You don't need to like video games to criticize them. Think about high school English. Were you an avid fan of every work by every author you read? No. But you did your homework anyway. Was that disingenuous of you? Of course not, you don't need to love something to pick it apart academically. The oft-raised complaint that "Anita doesn't even LIKE games" doesn't hold water because she doesn't NEED to.
I also don't think the Cherry Picking argument is fair, because you don't need to call out positive examples when you criticize something. The idea that you do is a facet of weak, bleeding heart media consumerism, the same kind of limp-wristed approach to fact delivery that sees the the film press describe Roman Polansky as a child-drugging pedophile who nonetheless made some really good movies, as though that makes him better than a hack who rapes kids. The fact that You play as a woman who isn't nude and who treats another female principle respectfully in Mirror's Edge DOESN'T NEED TO ENTER INTO a discussion of whether the God of War games objectify women, because whether Mirror's Edge existed or not, God of War could still objectify women (which it often does, gleefully).
NOW ON THE FLIP SIDE.
I don't like how she announces that an argument is unassailable just because. This is rhetorically poor. Her insistence that narrative can't excuse tropes is also kind of shallow, for instance that the presence of prostitutes in both LA Noire and GTA is equally offensive. In GTA hookers are basically Mario Question Blocks with vaginas, there to give you health and dispense money when hit, while prostitutes in LA Noire are characters, and reasonable ones to meet since you ARE a policeman. In fact I would argue that narrative excuses a lot of what she doesn't like, which brings me to...
She doesn't seem to bother much with plot beyond what Wikipedia tells her. This is important since often a story will add wrinkles that very much change how we see characterization. For instance, in Bioshock, Dr. Tannenbaum superficially looks like a hodgepodge of offensive female stereotypes- an untrustworthy scheming old maid who has a heart of gold for little orphans. But the plot puts a VERY plausible origin together for her that makes that more than the sum of its parts.
I also don't care much for her presentation style. Like Moviebob (sorry, Bob) she has a penchant for derisively laughing at stuff that deserves it, and like Bob it comes across as forced and arrogant. She also works a very pundit-ey "this guy gets me, wink wink nod" speaking method that I find offputting and I can imagine does her no favors with people who DON'T agree with her. And if I wanted to be catty, I'd point out the irony of a lady ripping up the male idealized image of women in media while equipped with eyebrows so laser-sharp in their shaping that you could slice cobalt on them. IF I wanted to be catty.
So in summary, she has a right to do what she does and I don't think her own values make her work invalid, but she really should try harder and play it a bit more straight, IMO.
