3: Disliking forced, token "diversity" is not "misogyny."
How would you feel if an all-female cast movie were remade as an all-male cast movie? And not because an all-male cast felt like they would fit the roles best, only because they want to force "men's rights" into the product.

How are movies like Alien or Kill Bill or (I can't think of a good movie with a whole crew of female characters) so well regarded when everyone is so misogynist?
Because the reason there has been a negative reaction towards GB since it was announced isn't because it stars women, it's because women were forced into the roles for "social justice."
When characters are forced into roles as tokens, they're usually terribly written.

I'd like to bring up the new Star Wars for this point.
Whether or not its new stars are a woman, black man, and Mexican because of "diversity" or just because those characters/actors best fit those roles, I don't know. But there was never a big outcry against the characters (the "black stormtrooper" racism fiasco was made up for clicks) because the trailers and announcements presented them well, they felt like they belonged, they were well written, not forced in.

Ghostbusters is the exact opposite, they're obviously forced in for "social justice" BS. The characters aren't women because those characters/actors fit that role the best, they're women because Sony wants those "progressive" dollars. And if the trailer and plot synopsis are anything to go by, the writing is awful.
And even worse, they're remaking the original (not just making a sequel), effectively resetting the canon, removing the original for this new one.

The only reason the original good Ghostbusters are being replaced is because Sony thinks they can cash in on "muh partiarchies." There is not a scrap of originality to the remake or reverence for the original.