Spot on! as the Brits say. But the fact that "it's become about Mary" is precisely due to lack of good teaching, which we see in this thread: folks objecting to calling Mary "Theotokos" are unwittingly coming up with most of the classical christological heresies. If one starts with Christ (as one ought) and holds rightly that Jesus is fully God, existing from before the ages, and fully Man, born of the Virgin, yet is one Christ, one person, not a divine person united to a human person, but one person subsisting in two natures, the title is a simply natural and correct expression of the truth of who Jesus Christ is. If one starts with some preconceived notion of the nature of motherhood and dwells on it, rather than on who Christ is, or starts with an erroneous conception of Christ, the title seems blasphemous or absurd.
And indeed the Holy Spirit does take care of details. . ."lead[s] into all truth" as Our Lord put it.
However, most of what is going on here has to do with disagreements about how the Holy Spirit takes care of details. Those of us (whether Orthodox or Latin) who understand Scripture in the context of Holy Tradition, knowing that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and always, see the Holy Spirit taking care of details throughout the history of the Church, and refer to that experience -- the promise that the Holy Spirit would lead us into all truth applied as much to the bishops who gathered in the Ecumenical Councils, to those we call the Fathers of the Church and to all the other saints down the ages as it does to us today. We can point to the first time erroneous ideas about Christ, which still come up, gained sufficient currency that the Church, led by the Holy Spirit, was obliged to act to ensure "good teaching", by issuing a condemnation of the wrong idea. Most prominently, when the wrong idea (heresy) roiled the whole Church, it was the Ecumenical Councils that issued these condemnations. Even peasants in traditionally Orthodox countries, with no theological training know that ours is the "Church of the Seven Councils" and have some idea about what the Councils taught, so this isn't a matter for learned theologian only. Orthodox hymnography -- from which pious peasants learn such things -- refers to the Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils as "the Harps of the Spirit".
Others on the thread and out in the world (esp. those who use "Bible" or "biblical" as an adjective to describe their faith) fancy somehow that they with their Bible are going to be lead by the Spirit into all truth, then come different conclusions from those to whom that same promise applied in ages past (notably the bishops who gathered in the Ecumenical Councils), indeed different conclusions from the consensus of those to whom that promise applied down the ages, and deprecate the teaching of the ancient and undivided Church as "RC tradition". And, as we've seen on this thread, as often as not, such folk end up preaching one of the classical christological heresies, be it the coarse monophysitism of Apollinarius in which God assumed only a human body, not our complete nature (excepting sin), a version of the "adoptionism" of Paul of Samosata, or Nestorianism with God the Word somehow distinguished from the One Born of the Virgin.
For what does Mary need titles for anyway.
If people wanted to distinguish her form other Mary’s found in Scripture, all they’d have to do is say, *Mary, Jesus’ mother* and I’m pretty sure anyone reading the Bible would have a pretty good idea of who was being talked about.