Well done dodging the question entirely I guess.
If you want me to qualify it for you, then by all means.
The "agenda" you're wondering, is this counter-culture to "woke-ism" which is an ill-defined, nebulous boogeyman, that gamers seemed to have latched on to. It includes things such as not liking that there are now more women protagonists instead of men. It includes bemoaning the lack of sexuality in the form of big tits and big asses in games, but simultaneously being outraged at the existence of gay or lesbian characters, because sexuality in video games is only good if its the kind that you like. Its this idea that games shouldn't be political or contain any overt politics in their stories. Effectively, what RedC has said.
You can say that its not an "agenda", but if it isn't an agenda, then what is it? Things in gaming are changing because of an agenda, apparently. But you wanting things to not change or revert back to how they were is not an agenda? Why? Can you qualify that?
Ah yes, the "status quo" which led us to where we are today and led to you even existing.
The horror.
This is a funny statement considering that breaking the status quo is what has led to progress over the millennia. Why venture outside the cave as a caveman, if the status quo of being safe inside the cave is acceptable?
You can carry this logic through all of human history. It wasn't until the American civil war, that indentured servitude of black people was considered the "status quo". It wasn't until the 1960s that "coloured" people not being allowed to attend the same schools or drink from the same fountains was considered the "status quo". Which status quo is the most acceptable? Would you like to go back to feudalism and serfdom? Was that the optimal status quo? Or perhaps back to the colonialist Britain? Or maybe back to the age of human sacrifice?
"Things were better back in my day" is a tale as old as time.
Am I being facetious? Yes, but you chose to run with this rhetoric.