This isn't a situation where you are killing a girl because she wouldn't have sex with you, or doing something other than killing. If it was I could see why it would be shitty and offensive (metal gear, for example). This isn't it. This is a fairly run of the mill violent action that doesn't represent any hatred or dislike of women. It isn't sexist.

Burning a black man on a cross was an action that was, and is, a threat to a group of people. It is an action designed to strike fear and to strike down, not a silly part of a comedy/drama.

Secondly, the only controversial issue with feminism and this move is that it is representative of women needing saving. A "damsel in distress". This achivement doesn't exactly fit that. The only reason there is outrage is "you had a girl get hurt, you are a monster!"

We shouldn't be protecting women against being attacked, killed, etc, in fictional media. No more than we do men.

"One needn't choose one or the other. Both are valid discussions."

Anything is a valid discussion. The thing I'm saying is that it's not a valid point.

Edit: is it sexist by its lowest definition of "discriminates between men and women" yes, but if you use a definition that low even bathrooms are sexist.