Please don't drag me into the feminist argument. I have zero opinion on the issue that I care to share.
But, the funny thing is, there's a pretty strong correlation between "I really don't like edition X" and "Edition X is bad because it breaks my suspension of disbelief". It gets even stranger when you start to point out the fifteen similar things that were done in another edition that didn't break suspension of disbelief but are apparently a bridge too far when done in another edition.
All you have to do is look at pretty much any edition war thread and you see it. "I hate 4e because 4e healing is too fast" "But, 4e healing is only slightly faster than 3e, by maybe a day or two for natural healing, so, did you have a similar issue before?" "Oh, hell no, they're totally different. One day vs three days is a completely and utterly different thing and i can totally buy healing from six seconds from death in three days. I only have a problem with one day."
Or:
"I can't believe the AEDU structure, it totally breaks my suspension of disbelief. It's so unrealistic!" "So, do you have similar issues with bardic music and barbarian raging?" "Oh, hell no, those are perfectly fine and right. "
Or:
"It's wrong for dragon born to have boobs since reptiles can't have boobs. 4e is so stupid for doing this." "But, dragons aren't reptiles and the lore for the race specifically says they were created to model humans." "Doesn't matter, 4e is stupid."
On and on and on. Pick pretty much any issue and you see the exact, identical argument - Damage on a miss, minions, martial powers that cause enemies to take actions (AKA martial mind control), etc. etc. etc.
Saying you don't like dragon born to have boobs is fine. Saying that dragon born shouldn't have boobs because SCIENCE is complete and utter ballocks.