We need to talk about trans sex and trans identities in schools. We need to not be punished for that demand with the warmed-up homophobic accusation that it means we’re predatory. We used to be trans kids, too. We need more trans voices in the media, and more trans characters in fiction. We need them played by trans actors, and written by trans people. We need to understand the unique benefits the trans experience can offer us on subjects that are unrelated to our genders or our bodies. We need cis people to make space for us.

But why should disabled people be forced to accept being planned for as an afterthought in a society designed for able-bodiedm neurotypical Australians, while the opposite is not just possible, but would dramatically improve the quality of life for everyone? Why does the onus fall upon disabled people to prove, to the satisfaction of our ableist society, the accommodations that we need are ‘reasonable’, and why does it not fall upon the businesses and governments with vastly greater resources to prove that they’re not?

Modelling has shown that over 25,000 Australian citizens will most likely die from COVID and COVID-related illnesses if the government proceeds with opening the country once 80 per cent of the Australian population has been vaccinated. It might therefore sound crazy for a group of people most statistically likely to die due to their ‘underlying health conditions’ to refuse a free, potentially life-saving, and scientifically well-grounded medication promising to protect them from the worst of its risks.

The Liberal government is predominantly focused on the maintenance and expansion of their power, rather than the best outcomes for the country. This fact explains the logic of what would otherwise appear to be ignorant or hypocritical decisions over policy, especially when it comes to Labor-controlled states – whose mere existence, let alone success, represents a threat to its power.

While both of our largest political parties are so concerned about the possibility of a ‘too generous’ welfare system serving as a disincentive against finding work that they are both refusing to maintain it at its current, merely adequate level, Animal Crossing presents us with a fictional economy where people are allowed to choose to work to better their society.

It also shined a light on the existence of the leftist nerd: a common type of nerd (especially in trans communities) whose presence is continually overshadowed by the louder voices of reactionary gamers and pseudo-rationalist centrists claiming to be apolitical, even as they enthusiastically support the status quo.

The fallout from the ‘Gamergate’ movement and its call for naive ‘objectivity’ has led to a reductionist approach in many gamer circles, whereby gamers try to focus exclusively on game mechanics in the hopes of ending the ‘politicisation’ of the hobby, which they say has impaired the quality of modern games and critical appraisals. But almost all games are inherently political, and refusing to acknowledge it doesn’t change their subtext or reality.

These cuts are usually defended by the cultural construction of the ‘bludger’: a largely mythological figure who prefers a life on welfare over working and who needs to be discouraged from their idleness by the formulation of harsh laws surrounding the eligibility of Centrelink recipients, already struggling, in financial and emotional distress, far below the poverty line.

Recently, videogame company 2K Games released the third instalment of the open-world crime series Mafia. By most accounts, it’s a fairly average game, a mix of the original Saints Row with Grand Theft Auto V, marred by bugs and partially implemented gameplay. But where it truly shines is its depiction of the world, a gorgeously rendered simulacra of New Orleans in 1968 called ‘New Boudreaux’ that operates on two distinct levels: as a political commentary on the history of racism in America, and as a left-wing power fantasy targeted at white supremacy.

In my playthrough of controversial mobile phone game Survival Island 3, I didn’t meet a single Indigenous Australian.

Historically, ‘post-punk’ has been described as a predominately white, male, middle-class musical scene. While the reality was really very different – female-fronted bands such as Delta V and Au Pairs not only participated in the subculture, but used it as a platform for gender commentary – it has mostly been the male performers – Joy Division, Wire, Gang of Four – who’ve received the bulk of critical attention.

It is neither partisan nor controversial to suggest that political donations have a dangerous effect on democracy. A couple of months back, Fairfax revealed that the Liberal Party had received the first of two major donations from the gambling industry in August 2013, the same month the Labor government introduced new reforms to tackle problem gambling. While the Liberal Party and the gambling industry both denied the money had any effect on collation policy, the donations were intended to assist government frontbencher Kevin Andrews in his re-election campaign.

In its current form, far from helping the unemployed remove themselves from welfare, Work for the Dole and related programs actually cause participants to spend a longer time collecting benefits, owing to a combination of a reduction in the hours available to search for paying work, and what Jeff Borland of the University of Melbourne calls the ‘scarring effect’ created by the program.

Because the player’s protagonist character is male, players interact with the simulated world as a man. Women in the game insult the protagonist’s appearance, and men either threaten to attack him, or make sexist jokes and comments expecting his support. This is where the problems of the game begin, but it’s also the start of their solution. GTA VI needs a female protagonist. But what sort of character could she be?