blurb.

gistfile1.txt

@russpitts> Judging by the amount of BS I get by simply pledging support for @femfreq, the amount
            they must suffer has got to be ridiculous."
@Ark_kun>  @russpitts @rygorous Pledge your support for KKK and see what happens. "The amount white
           people must suffer has got to be ridiculous."
@rygorous>  @Ark_kun @russpitts One of these two is a hate group associated with hundreds of lynchings.
            The other publicly talks about sexism in games.
@Ark_kun> @rygorous The later is quite hateful. But this is irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that
          @russpitts's tweet was fallacious.

Nope, you're arguing a straw man here. Because this:

  Judging by the amount of BS I get by simply pledging support for @femfreq, the amount they must
  suffer has got to be ridiculous.
  
is not at all the same as this:

  Pledge your support for KKK and see what happens. "The amount white people must suffer has got
  to be ridiculous."
  
I think this analogy is completely ludicrous, but that's beside the point here; you're twisting
Russ' words here. Translated into the terms of your crappy analogy, what he's saying is:

  Judging by the amount of BS I get by simply pledging support for @KKKofficial, the amount they
  must suffer has got to be ridiculous.
  
See the difference? There's no mention of, in your analogy, "white people" here. He's just saying
"wow, I get shit for saying I support person X, how bad must it be to *be* person X?". Which is
completely valid (whether you agree with person X or not).

----

Separately, small primer on hate speech:

This:

  Gummi bears are the source of everything evil in the world; they must be destroyed and everyone
  who eats or makes them deserves to be killed.
  
is hate speech. This:

  I think half the flavors of gummi bears are disgusting. Their recipe is bad and it should be changed.
  
is not.

Just because you hate hearing it does not make it hate speech.

He's just saying "wow, I get shit for saying I support person X, how bad must it be to *be* person X?"

I might be wrong. I understood it differently. @russpitts used "they" instead of "she" when talking about a person representing a social movement concerning some group of people. I believed that "they" meant that group of people.
As in "Judging by the amount of BS I get by simply pledging support for @WhiteFreq ("protectors of white race"), the amount they (the white people who @WhiteFreq strives to protect) must suffer has got to be ridiculous."

I guess, I was wrong, sorry.