>>52817492What the fuck is your aim here? Did you even read the article? It's about 6 weak(in terms of length and substance) paragraphs that barely creates a thesis and she tries to tie in LGBTQ issues into it which are not and have never exclusively been about women.
Here's an excerpt:
Often considered a symbol of female empowerment, skirts and dresses have been part of Pokemon games for almost a decade now, as they were introduced with Pokemon X and Y. As such, Pokemon Scarlet and Violet removing both skirts and dresses entirely not only makes no sense, but it breaks a major tradition that had only helped the franchise grow thanks to trainers across the world being able to choose what their in-game avatars looked like. School uniforms always come with shorts and pants regardless of the character gender that players pick at the beginning of the game, which doesn't make much sense.
This "Journalist" claims that skirts were introduced to Pokemon in Gen 6 which ignores the fact they've been around as character design clothing since the original releases and as part of the character design of the female PC in the Fire Red/Leaf Green Remakes, hell even Dawn in gen 4 had one.
This is bad journalism, that's my fucking opinion you weirdo
