@maximo: I deleted my comment because I didn't feel like another argument, but you managed to reply anyway, and your reply is too good to pass up.

I said something along the lines of "What exactly makes a female character suit the story more than a male character?", to which maximo replied "it's the story".

@pops4657: They aren't forcing you to play as a female, just don't play the game.

That's the logic used when women want female playable characters, right?

@Thanatos2k: You did not address my point. Here:

"All men are created by Satan and inherently evil. All women are created by God and inherently good."

Is that sexist?

@Thanatos2k: I have not advocated criminal behavior. As I have shown, what I have advocated was upheld by the Supreme Court. You have shown nothing to the contrary.

@GH05T-666: He wasn't trying to sell games, at least. Imagine what might've happened if criminals got their hands on games!

@Thanatos2k: "No, I didn't advocate discrimination or illegal activities. That pretty much makes my opinion reasonable to most people."

Whoops, let me clear up what I implied for you: "your opinion is weak, unsubstantiated, and is to be ignored by intelligent individuals"

"You advocate punishing innocent people for the perceived sins of others? And you think it's ok? One wonders who taught you such a despicable morally bankrupt concept. Bad parenting? Low quality teachers?"

What, they don't win a tie? I hardly call that punishment. It isn't as though, if the other applicant was a man, they necessarily would've gotten the job either. But thank you for breaking down into pettiness, I always love that.

"And now you're advocating discrimination because of things that "likely" might have maybe happened."

I just mean I can't prove anything, but the numbers are telling. In any case, I meant "likely" in the sense that it doesn't apply in every case, not the sense that it may not be true at all.

"illegal"

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

@Thanatos2k: That is incorrect. My claim was that he is sexist, which means he believes there is a difference without proof. That Is The claim I need to substantiate. By your logic, that something is only sexist if it is proven false, then almost no one has ever been sexist, or racist, for that matter. However, as I said, I claimed that he is sexist because he believes there is a difference but cannot prove it, which is sexism. I did not say I could prove it false, I only claimed that he believes it without proof, which is sufficient for sexism. Otherwise, I could say all men are created by Satan and inherently evil, but that wouldn't be sexist, because you can't disprove it.

@linusa: To be clear, I have claimed that he is sexist because he believe in an inherent difference between men and women which is unsubstantiated. You countered by saying the difference is true, but have not substantiated it. Claiming that I cannot substantiate the reverse does not make my claim false. I can't prove they are the same, but that doesn't change my claim that he can't prove they are different.

@Thanatos2k: You said it isn't sexist if it's true, but you apparently have no reason to believe it's true. If I have no reason to believe it's true, then I can reasonably conclude that the view is sexist. You are the ones making a harmful claim, my claim is neutral. If your claim of inherent difference is true, then what does that make me? Still not sexist, just mistaken? I can live with that. Let's agree that neither of us can back up our claim, so you're sexist and I'm still not. You can have an unsubstantiated sexist belief, and I'll have an unsubstantiated incorrect belief.

EDIT: To clarify, I claimed that he was sexist. I substantiated my claim by citing him as saying that there is an inherent difference between the interests of women and men that he cannot back up. You have defended him by saying that the difference is true, but provided no evidence for that claim. I have backed up the claim I made, that he believes in an as-yet unsubstantiated difference. You have not backed up your claim that he believes in a legitimate and substantiated difference.