is all backed up and sanctioned by those with a huge amount of power over you. And that’s a bullshit state of affairs to have to deal with just to keep a job.

        Saying ‘but people other than straight vanilla males can put their fantasies on display as well, so it’s all cool!’ is not an answer. Not everyone wants to sign up to that deal. And even they did, there’s still a big cultural weight that emphasises one thing as normal and manly and funny and harmless, and others as ugly, unacceptable and queer and disturbing, whether its implicit or explicit.

        It’d be great if it was always cool and unproblematic and didn’t lead to harassment and other bad things when people displayed their lust in the workplace. But that’s a hell of a long way from happening here in the real world, so taking the safe route and just keeping things clean and professional until we’ve sorted this shit out is nothing to do with being a prude and disliking sexuality. It’s about making sure that people can come to work and get on with their jobs and with socializing, without being creeped out and uncomfortable. And it goes without saying, but you don’t need to be spraying your pheremones all over the place to have a workplace that’s an enjoyable and fun and interesting place to work.

        • 00000 says:

          You seem to be making a very fair point that it really is about prudism. Interpreting the display of naked bodies as creepy, hostile and oppressive and being uncomfortable with the sexuality of his/her peers, that sounds pretty close to the text-book definition of a prude.

          I’m not saying we shouldn’t keep to “tasteful” nudes. But posters aren’t some gateway drug that turn your co-workers into sexual deviants.

          • TsunamiWombat says:

            I consider myself non-prude but gotta back DXN on this. The office is for work, and work related materials. As I see it, artwork is fine, decoration is fine, but even if you don’t find those posters offensive, they might be, *ahem* distracting. Bringing your sexuality into the work place in any fashion is almost never ever a good idea. And this is not a male centric viewpoint – that manager was extremely in the wrong for posting cheesecake at all. The best way to be in the work place is as androgynous and non-sexual as possible. Anything else is cruising to land yourself in serious shit with HR and other employee’s, no matter your gender or orientation.

        • DXN says:

          C’mon guy. It isn’t one or the other, is it? Like I keep saying, it’s not ‘the display of nude bodies’ that’s the problem. It’s making that display a mandatory and omnipresent part of the workplace. It’s making that display focus so wholly on women and on a particular model of attractiveness. It’s about daring anyone to complain and calling them a prude when they do. It’s about bringing the whole sad oppressive history of sexist imagery into the modern day and shoving it in everyone’s faces. It’s about marking the workplace as the property of a particular type of person. It’s about edging the flow and boundaries of conversation towards babe-appreciation and straight-vanilla-male posturing or having to react to that posturing and define yourself as part of it or not part of it. It’s about defining a particular sexual standard and openness as the officially-sanctioned one. It’s about a thousand other things that are more complex and nuanced than “hurr sex bad” or “one glimpse of flesh and everyone becomes a rapist”.

          • 00000 says:

            Well sure. Doing something that brass without consensus is what I’d call a lack of good taste. But that’s also opposite to what I am advocating.

            My pet peeve is not dealing with sexism by allowing an equal and open expression and display of all sexuality. (This is prudish to me, or only leads to it.) Although the prank was making the boss just as uncomfortable – this is not at all the result. You might believe that the new status-quo at Meteor is solely maintained by equal amounts of discomfort among both sexes when they confront each other with their standard model of attractiveness. But when they do, there is no reason left to feel uncomfortable with either nude. They just become two images that can be put in perspective. I don’t see how an environment like this should in any way become less civilized.

  5. Lambchops says:

    “That was a brilliant prank. You called me on exactly the bullshit I need to be called on. I put up pictures of half-naked girls around the office all the time and I never think about it. I’m taking you and [the artist who made the poster] to lunch. And after that, we’re going to hang both prints, side by side.”

    Could have come from:

    link to

    • Kitsunin says:

      Pretty funny. But I feel that people might come away with the idea that they are satirizing feminism rather than men’s reactions to it (And who knows, maybe that was the point).

      I probably shouldn’t say it, because it’s probably fine, and IMO that was just a funny article, but it worries me a little, considering the opinions I’ve heard about the topic.

      • sinister agent says:

        Never stop reading the Daily Mash. Their work is often magnificent, and they’ll take the piss out of basically anything while sometimes making some damn good points, too (though seldom explicitly, because Rule of Funny).

        That article is actually way below par for them.

  6. NieA7 says:

    More of this sort of thing.

  7. Skeletor68 says:


    In a tangential aside, I would love to see more ring-card dudes during women’s MMA fights. They had one for a Katie Taylor boxing match a while back and it cracked me up.

    • Simon Hawthorne says:

      Ug, I love MMA but the ring girls make me cringe. I want people to see MMA as a legitimate sport and competition rather than something for thugs only interested in being the alpha male at the expense of another, and getting their end away. Ring girls are not helping!

      • Skeletor68 says:

        Yeah it is pretty silly. I wonder if there is any science behind it though? (Not to excuse it). Does having a pretty girl putting smiles on some dude’s faces in between rounds keep them distracted and let them ‘amp down’ between rounds so fights don’t get started in the crowd? I wonder if there is some kind of hormonal/psychological response to it, or is MMA just doing it because boxing did too?

        • UmmonTL says:

          I’d think the opposite, they want to keep the crowd riled up so they don’t get bored in the break.

      • bonerjams3000 says:

        I watch the majority of MMA events that I can get and whilst I’m not fussed whether they have ring card girls or not, I’m pretty sure they’re just pandering to their demographic which is (mostly, my girlfriend loves MMA too but let’s be real it is mostly) men aged 18-40

        • mfcrocker says:

          This is in fact the same argument people tend to use to defend sexism/objectification in gaming and is just as silly here. I’m pretty sure basically no-one would stop watching MMA if they removed ring girls, but they may put some people off from becoming fans.

      • frightlever says:

        There was a UK promotion, can’t remember the name, that used to have Daily Sport dolly birds dancing at the start of matches. Painful to watch.

  8. Simon Hawthorne says:

    I don’t want to stir up a hornet’s nest, but I do want to say that of all the recent posts on RPS about gender/sex inequality in gaming, this is my favourite. Thank you.

    • Thermal Ions says:

      Agreed. Highlighting a real issue without feeling like the writer (intentionally or otherwise) is judging me because I may have found a woman portrayed as sexy or attractive.

      • Vorphalack says:

        If you felt personally threatened by any of RPS’s previous articles, then i’m sad to say you are in the group that needed to read them. Part of the problem without realising it.

        • Bhazor says:

          Or a feminist who happens not to agree with RPS’s approach of constant beratement and attitude of “Anyone who disagrees with our sudden tangent should just GTFO”.

          This article on the other hand, it’s actually fun non judgemental and feels like an RPS article.

          • Vorphalack says:

            The sound of people saying ”it’s actually fun non judgemental and feels like an RPS article” when Walker posted the ”Raynor-butt-gate” piece was deafening by its absence. There have been quite a few people on here today saying something along these lines, and it’s starting to smell like a nasty case of writer bias.

            Besides, casual misogyny is a serious issue in all walks of life around the world, and we should not expect RPS to inject humor into every related article. Nor should we expect them to be tolerant of opinions that are blatantly part of the problem. Enjoy the humor while it lasts, but if the entire coverage was skewed towards this it would do an honestly good cause a severe disservice.

          • Bhazor says:

            Oh I liked the butts article for the same reason. Non judgemental, humourous and actually let the reader draw their own conclusion.

            Why not use humour? Brow beating people won’t change their minds but showing them how laughable something is just might.

            Walker’s been using the phrase “Preaching to the choir” as if its a good thing. He seems to miss the point that when you preach to the choir you turn your back on the congregation.

          • Isair says:

            I believe the butts post was by Alec.

          • Vorphalack says:

            I’ll admit to being awful with names, one of the most annoying traits of having language problems.

          • WrenBoy says:


    • Snids says:

      I don’t want to stir up a hornet’s nest, but I do want to say that of all the recent posts on RPS about gender/sex inequality in gaming, this most closely suits my exact tonal requirements. Thank you.

      • saginatio says:

        I feel the same.
        Imho its because this article shows a constructive and non-aggressive way of coping with the subject. Overall it is quite pleasant and I like RPS cooked in a positive sauce.

      • cptgone says:


        BTW, today i learned that “females are the homogametic sex”. homo-game-tic! perhaps we need more gaymes to lure the girls in?

      • DXN says:

        Sag, cpt: *wooooossshhhhhhhh*

  9. jpvg says:

    Meh the problem with this is :

    We are discriminating colored, redheads, smurfs and furries.

    So are we going to fix posters for all of em? That is my question.

    • Mctittles says:

      At least we can all agree midgets are still good fun!

      • jpvg says:

        See another vital group to the gaming community that we must appeal equally to. After all we are going for equality right?

    • lijenstina says:

      Only misanthropes do not discriminate, but I hate them. :D

    • Kitsunin says:

      True, but when you consider that literally half the population is female, it does seem like a bigger issue, doesn’t it? Also, discrimination of other things is fairly universal, whereas discrimination against females is more specifically present in video games, at this time.

      • jpvg says:

        7/10th of the world population is asians, so that’s an even bigger problem? If size of the group matters then I’d say that is the most important thing to fix right now? That being said, you don’t actually answer the question, if a company should be 100% politically correct, should they be making posters for everyone?

        Thanks for your reply though.

        • Kitsunin says:

          Good point, but when you consider that almost 1/5 of the world’s population lives in China alone, and America’s Asian population is under 6%, the amount of Asian games consumers for games created in English speaking cultures drops drastically. I’m willing to admit that this doesn’t necessarily change things, though.

          To answer your question: Yes, I think that the number of posters relating to a single minority or non-minority should more or less match the presence of that group within real life. So, not having every other guy be Asian when the game takes place in America is reasonable, but not having a single African American in that same game, when it has 50+ characters is unacceptable. And yes, I do feel that this is also a problem, one that should certainly get more attention than it does. I just think that we should deal with gender issues until they are resolved too, rather than using other issues as an excuse to ignore them!

          • jpvg says:

            Yeah, that’s probably where I differ from your view then, I personally find the idea absurd, the goal of the company is to generate as much profit as possible for the owners, if that means that a gender/culture group/haircolor is excluded from the focus of the marketing then so be it. If a minority group is excluded from playing the game in one way or another, I will be the first to yell about inequality.

          • Ergates_Antius says:

            Presumably you’d like companies to be bound by at least *some*degree of laws/ethics. If, for instance, a company discovered it was very profitable to murder people and sell their organs, I’m guessing you would think that was OK.

            Extreme example, obviously, and equally obviously illegal. But the principle remains that very few people actually believe that “anything goes” when it comes to making profit, and there are plenty of things which aren’t actually illegal which most people would consider deeply unethical.

            What you’re actually disagreeing on is where the lines should be drawn.

          • jpvg says:

            I suppose you’re right about that but in this specific case, what is the new law/ethic that you’re proposing?

            All games must be genderneutral and appeal to both genders?

          • Ergates_Antius says:

            Laws? None.

            But suggestions?
            1) When your game is about big stompy mechs blasting the shit out of each other, why have promotional material that objectifies women? It has nothing/little to do with the game and smacks of titilation for titilations sake.
            2) When you’re the CEO of a company and you have a mixed workforce, maybe hold back on displaying large posters of said objectifying promotional material in your office. It’ll probably make at least some of them uncomfortable, and they shouldn’t have to fear losing their jobs to bring it to your attention. When you are in a potision of authority, you have a responsibility to consider how your actions might impact those who are subordinate to you.

    • Low Life says:

      By your logic, before the male poster was created the problem was that it was discriminating men.

      • jpvg says:

        That’s by assuming that Redheads wants other Redheads and my post indicates that they do. I don’t indicate that hopefully, the point is merely to point out that there is minority groups in gaming that may have other desires then what is being shown on e.g. posters with good and reasonable explainations to support it.

    • aldo_14 says:

      That’s not a problem; tackling one biased stereotype doesn’t mean you reinforce every other one in the process.

      It’s not like people went ‘oh, we can’t ban slavery while we still have sexism’ or ‘tackling sexism is homophobic’. You just do one thing at a time and the process helps broaden horizons.

    • UmmonTL says:

      Well the question is what do these groups want to see in a pin-up poster. These posters are usually designed to be attractive for a broad demographic. Sure, posters for different ethnic groups can be done but it’s not like they are only attracted similar looking people. Do redheads only like redheads?
      It’s really just a question of how many of these posters you wanna make, you could do a pair of posters every month or so but that’s completely up to them and probably a waste of artist ressources.

      As for the rest of your joke examples, why would they include stuff that clearly has no place in their gameworld.

    • JackShandy says:

      So you’re discriminating against anyone you don’t put in your artwork?

      What viewpoint are you mocking with this intentional fallacy?

      • vondas says:

        Looks like someone has never heard of erasure. ;)

      • jpvg says:

        That is not the case, I don’t claim that e.g. Redheads wants other Redheads by default, merely that they are a minority group that may or may not have special needs for posters(and at the same time are they groups that have “less standing” then a white male).

    • Snids says:

      “colored” lol.

      There’s an old-timey telephone ringing for you. I think the 1930’s want their lingo back.
      Also, comparing discrimination against women to the plight of the furries shows how seriously you take it.

      • jpvg says:

        Well no, I just took something that male and females had in common and found something outthere related to sex, I also took culture, racial and haircolor more, another fellow added height and I will gladly throw in a politically group as well. The bigger diversity the better. I’m sorry for not being native english and thought that ‘colored’ was the correct use.

    • vondas says:

      I’m assuming that you’re joking, but the serious answer is this: the intention was to parody the poster with its binary opposite, i.e. answer female fanservice with male fanservice (or the other way around, I don’t know). So all those other fine and upstanding groups you mentioned simply do not enter into it – the intention isn’t to be inclusive or diverse, but to simply answer one polarity with the other.

      Though it is possible that if the company was male and half of their workforce was gay, they could’ve still done something similar without losing much of the intent.

      • jpvg says:

        Actually yeah I follow this poster, it’s fun, that’s not really what I’m commenting on, maybe that is a mistake. It’s the general principle of why this story is being picked up that is being commented on and I’m looking for an explaination on what we are going to do with all those groups are being either directly or indirectly stepped upon because the list simply dosen’t stop at women, it’s so long and evergrowing that it will never end.

        The story is fine, it’s a good story and it is how it should be ;)

        • JustOneWay says:

          Why are you waiting? You concern for these other minority groups is inspiring. Start a movement. I will be right behind you!
          It would be an awesome way to demonstrate your sincerity on the issue to those who might doubt it.

          • jpvg says:

            Where do you get the idea that I wish to lead my own crusade for any potential minorities that I’m in myself? That’s not my goal, my goal is to figure out how to serve my customerbase better so I sell more copies for less costs.

          • JustOneWay says:

            Quite! You don’t really care about the other minorities at all. Consequently your questioning of other people’s priorities is not an honest attempt to influence them.
            Clearly my sarcasm as to your sincerity went flying well over your head. But it is all right, you have revealed yourself anyway.

  10. ocelotwildly says:

    Oh god, I really don’t want to be *that guy*, but is anyone else’s viral marketing alarm starting to tingle? I mean, even if it is viral marketing it is an excellent example of the form, I can’t really begrudge someone using a timely issue in an original way. I guess it just makes me sad that my overly cynical brain can’t let me enjoy such heart-warming stories with forensic examinations of the motivations of everyone involved.

    I want it to be true, but the set up just seems a little too cute to me, and I always get suspicious when something like this comes around and the subsequent frequently retweeted image has the website URL included front and centre. Combine that with a recently released F2P game trying to drum up support, and the hot button issue that any gaming site worth its salt is covering (rightly, might I add), I just get the feeling that I’m being played.

    • Kitsunin says:

      I don’t really care if we’re being played: Bringing gender issues forward and normalizing support for their discussion is a good thing regardless of why we’re seeing it. Even if it is fake, maybe in the future someone will do something like this for real because of it. And maybe they’ll be fired for that :/

    • ocelotwildly says:

      I do want to make it clear that even if it *is* viral marketing, I still think it is a very good example of viral marketing that is also striking a positive tone in relation to issues of gender in gaming and that the ultimate motivation for the story doesn’t change that. So I guess whatever this is, more of this please!

      *Edit: Kitsunin got in there first, but basically what they said. Although I think it is still right to be sceptical in instances where the overall motivation is a good, it keeps you on your toes for the real bad eggs!

    • solidsquid says:

      Possibly it is viral marketing, but it’s viral marketing with an up side to it. If companies see Meteors getting strong positive feedback over this then they might start doing the same sort of thing, normalising this kind of behaviour

    • bateleur says:

      Yes, that was my first thought too. Am currently investigating.

      Possibly some of the odd aspects may have been caused by the publicity about Brosie going via Meteor’s PR people. That might explain both the long delay and the weird bits bigging up the CEO and the company in general.

    • finbikkifin says:

      The way I see it is that if advertising starts making the world a better place, and the only price is that advertising continues to exist (which it would anyway), I can live with that. Good advertising can be enjoyable in its own right.

    • sinister agent says:

      Very unlikely. It would take a single employee sending one email to expose this and turn this into a PR disaster.

  11. Archipelagos says:

    Largely positive comments — SO FAR — on an RPS article about gender? The MRA folk must be asleep.

    • Runs With Foxes says:

      That’s just the kind of comment that will draw them out though, so well done.

    • newguy2012 says:

      Hello, I guess I am one of “those” people.

      I do not like the pro feminist articles that RPS sometimes serves us. This however is fair, balanced and quite funny. It is actually equal :)

      No victims or “oppressors” here.

    • JakeDust says:

      Maybe they don’t really care about these issues, they just hate Mr. Walker, so they assume the inverse of any position John takes. As it was Nathan who posted this, they didn’t even bother to come here comment.

      • newguy2012 says:

        his articles are pure feminist, not balanced or funny at all.

        • GaiusJulius394 says:

          You seem to be confused. Feminism is balance – it is about balancing out generations of oppression against women in all aspects of life. You can disagree with the methods of achieving that balance, but to disagree with the concept of feminism or requiring something to ‘balance’ against it (as if there is a ‘different’ point of view that isn’t just misogyny) is just plain wrong.

          • Thermal Ions says:

            Two opposing extremes supposedly balancing each other out can hardly be extolled as a optimal goal.

            Whether representative of “true” feminism or not, extreme does tend to be the generalisation that gets applied. Sadly, in life, extremes and generalisations commonly get the airtime and have the loudest voices, even when not representative of the majority opinion.

          • paddymaxson says:

            I don’t think feminism should be about balancing out generations of imbalance. It’s not the modern man’s fault that previous generations treated women like shit. It should be about balancing TODAY. I don’t owe pre-suffrage women anything. I owe some currently living women some things and I always repay what I owe.

            The notion that “men did stuff bad in the past, god men are dicks and should be nice to me in apology for what happened in previous generations” is exactly the kind of radicalist feminism that causes people to think feminists are crazy man hating bitches.

            All that feminism should strive to gain is that men and women be treated equally, it should never be about who owes who due to the imbalances of the past

          • newguy2012 says:

            what nonsense. generations of oppression? there are good reasons as to why men and women had different roles historically. dont take the victimization standpoint again please, women are not victims of anything but themselves.

          • glix says:

            You seem to think that men don’t do “bad stuff” to women now. The modern man is at fault for the injustices and inbalances that have happened in modern times. I think it’s important to learn from past mistakes and not underestimate the importance of history, but dude, things haven’t gotten that much better. As a recent example, in a desperate bid for attention, Angelina Jolie hacked her tits off. At least, according to people that don’t understand that a double mastectomy when at an 87% risk of getting breast cancer is the equivalent of removing a bomb from your chest. There is no consideration that there’s a person who those breasts are attached to, and that she made a choice for her own health.

            and shhh gaius i don’t think they’re ready to know about intersectional feminism yet

          • Lusketrollet says:

            paddymaxson’s got it right.

          • GaiusJulius394 says:

            @paddymaxson I agree with you there, I wasn’t very clear. What I meant was that feminism is about creating a balance which, historically, has never really existed. It’s not about apologising for the past – as a man I am responsible for my current and future actions and therefore have a responsibility to help create an equal society which remedies the problems which have existed historically and continue to exist today.

            @newguy2012 You’re expressing a rather warped viewpoint. I can understand what you’re saying about the different roles of men and women historically, but to then claim that women are their own victims and that the reason for their oppression historically is – what, lack of effort? Laziness? Some moral failing? I get the impression that you’re the type of person who thinks this is a ‘women’s issue’ that does not concern you, but let me tell you – it is not. It is as much the responsibility of men, if not more so.

          • Lusketrollet says:

            @newguy2012 You’re expressing a rather warped viewpoint. I can understand what you’re saying about the different roles of men and women historically, but to then claim that women are their own victims and that the reason for their oppression historically is – what, lack of effort? Laziness? Some moral failing? I get the impression that you’re the type of person who thinks this is a ‘women’s issue’ that does not concern you, but let me tell you – it is not. It is as much the responsibility of men, if not more so.

            He’s just trolling. Ignore.

          • GaiusJulius394 says:

            @Lusketrollet I know, I’m just in the mood for a punch-up xD It’s one of those days…

          • Lusketrollet says:

            @Lusketrollet I know, I’m just in the mood for a punch-up xD It’s one of those days…

            Yeah, I could tell by your above post that you were feeling a bit pissy, today.

            Still, paddymaxson sounds to me like the single most sensible person in this entire thread.

          • newguy2012 says:


            Women had the reproductive responsibility, men had the responsibility to keep them warm, feed, clothed and safe. Women ran an enormus risk having a child. Without them the country, town or familiy would cease to exist.

            Men worked in mines, on the sea, in factories and the likes. Many died doing these dangerous jobs, jobs they did so their families could survive. They did not sit in dark corners twirling their mustaches in triumph over women.

            As technology advanced, it got to the point where most children born survived. Women were freed from their reproductive role. Society today goes on just fine if some women choose not to have children. Men are freed from having to do many forms of hazardous work due to machines doing it for them.

            As a consequence of this development it is only natural for women to work and live as they please. Technology has freed us all from the old gender roles. To call this natural development “oppression” is to take an extremely narrow viewpoint on history.

            Things were different before for very good reasons, not because men decided to “oppress” women.

          • Milky1985 says:

            The problem is that while feminism is the push towards a balance between men and women it is also used by some people as a way to basically bash men and say “well you have had it good for years, now its our turn” which is kind of against the principles of the idea.

            True balance is a good thing to aim for, but sometimes the feminism banner is used not to promote balance but to promote better conditions for women, i don’t mean better to lead to balance, i mean better over the balance so that sullies some peoples idea of feminism as girls trying to take some of the things guys have now, rather than what it should be which is girls having some of the things guys have now AS WELL.

            This is actually a perfect case for it, yes there is a girl a bit scantily clad, but there is a guy AS WELL. More promotion of the “as well”, instead of … well “you can’t do that” is a good thing to help with pushing a balance.

          • Lusketrollet says:


            Women were very, very definitively treated as second-class citizens for a great length of time. Please explain how not allowing them to vote could be anything other than oppression.


            Perhaps one should re-name “feminism” to “equalism”, or something along those lines.

          • Prime says:

            The problem is that while feminism is the push towards a balance between men and women it is also used by some people as a way to basically bash men and say “well you have had it good for years, now its our turn” which is kind of against the principles of the idea.

            No-one has said that Feminism is not without it’s fundamentalists and just-plain-mental-ists. There are jerks in every facet of human life. Feminism has its crazies, too. Best way to deal is to try and understand the anger behind those opinions; no-one hates men without reason, even if it’s a dumb-ass reason.

          • Bhazor says:


            One reason is because it was one vote per household. There were many men unable to vote as well for the same reason.

          • Lusketrollet says:

            One reason is because it was one vote per household. There were many men unable to vote as well for the same reason.

            Huh. I didn’t know that, actually.

          • newguy2012 says:

            @ Lusketrollet

            Bhazor is right. Most men could not actually wote for anything at all. They had to do what their lord or king wanted or die. A very small elite ruled. Most people worried about having enough to eat to survive a harsh winter and not starve, not voting rights.

            As for why women and people in general was oppressed before democracy came along, I believe the idea of gender equality simply not existed. Without gender roles society as it was would cease to function, in the minds of someone from say the 1700s the idea would sound like madness. When the need for these roles disappeared, women demanded and got equal rights.

            Science, religion and philosophy were also different in the olden days, and were used to justify all manner of atrocities. Things were wery different. To say that women alone as a group were oppressed is simply wrong.

          • Prime says:

            I don’t think anyone is trying to say that only women were ever discriminated against. And I’ll grant that gender roles were very different in different eras of history. But I’d argue that discrimination against women has been a prevailing theme ever since biblical times. Religion, now that you mentioned it, has been used as a tool to control everyone but has usually placed women lower in their hierarchies than men. Not just Christianity, either. Buddhism is equally culpable, as are many others. When it came to defining gender roles, the ones chosen for women usually favoured men, ‘dutiful wife’ as Christianity still likes to spout, or at the very least placed greater freedoms on the male (even if the male himself would rather not choose those responsibilities or their accompanying dangers)

            But as has been pointed out, that’s history. We need to look at today and deal with the inequalities that still exist today. Women may have demanded and got equal ‘Rights’ (that they had to demand them should tell you how good we men were/are at recognising their needs by ourselves) but there’s still large areas of imbalance in terms of respect and opportunity. They still have to deal with lots of gender-bias crap that seems to have been baked into the societal/cultural frameworks, crap that we men simply never experience, the Hawken article today giving us an excellent example.

          • Ovno says:

            ‘it is about balancing out generations of oppression against women in all aspects of life’

            Exactly the problem that a lot of people of both sexes have with feminism, we’re all for equality but we are not for ‘balancing out generations of oppression’ down that path a bitter twisted world lies…

            I know many women who deliberately don’t classify themselves as feminist and in fact dislike feminism and die hard feminists because of exactly that kind of attitude from feminists…

            But all of those women and the men I know are for equality of opportunities for all…

            Also loving the hawkeye initiative definitely the best calling people on their bullshit response I’ve ever seen!!!

          • GaiusJulius394 says:

            @ovno Please see my later response for clarification on this point. I was not intending to argue for the position ascribed to me – I just got carried away with the hyperbole :)

          • paddymaxson says:

            I know full well some men are still awful to women. I was merely saying “let’s not blame current men for what other men did in the past” at no point did I say “Let’s not blame current men for what they do”, we should absolutely crack down on men being shits to women, patriarchy is not fair – neither is matriarchy, but matriarchy is much more rare.

            We don’t owe anyone for what our ancestors did. We owe people for what we do. Learning from past mistakes is the right thing to do, appeasing people to apologise for the mistakes of others in the past isn’t.

            It’s not my right or responsibility to apologise or appease others on behalf of somebody long dead but it is my right and responsibility to be decent to others regardless of gender. The modern man may well be at fault for the injustices and imbalances that currently happen, that’s fine, let’s DEAL WITH THAT. But don’t tell me I should treat women better than men because my grandad treated women badly. That’s not balance it’s affirmative action and it is absolutely no better than chauvinism.

            I’m not sure what Angelina Jolie’s tits have to do with anything. I’ve not as yet met anyone who thinks that was attention whoring. But I don’t often consort with people who don’t know what a masectomy is.

    • biggergun says:

      I guess I’m one of the people you refer to as “MRA crowd” and I think the poster is funny and actually makes a valid point. As someone lower in the thread said, it is actually equal, while feminism stopped being about equality since around Dworkin and Irigaray.

      Also, don’t really want to start a debate, but the feminists of old would have loved the tech girl poster – it depicts a woman who а) does and loves a job that is traditionally considered man-only b) freely expresses her sexuality while doing so.

  12. GallonOfAlan says:

    Another RPS article about women …. why don’t you just rename yourselves FROCKPaperShotgun and be done with it! Hahaha! You’re all pussywhipped!

    I’m 14.

    (this is also sarcasm in case anyone missed it)

    • Skeletor68 says:

      Your SN always cracks me up.

    • Thermal Ions says:

      I thought you were supposed to be 12?

      or was that 2 years ago? I can never keep up with these meme things.

    • Prime says:

      Witty. I like it. Made me laugh. Visions of all the chaps in skirts. Jim’s is floral. :)

      Of course it’s not a good rename but it might make a great banner-for-a-day if there was to be a day devoted to women’s issues in gaming, or something like that. Probably. Perhaps. YMMV.

  13. Ein0r says:

    Not sexist enough.

  14. ribobura osserotto says:

    Thank you RPS for reminding me I should feel bad for enjoying sexy depictions of women.

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      Yeah, THAT’S the message from this story.

      • ribobura osserotto says:

        Why not writing a post about how porn games are horrible and should be eradicated from the face of the planet? In fact, why not banning porn as a whole, since it’s core audience is a group of chauvinistic male oppressors and potential rapists?

        • Zepp says:

          God, no! Please, porn is keeping me alive. :( Fuck this world if it happens.

        • Lars Westergren says:

          It’s good you didn’t have to resort to straw men or hyperbole. Kudos.

        • glix says:

          If you heard the wind howling just now, that wasn’t wind. It was the point hurtling overhead off into the sky.

    • RaveTurned says:

      I don’t think the article said that. If reading the article made you feel that way though, perhaps it’s time to think about why that could be.

      • ribobura osserotto says:

        Sorry. It’s still not privilege checking time for me, and I’ve been busy today. Will check it in an hour or so, and I’ll proceed to write an apologetic post on why we should label as offensive and totally care about a non-issue which can be summed up by target demographics.

        • Lars Westergren says:

          You are sounding awfully sincere for someone claiming to be sarcastic.

          • ribobura osserotto says:

            I’m a CISprivileged white male. What else do you expect?

  15. The Reviewist says:

    This reminds me of an old Flight sim I remember playing years ago (In the days of XWIng & Tie Fighter) Where in the barracks room there was a “sexy photo” of a woman in a bikini on one side of the room and on the other a similar pic of a burly hairy bloke flexing in his pants.

    Wish I could remember the name of the game….

  16. lowprices says:

    Saw this on The Mary Sue. It isn’t often ant behind the scenes videogame development news makes me smile, but this did.

    Also, good on the boss for realising that he had shit to be called on. That’s rare in any industry.

    • Chainrxn says:

      I think the whole point of the article is that it may not be as rare as you expect. I think the opposite may be more true. The true assholes are the rare ones. Its just their actions are so loud and obnoxious that they drown out the majority.

      I consider myself an enlightened person and would have supported this and loved to see it happen in my workplace, but I’m sure I’ve been party to supporting some of these stereotypes unintentionally in the past. It might be myopic to think there are more people like me than not, but i think in general its far more common for people to unintentionally support the status-quo than to actively support it.

  17. Taidan says:

    I, for one, am hugely relieved that these folk have just discovered that mens bodies can be beautiful too.

    For far too long now, we males have been discriminated against when it comes to the arena of (both tastefully and tastelessly) exploiting half-naked bodies in order to sell stuff.

    Now begins the real battle. I want to see a lot more of this moving forwards, and I want to see a far greater variety of body shapes and sizes being draped over advertising materials in order to sell stuff. Not all of us guys and gals have underwear-model proportions. Also, body-hair exists, and is beautiful on both genders. (The complete lack of female under-arm hair in videogames is the real hot-button issue here, and is something that we’re not getting nearly angry enough about.)

    While we’re a long way off of that kind of genuine equality, those employees at Meteor are on to something genuinely great here, and I’ll be proud to be rocking Brosie as my new desktop wallpaper for the foreseeable future. (Goodbye Sexy Spock. link to )

    • Kitsunin says:

      I have to say, I would legitimately not mind there being more shirtless, crotch-bulge wearing men, in games. And no, I’m not gay. And yes, that is true.

      • NathanH says:

        But men are objectively ugly. Objectively.

        • RaveTurned says:

          That all depends on who’s doing the objectifying.

        • Lars Westergren says:

          Objectively objectively, or subjectively objectively?

          If your answer is “Yes”, I hate you.

      • JackShandy says:

        Your prayers have been answered! Enjoy your beefcake, friend.

        link to

        • Kitsunin says:

          I forgot what that game was, except that it was something about dragons, and there was a Jimquisition episode talking about the sorcerress’s boobs in that game.

          So of course I decided to google “Dragon Boobs” then immediately realized that was the worst idea I’ve had in quite a while.

          In short: The game is “Dragon’s Crown”.

    • cpt_freakout says:

      Hell yes. This is a good step towards more of everything: races, body shapes, ages, genders, whatnot. Maybe sooner rather than later we’ll start seeing those kinds of things, so kudos to the HI staff!

  18. AbyssUK says:

    The only problem I see here is that guys wrench has the same size opening on both ends…WHY!

  19. MajorManiac says:

    I’m guessing they both have no body hair due to all the naked-welding.

  20. paddymaxson says:

    If this article had been on Kotaku, there would be a furore as they accuse the anonymous prankster of accusing her boss of being gay and the implication that doing so suggests being gay is bad.

  21. SuicideKing says:

    Hahaha! That was fun.

  22. Lusketrollet says:

    I think it’s weird that the men reportedly reacted with shock initially. I would have thought they’d just laugh it off and continue with their day.

  23. Lusketrollet says:

    Oh, fuck this comments-system. Fuck it.

  24. aircool says:

    That’s so cool :)

    As for their worries about an army guy getting up tight? It’s exactly the sort of thing he would have done 20-30 years ago without doubt.

  25. Prime says:

    Someone posted this on my Facebook this morning. Best thing I’ve read in ages.

    That lady’s CEO is an absolute hero for so readily accepting his mistake and then rewarding the employees that pointed it out to him. Wonderful.

  26. LionsPhil says:

    But…why is the K backwards on one of them?

  27. TreuloseTomate says:

    Now they need to make posters with a black man and a black woman.

    • 00000 says:

      Fair point. The women working at Meteor publishing are obviously racist.

  28. vondas says:

    I’m usually irrationally hostile to this sort of posts here, but this is actually a good (possibly the best) solution, and their boss’ response is also highly commendable. Thanks for sharing this!

  29. Tom Walker says:

    “nipples testing the air like young gophers in springtime”
    I want to read more from this person.

  30. Garad says:

    While I’m glad that the CEO recognized that this kind of poster is offensive to some people, and while I think the prank itself is funny, I don’t know if keeping both posters was the correct response…

    • SAM-site says:

      It is.

      Certainly you could bin both posters as being unacceptable sexualised depictions of people, however out of sight out of mind. By displaying both you’re displaying a constant reminder that the two are equally dubious.

    • Kamos says:

      Why? Is there something intrinsically wrong with sex or representations of it?

      • Garad says:

        Of course not! But when does “representation” become objectification?

  31. Premium User Badge

    Bluerps says:

    This story brightened a day that has sucked rather hard, so far.

  32. Bluestormzion says:

    I find this all hilarious, and I think it’s great that rather than remove the original poster and stifle all expression and put people into some asexual stew of nothingness, they put up the new one alongside it, and celebrated both the absurdity of the situation and the way that females are not exclusive in the “I want that!” category.

    HOWEVER, I do want to keep stressing to the world that underboob creating tit straps is NOTHING compared to Banana-Hamock. The Penis and Testicles are actual reproductive, sexual organs. Breasts aren’t. In fact, the cosmetic “Breast” that dudes (and some ladies) go nuts over is actually nothing but strategic fat, designed to fool the stupid masculine bits of our existence into thinking that a woman with larger breasts can nurse more children. In fact, all of the mechanical parts are just as capable in a woman with mad tiny boobages, since once she’s given birth her lactatory systems will engage and produce milk, swelling the breast by the same amount as a woman who’s been walking around with two propane tanks attached to her chestal region.

    I made up many, many words there.

    But my point is that the dude in the speedo is WAY more revealed than the woman is, from an actual sexual and factual perspective… and I am 100% fine with it.

    • MobileAssaultDuck says:

      To be fair, while the penis is obviously the more biologically sexual organ, boobs and penis are on equal footing is our social sexuality ladder.

      Though I know there are strip clubs in the states that do not allow bottomless dancers, or full nude, but I find that alien and weird.

      Here in Canada our strip clubs are 100% nudity.

  33. Sparkasaurusmex says:

    Why doesn’t the woman have a six pack like the man? I want equality!!!

  34. Berzee says:

    Immodesty: it is bad.
    Double Immodesty: it is doubly bad.

    (After the riptide statue thing and this, and some other articles — I wish that posts criticizing a Shameful and Exploitative Image would post that image *after* the break. Otherwise I feel like I need one of these in order to scroll the front page.)

    For now I will just turn off automatic image loading from the site; who knows? I might be beneficial anyway in actually getting me to read all the words. ^_^

    • Garad says:

      I gotta second this. I’ve had to limit myself to checking RPS on my phone over the cellular network at work today because I work in a professional environment and that picture on my screen at the wrong time could get me fired :(

      • NothingFunny says:

        Now this is ‘being oppressed’. You should fight for your rights in your respective industry.

      • Wisq says:

        At our company (200+ strong), this is the sort of thing that would be posted to the company-wide chat channel. With the image hot-linked and auto-loaded on everyone’s screen, no less.

        Your world is alien to me and I offer my sympathies. :/

    • LionsPhil says:

      Yeah, it’s not exactly workplace lunchbreak-friendly.

      Come on, we’re British. Cover up those elbows.

  35. ShockLobster says:

    This is a nice offset to the ridiculous office drama involving Stardock and Brad Wardell.

  36. cptgone says:

    good to see they did the right thing and put some brothers on the wall.

    some people will still take offense though. after all, one can’t tell if this girl and guy are homosexual or not. maybe we need 4 posters. oh, and one of pedobear too, to even things out. and where are the disabled people? disabled people are sexy too!

    • vecordae says:

      You can pretend that the lady is a super-gay transgendered person and the guy has no legs below the knees if it helps you feel better. You can also pretend that pedobear is somehow relevant to gender equality for some reason if you really need to.

  37. vecordae says:

    What a delightful story! Very egalitarian.

  38. Johnny Go-Time says:

    Hey isn’t the guy in the poster that guy from Click Nothing??
    link to

  39. f69 says:

    So tell me if someone posts the poster of the man on the right in their office should I be offended? Should I be outraged at the objectification of my male body? Because I don’t think I would.

  40. edwardh says:

    People REALLY need to fucking learn about primary/secondary sex characteristics!
    Or to put it in terms that are maybe more adequate for people who think that those two images are equal: The difference between wee-wees and bazoongas.

    If those two images were equal, she would not be wearing a damn top! And this is one thing that angers me so much not only about feminism but any kind of petty retaliation that people excuse by saying they would merely try to “restore balance” but constantly overdo it. Of course… the people who do it, who naturally can be blinded by emotion are thus not nearly as stupid as supposedly neutral parties who look at it and go “Yeah right… he did fuck that dude’s wife, so I guess it was fair that he shot him”.

  41. Geen says:

    …Well played, meteor, well played.