I’ve just got wind of a new magazine called “Gamer Girls”. In an interview with the creator it becomes apparent that the salacious girls photographed in various semi-clad poses are possibly not serious gamers at all, but perhaps more of the type to play the latest version of Angry Birds on their phone while sitting in a lecture for their liberal arts degree.

Each to their own. It’s obviously trash, and also obviously going to make the publisher some short term cash. This is the beauty of capitalism and a free society – if you have an idea you can risk your money on it. The obvious beauty of this magazine is the all too predictable amount of indignant self-righteous outrage it has generated across the internets. Free publicity is a boon for any start-up, and this one has ticked all the boxes.

The outrage has flowed thick and fast. (Incidentally, this is the first time I have come across the Canadian online gamers site, and what a winner it is – I’m sure it’s going to provide me with many sources of abject stupidity into the future). The ‘article’ is so weak as to not generate even scorn, but the following comments are wonderful in the way they illuminate the very stupid. How about this little gem from commenter Niki Crawford:

“… As if that somehow negates the fact that this magazine is an embarassment to those of us who play video games. I am not basing my assessment off of the pictures alone, but the content as well. Which is weak to say the least. You are representing us in a bad light and we don’t like it …”

Where to start? The poor little dear just doesn’t get it, does she. This is the great trap with moral outrage and the ability to see offense in every dark corner; you’re prone to being taken for a sucker. If Gamer Girls magazine is representing anybody it would be girls with ample bosoms who will do just about anything to see themselves in a glossy magazine. But dumb little Niki honestly believes that she is being misrepresented. Hilariously, she would have less of a problem with the magazine if it had better content. This is insightful, as it underscores the fact that she believes that she is part of a special group, ie women who play video-games.

Not gamers, but women who play video-games. Because Niki and her cohorts would actually like nothing better than a magazine devoted to their cause. The reason that they are so very upset is that this publisher has twisted this idea around on them.

Some years ago the feminist bloc held protests outside crusty old city men’s clubs denouncing them as institutions of sexism and demanding the right to be admitted as a member. Of course now we have women’s clubs for just about anything you can imagine. In Australia there is even a Minister for Women, although the corresponding Minister for Men seems to have been forgotten about. So the goalposts of outraged sexism have had to be shifted. Now it is sexist if a game company makes strategic commercial decisions in order to give their product a chance in a highly competitive market environment. That embarrassment of an article protests the fact that images of women are not being used as game cover art. It ends with the question, ‘what are we going to do about it?’

Because they would like nothing more than to have the power to make these decisions. The sad thing is that they already do. It’s called designing your own game and marketing it the way you want. Taking a risk, like the guy who put out Gamer Girls. But these people don’t want to take a risk, they only want to censor those who have the balls to get out there and actually do something. The reason that the Left hate Capitalism so much is that it is a barometer for the truth of a situation. You can be as idealistic as you like, but idealism is nothing in the face of market forces, which is what people actually want.

Gamer Girls hurts them on every level. It sucks them into giving it free publicity, it traps them into believing that they are misrepresented, and it succeeds in spite of their lamentations. It is true brilliance, intended or otherwise.