Now, I don’t know what you feel is “woke”

A combination of: Marxian economics—specifically the framework of oppressor and oppressed—applied to social categories such as gender, race, and sexuality + Critical Theory from the Frankfurt School.

but just because there are people that don’t fit some preconceived mold, and they are included in a game, doesn’t make it magically political.

I know you’re not directing this at me but still, I respectully disagree. This sudden overcompensation of swapping the gender, sexuality or race of characters in movies and games, under the guise of “celebrating diversity,” often feels less like a meaningful or thoughtful inclusion and more like a superficial, performative gesture. This trend is widespread and politically charged, driven not by genuine artistic intent but by a desire to align with current cultural trends. Some people call it “tokenism”.

They’re not doing anything to make anyone think about structural injustice in society,

What does this have to do with enjoying games? At their core, games are meant to entertain, engage, and immerse players in experiences that transcend the everyday. The primary goal is enjoyment.

Injecting external debates, especially contentious ones, into this space often detracts from what makes games special. It shifts the focus from the creativity, storytelling, and fun that unite players to divisive topics that many come to games to escape from.

False dilemma #1:

It’s just capitalism noticing that mysogynists etc. are no longer the largest demographic and being very unsubtle when signalling that the product thinks women are people.

Capitalism itself doesn’t “notice” anything; it responds to consumer demand and market trends. The idea of a “misogynist demographic” is flawed because such a group doesn’t actually exist in any meaningful, targeted way.

Textbook Straw man:

There are a small number of very vocal people who complain about both kinds of game. They don’t want people to acknowledge that treating women as people is now the default,

Who exactly are the “small number of very vocal people” you’re referring to? Are you speaking about a specific group or just a generalized idea of dissenters? Without evidence or clear examples, this comes across as a vague accusation rather than a meaningful argument.

Moreover, how is it that you’re aware of their intentions? What concrete actions have they taken to actively prevent people from acknowledging that treating women as people is now the default? Are there examples of deliberate efforts to suppress this acknowledgment, or is this an assumption about their motives?

Ironically, the statement itself mirrors the behaviors it criticizes: it paints a reductive, hostile caricature of the opposing view while claiming moral high ground.

I’ve got a few concerns with Chris’ post, particularly the use of logical fallacies that undermine his main argument. Let’s break this down:

Straw Man Fallacy #1:

People who complain about wokeness in new video games don’t actually care about the past, just their imagined version of it.

This statement misrepresents the position of those who critique “wokeness” in media. It assumes that everyone in this group shares a simplistic, uniform, and flawed perspective on history, which is neither fair nor accurate.

Isn’t it ironic to advocate for inclusivity while reducing the opposing view to a stereotype? For example, I personally dislike overt “wokeness” in games, yet I don’t fit the imaginary box you’ve described. My position isn’t rooted in a denial of history but in the belief that games, music, and films are creative, self-contained domains to be enjoyed on their own merits—not as platforms for political messaging.

It’s not about rejecting inclusivity or denying the contributions of diverse creators. Rather, it’s about questioning why politics should take center stage in these art forms. Why must every creative work be a vehicle for ideological statements? Art can reflect politics naturally when it’s intrinsic to the story or setting, but forcing it risks alienating audiences who value the escapism and creativity of the medium.

Straw Man Fallacy #2:

Games we love are created by diverse people […]. Just because you’re unaware of them doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

Who exactly is denying the existence of diverse creators? This statement uses vague, accusatory language aimed at a generalized “you” without specifying who or what is being addressed. This lack of specificity makes it difficult to engage with the argument constructively.

If the intent is to highlight the contributions of diverse creators, that’s absolutely valid and worth celebrating. But framing the point as an assumed rebuttal to an undefined group of people not only creates unnecessary division but also fails to advance the discussion meaningfully.

When addressing criticism, it’s more effective to engage with specific ideas or individuals rather than casting a wide net over an entire group. Otherwise, this risks becoming the very thing being criticized: stereotyping and marginalizing others based on assumptions.

I used to use Calckey but it soon morphed into Firefish, which also didn’t last long. So, as far as stability goes: Misskey may be stable, its forks not so much. I’m currently using Catodon (catodon.social) and the only functionality missing is the antennas.

On the other hand, most of the firefish crowd migrated to Iceshrimp. You can check out the Fediverse Observer to find some english-speaking instances.