I think everyone is in support of the notion of more equitable representation. i consider myself a feminist and have written grad school essays on brilliant feminist writers that the world could learn a lot from, like Judith Butler, Gayatri Spivak, etc. I say that not to brag, but to attempt to establish feminist credentials before I'm shouted down like many people who don't toe a strict ideological line when it comes to feminism and issues like this.
What I don't see ITT are concrete examples of women who were passed over because they are women, or a list of clearly undeserving men and the women who should replace them. The unequal representation is certainly something to raise an eyebrow at, as is the relative lack of women who choose to write in and about the games industry, but moving from that fair, honest, unpleasant observation to a concrete, actionable plan requires delicacy and not simply ascribing negative motives to people involved in the selection or a sloppy attempt to immediately make things equal.
When someone says, "I'm not supporting these awards until they're 50/50 split between men and women," I view that person as fighting an admirable battle in the worst way possible. The goal, as it should be in every situation like this, whether it's about race, sexuality, etc, is to provide equal opportunity and to avoid discrimination on any basis. No proof has been provided to show this happened, particularly in an industry that skews heavily male in the first place and as a result leads to unequal representation in situations when people are selected from pools of preexisting applicants/candidates (which I do hope shifts over time).
Good post.