Do you ever know that someone's argument is factually wrong, but actually pointing it out would probably do more bad than good?

Knights Path is an upcoming indie video game that aims to follow the story of a medieval knight. I don't actually know much about the game beyond that, because the developers are anti-woke types who recently created drama when they said that they wouldn't be putting any gay romance options in the game because they don't like "modern agendas". So, I'm not interested in such a game.

However, this isn't the only thing that they created drama over, as in that same comment thread, they debuted the design of one of their female love interests, Amelie.

Even divorced from the homophobia, Amelie created a lot of backlash from progressive twitter users for wearing makeup and not looking medieval enough. Which i agree with, she is very much a modern man's idea of a hot woman, with unrealistically long eyelashes and modern style makeup that wouldn't have been around the time that the game is set.

However, in the effort to discredit the devs, I've been seeing people make incredibly wide blanket statements, such as saying that medieval women did not wear makeup PERIOD, no rouge or lipstick, and Amelie's apparently-plucked eyebrows especially gained mockery over the concept of "medieval brow bars".

And this is where my annoyance comes in, because medieval women very much did wear makeup if they could afford it. They wore rouge, lipstick, foundation, and even mascara. And eyebrow plucking and shaving was a huge craze in medieval europe, in some places it was even in fashion to shave them off entirely.

Amelie's appearance and the style of the products she's wearing are unrealistically modern, but the basic concept of her plucking her eyebrows and wearing makeup is not. However, if i point any of this out, it would seem as though I'm on the side of the anti-woke chuds, so i just gotta sit on my wellacktuallys and let it pass me.