The prequel movies were made by the same person, but that doesn't stop them from being bad films that reframe the original trilogy in a bad light. I"m talking about things that the EU hints to, which is no longer canon, but was considered canon up until 1999. 

"Since you are judging the newer films by the measure of what was set up in the older films, you are dependent upon also judging the older films according to what was canon, which is what was set up in the prequel trilogy."

No I'm not, because the prequel trilogy didn't come chronologically before the original trilogy.  Those films were made over 20 years after the original trilogy films. There's an entire generation that saw the OG trilogy without needing to contextualize it within the prequel trilogy because the prequel trilogy didn't exist yet. This meme tries to point out the OG trilogy as having the same flaws as this new set of Star Wars films. But those flaws didn't exist in the OG trilogy at all, and were created by the prequel movies. 

According to your argument, we should also be harsh in our judgement of episode 5 and 6 since they were only planned AFTER it turned out Star Wars was succesful (the "a new hope" was added later and a trilogy wasn´t planned). Speculation is that Vader wasn´t supposed to be Lukes and Leias father and Luke wasn´t supposed to be related to Leia. Or is there some sort of magic time limit of when a sequel is regarded as canon to you?

That's comparing apples and oranges. We have decades of EU material, and the films having set up what the Star Wars mythos, and the character of Luke was. Then all that is changed by a completely different writer who had nothing to do with Star Wars. Compare this with a three year wait for Empire Strikes Back, after the first Star Wars film. 

I am arguing that both she and Luke are Mary Sues/Marty Sues... and she had multitudes of failures in TLJ: with how she handled her connection with Kylo, how she wanted him to the light side, how she dissobeyed Luke on the Island and how she couldn´t stop the First Order. I would still argue that both she and Luke are supposed to be perfect in their personality in many ways but they both make many big mistakes that shape events.

It is you who does not know what a Mary Sue is.  Here's the textbook definition.

A Mary Sue is an idealized and seemingly perfect fictional character. Often, this character is recognized as an author insert or wish fulfillment.^[1] They can usually perform better at tasks than should be possible given the amount of training or experience. 

Mary Sue stories—the adventures of the youngest and smartest ever person to graduate from the academy and ever get a commission at such a tender age. Usually characterized by unprecedented skill in everything from art to zoology, including karate and arm-wrestling. This character can also be found burrowing her way into the good graces/heart/mind of one of the Big Three [Kirk, Spock, and McCoy], if not all three at once. She saves the day by her wit and ability, and, if we are lucky, has the good grace to die at the end, being grieved by the entire ship.

That last part is specifically about Star Trek, where the title originated from, but it easily applies here.  She can fly and fix the MF just as good, if not better than Han Solo, no explanation given.  Han and Chewy instantly warm up to her.  Han even asks her to join his crew after knowing her for an extremely short time.  When he dies, Chewy instantly accepts her as the new Han, and the MF is hers, now.  She's just as handy with a blaster as a skilled shot, after only taking one practice shot.  She is just as good, if not better, with a lightsaber than anyone, no explanation or training given.  And she is 100% the most powerful user of the Force, as she can do anything and everything with not only little to no training, but also with little to no concentration/effort.

TEXTBOOK MARY SUE.

Wait, so the EU material should count but not the prequel movies made by the creator of Star Wars? You just seem to make up arbitrary arguments just to fit your narrative.

Yeah, because no one on your side of the argument wants to actually research what a Mary Sue is. They'd rather resort to semantics ("Lol, he's not a Sith") and use non-arguments ("but Jakku!") than actually address the veritable mountain of evidence that she's a Mary Sue.

I can’t believe I’m getting sucked into this nonsense, it’s like I make one brief statement and Everyone pounces on it. You are scary obsessed with convincing everyone that a movie you didn’t like, isn’t as good as they thought.  It’s sad is what it is.  But since you actually quoted the wiki, I will comment. Most of Rey skills were brought up through actions.  She took out the troopers with a bow staff (hand to hand skills), fixed BB-8(good mechanic) and knew how to pilot vehicles.  She obviously has been at Jakku all her life, and spends most of her days collecting scraps.  Considering her interactions with the dealer, she has learned what parts are important are and what aren’t.  These are all skills that she could easily pick up on while living alone, and fending for herself.  She didn’t need to say a couple lines saying hey “I taught myself these things because I’m awesome” because the movie did a great job of demonstrating her strengths and weaknesses.  When she got on the falcon, the first thing she did was fly it into the ground, before she got a handle on the controls.  When she was in the forest she struggled with hitting her targets with the blaster.  But most importantly, her biggest weakness has been her undying need to find her parents.  She would rather leave Finn and Han to wait at Jakku.  As for the force, it was established in TLJ that the force awakened inside of her.  Luke said that he saw that kinda of power only once before.  That being said, she failed at turning Ben and was powerless against Snoke.  Now perhaps she might be more powerful than Kylo Ren, but the part where they split the lightsaber in two tells me they are equals.  Now I could go into why Kylo Ren wasn’t strong enough to take her down, but I’m typing on a phone lol.

Lol

The prequel movies were made by the same person, but that doesn't stop them from being bad films that reframe the original trilogy in a bad light. I"m talking about things that the EU hints to, which is no longer canon, but was considered canon up until 1999. 

"Since you are judging the newer films by the measure of what was set up in the older films, you are dependent upon also judging the older films according to what was canon, which is what was set up in the prequel trilogy."

No I'm not, because the prequel trilogy didn't come chronologically before the original trilogy.  Those films were made over 20 years after the original trilogy films. There's an entire generation that saw the OG trilogy without needing to contextualize it within the prequel trilogy because the prequel trilogy didn't exist yet. This meme tries to point out the OG trilogy as having the same flaws as this new set of Star Wars films. But those flaws didn't exist in the OG trilogy at all, and were created by the prequel movies. 

According to your argument, we should also be harsh in our judgement of episode 5 and 6 since they were only planned AFTER it turned out Star Wars was succesful (the "a new hope" was added later and a trilogy wasn´t planned). Speculation is that Vader wasn´t supposed to be Lukes and Leias father and Luke wasn´t supposed to be related to Leia. Or is there some sort of magic time limit of when a sequel is regarded as canon to you?

That's comparing apples and oranges. We have decades of EU material, and the films having set up what the Star Wars mythos, and the character of Luke was. Then all that is changed by a completely different writer who had nothing to do with Star Wars. Compare this with a three year wait for Empire Strikes Back, after the first Star Wars film. 

And I'm arguing that if you're going to keep making that statement, you need to actually address my post from a few pages back instead of just whining about me having pointed out genders twice.

From Wikipedia:

A Mary Sue is an idealized and seemingly perfect fictional character. Often, this character is recognized as an author insert or wish fulfillment.^[1] They can usually perform better at tasks than should be possible given the amount of training or experience. Sometimes, the name is reserved only for women, but more often the name is used for both genders. A male can also be referred to as a Marty Sue or Gary Stu, but Mary Sue is used more commonly.

In what way does this not apply to both Luke and Rey? I completely agree that she is a Mary Sue, but so is Luke. Rey might be quicker to learn many of the abilities that Luke learned but they are both exceptionally fast compared to even Anakin.

My issue with  alot (not all) of the criticism I have heard is that people claim that she is a Mary Sue because the writers/directors want to make the male characters look bad, yet these critics can´t point to a single event or line of dialogue that would point to this in the movies. I agree with you that the political discourse is toxic right now, but I would claim it comes from both feminists and anti-feminists (ofcourse not all of them) where the analysis of different matters is highly irrational and emotional in nature.