I mean, this is obviously untrue. To take the example of homosexuals and homophobia, in what way did homosexual people "attack" first or how are they one of the two tangoing.
The question isn't "did both sides attack" it is "do people on both sides feel attacked." I'm sure there are plenty of Russian's who feel attacked by the Ukraine; that doesn't mean the Ukraine started the current war.
Consider this mindset (to be clear, not my mindset):
1. The US is, and always has been a Christian nation
2. Homosexuality is unchristian
3. For the past 60 years, anti-christian liberals have been trying to (and in large part succeeding) in legalizing many sinful behaviors, at least one of which is tantamount to murder (i.e. abortion)
4. Following the legalization of the sinful behaviors comes normalization via indoctrination in schools
From this mindset, it's easy to see how e.g. legalization of homosexual behaviors (and then of homosexual marriage) is seen as an attack.
As far as attacking first, well that's simple: all those people who attacked, beat, or killed homosexuals were isolated incidents and e.g. the raid on Stonewall Inn was just the cops doing their job (these people were breaking the law, after all).
Alright, cool, FEELING attacked is valid of course. But then, if it's factually wrong - if in this case gay people aren't causing them personal harm, just objections to their personal convictions - who has to change?
The other. It is always the other that is supposed to change. Never assume that these kind of conflicts/positions are completely rational, or even can be solved by an appeal to rationality.
One example: declaring broadly that an entire group of people (say, Trump supporters) are homophopic. It only requires that literally two Trump supporters are homophobic for the statement to be literally true.
System 1 thinking is terrible for practicing set theory, and Sysyem 1 seems to almost always take 100% of CPU power during such discussions. The irony is delicious.
The example in the article is about Brandon Eich who was supporting a specific amendment banning same sex marriage in California. This isn't saying all people who support a specific politician are homophobic, this is saying people who support a specific homophobic law are homophobic.
