Case Officer's that get to hand out funding get their directives from somewhere you know, they don't just get to make decisions on who to throw money at based on their own personal views.
As for the Trade Organisation, it is adapting to the political realities of the day. You can compare it to Hollywood adapting the restrictive Hays Code of Censorship back in the day due to the fear of Government mandated film regulations from Washington. Better to act than react so to speak. I doubt the Swedish gaming industry just woke up two weeks ago and had a sudden realization that they should probably rate their games based on sexism, they clearly fear that if they don't look as if they're doing something, they'd be the perfect target for the government to institute some "reform" trying to win back the 3,1% that voted for the Schyman cult.
True, but 1) those directives are very likely the ones of the old government, it takes time for Vinnova to make decisions, it takes time for the applicants to write the application etc., 2) the directives are most likely along the lines "support gender equality in the work place" or something like that, i.e. rather general and in this case what people take issue with is the specifics about labeling games.
As for your second comment, I would say that Gamergate is a much more reasonable explanation.
