I'm on the fence about this. While Duke Nukem can be seen as a parody of the masculine stereotypes, one of which is the subjugation of women as unequal, but it still advertises misogyny as a core trait of his character. For me, Pitchford's argument doesn't hold water. Just because something is A doesn't mean it can't be B also. We don't stop calling tigers felines, just because they are tigers. Duke Nukem is a misogynist, this is a fact you cannot refute, no matter how many 'reasons' there are for it. The game portrays women as stereotypical sexualized objects, that is the definition of misogyny. But since the game blows out the masculine characteristics of Duke's character to parody levels we could claim that the feminine portrayals in the game are no more valid than the masculine ones. Does this make it okay though? I'm not sure, because the game is designed as a "kick ass and chew bubblegum" simulator, not a critique of gender dynamics and roles in society. Once games for the most part become less about the game, and more about the ideas and messages orbiting around the game we can make the argument that games are art and therefore can take on issues like these. Until then these concerns are secondary if that.