Not everything is equal, some arguments have more merits than others. For your Imp example, his own arguments aren't consistent, and he has to do a big reach to make the argument that there's a cabal of women running everything. It's much less of a reach to say that Jews have disproportionate control. Now, you can take either stance too far, yes. And plenty of the anti-Jew crowd do, I said that from the start.

But the idea that you must be a racist or sexist because you criticize women but defend men, or criticize blacks or Jews but defend whites, just isn't true. And some of it is just perception, admittedly. But there's already so much anti-men and anti-white rhetoric, it's thoroughly saturated. They've had to reach massively, most of that shit is unfounded. Generally speaking, an anti-white perspective will probably be more incorrect than an anti-Jew or anti-black one. And, no, that's not hatred toward Jews or blacks, for the record, nor does it mean every member of that group.

Point is, the arguments aren't equal. So just because you support one stance but not another doesn't necessarily say anything about your thought process, or make you hateful. Also doesn't mean you're not hateful, but it's not a forgone conclusion either way.