The vast majority of comics gate comes from the perspective of anarchic-capitalism, which while a marked improvement over the crony capitalist dynamic of the industry, still pales in comparison to true communitarian goals such as removing market demands entirely: they still treat readers as if they were consumers, rather than something more personal, like a father telling their child a bedtime story.
The improvement comes from wanting to respect readers rights, which while it's noble, still comes from the direction of how much money can be made by readers having to purchase comics as "products". The goal I personally seek, is a world where entertainment can be consumed both gratis and copyleft licensing. For example, the content provided on services like Plume.
I've never thought of creative arts as a form of "product" or service. For the vast majority of creatives, things are produced simply because they love doing it. And readers read book because they love enjoying other people's stories. The reason I distrust comics gate, is because it doesn't do anything to resolve why a reader should even have to buy something, rather than enjoying it freely even with capitalism crashes and burns.
Particularly in a decade when people are discussing Universal Basic Income, readers treating creative arts as if it were a service feels like a product of a different century. But the readers ability to purchase goods is being limited by the economic bubble itself: if there is no money to go around, threatening to not purchase people's work feels a bit like a hallow threat.
That doesn't mean I don't sympathize with readers, rather I'm tired of readers being treated as consumers rather than simply "people" who happen to enjoy your work. That is my critique of comics gate however, but I have a far more damning judgement regarding Marvel and DC, who promotes packages of heroic Vitamin C.
In a sense, diversity itself is great, I want more of it. But it's entirely the wrong angle to approach diversity from the perspective of how much capital it adds to your pocket book. Because it still applies that what you care about is earning money. Which if it were small lump sums this would be one thing. But it's the need for small amounts of money Universal Basic Income seeks to solve.
So my only conclusion is I feel like I'm watching a battle between different sides that I don't agree with.
I'm tired of being forced to care.