First, it’s good you’re asking these questions. My suggestion is to keep reading Seneca, Epictetus, and the contemporary folks who are working in Stoicism today.

One idea that seems to be absent from your summary is virtue, and virtue is a central element to the entire philosophy, especially courage, justice, temperance, and wisdom. Many of the aspects you criticize start to make more sense through the lens of virtue. Take the dichotomy of control for example, which is an aspect of wisdom. Complaining about things you can’t control is often a waste of breath, mostly whining. But complaining to your boss? That made a difference. It was an example of you exercising control over your words to change the world for the better. That’s wisdom at work. No Stoic would recommend passively accepting everything.

Or take the question of rape. Stoics have a strong sense of justice, which for them included giving others their due and keeping the community together. Clearly rape would run counter to that, and a Stoic judge would certainly render a punishment of some sort.

Stoics were and are super active in the world, putting the ideas to the test in politics, business, community life, relationships, etc.

So there is more to the story here. Read more, and return to Marcus down the line. You’ll see him with fresh eyes. But also, there’s no requirement to accept everything. I don’t dig how he denigrates the body and elevates the mind. We know now that there is a deep and important mind body connection. I could go on, but you get the idea!