Alright, so the search engine told me that "ESG" is a set of criteria to rate sustainability of corporations/investments, where E stands for environment (ressource efficiency/non-pollution, ...), S for social (worker safety, non-discrimination, ...) and G for governance (risk management, compliance, anti-corruption). Please correct misconceptions.

You are suggesting that government pays writers to show those kinds of sustainability in a overly positive way?

How would western media look if it wasn't a trojan horse? Would it show slavery, environmental pollution and feudalism in a much more positive light? How can you be sure that the mismatch here is from goverment/corporate influence on writers, and not simply a difference in ethical values between the average writer and you?

ESG is for corporates. Authors are individuals. This is just "anti-woke" whinging by another (dimly related) name.

expecting corporate publishing to be a source of good art is a mistake. of course a corporation will adapt to the market. seems like you have a problem with the free market which is exploiting the desire for wokeness in culture.

You raise a completely valid point that "fascism" is used in exactly the same way by the left political spectrum.

But this does not make the use of woke as a generic accusation any better.

> I simply do not believe anymore that people don't know what others mean when they say "woke"

The insiduous thing about this is: Different people do mean different things with this.

Some people are maybe against depicting women in leadership roles; others might not want to normalize homosexuality. Another group might want to keep any mention of transgenderism away from their kids. Someone else might just want to see more racist jokes about Mexicans. All those views are radically different; a lot of those "anti-woke" views would not even agree with each other.

By allowing weasely standpoints like that in a debate, you make it very easy for people to claim broad support for stupid and bigoted views without having to justify them.

So, in the context of western comics, what does "too much woke" mean to you?

Is this factually correct or can you simply not recognise the politicaly activism in the Japanese productions because of the cultural differences, or because they're more subtle or integrated into the story?

I mean that last one is a good thing; I think that instead of pearl-clutching and yelling "woke11!111" on the internet for a new Netflix production, it's more intellectually honest to criticize poor writing.

Could you please elaborate how I disagree with Japanese fiction? Thx :)

Recent? FFS, they _always_ have been a reference for marginalized races/ethnics/disabled people, among the Teen Titans. Have you been living under a cave for 50 years?

Damn it, please, take a look on Charles Xavier. He's a disabled guy with mental powers. And OFC Magneto and his band are a metaphor on Malcolm X and radicalized Black people.

The X-Men from his birth it's basically Marvel:ACLU.