So andromeda initiative is all about girlpower?

Entertainement being ''neutral and apolitical'' sounds not only boring as all hell to me, but impossible as soon as you tackle any story more complex than ''good guys punch bad guys in the face, the end''. Which is fine to have, but surely not all stories have to be so limited. Whenever you depict stuff such as war, economics, social tensions, or any other topic that comes up in real life, it's political. It happens that some topic garner more press around the gaming community than others, true, and Bioware likes to write about some of these topics. Why not? Video games aren't mindless entertainement, not always. I enjoy games like DOOM as much as anyone, yet being challenged in your views and seeing stuff you don't like in a game is very much fine by me too. For instance, I found Cerberus's xenophobic political positions abhorent myself, but I don't think it means they should have been removed or tossed to the wayside at all (I loathe Cerberus for different reasons).

I also cringed when The Witcher waved its anti-war, anti-religion message in my face at every single opportunity it got, but it was part of the setting so I accepted it. Not that I disagreed with the basic points, but they were even less subtle about it than Bioware ever was, yet few people said anything or found it ''too political'' simply because these issues aren't very contentious to the gaming public at large.

To say nothing of one of my favorite RPGs of all time, Fallout New Vegas, which is an incredibly political game at its core, tackling too many themes for me to list them all and clearly taking cues from recent history.

And you might not like the explanations given by Gaider, that's your prerogative, but that doesn't mean that the explanation is not valid. The Qunari make exceptions without, in their mind, making exceptions for some individuals. I cited Sten, you could say the same of Hawke being recognized as bas-alitan by the Arishok. He's still a filthy bas that needs to be re-educated for his own good, but he's a special one or something. Or how they forbid women from being soldiers, but being spies that happen to fight a lot (Tallis) is totes fine. The ability to ignore specific parts of the Qun when it suits them is a well-documented aspect of the Qunari even before Inquisition. I grant you that the writers could have exposed this aspect of their philosophy in greater details, but let's not act as if they pulled it out of their rear.

Also, why is it a political point in particular when females dominate leadership? When males dominate,  does it mean ''the writers think males are better''? When females do, it means ''the writers think females are better''? If it's a perfectly even split, does it then mean that ''the writers were going for a quota, so political''? When is it not ''political''?

I just think people are incredibly selective as to what they see as ''too political''. Oftentimes it seems all but undistinguishable from ''topics I don't happen to like''.