My comment was in reference to the final part of her article. I have zero problem with her actions. People can be friends or not be friends with whoever they please for whatever reason they like.

However, in a pluralistic society — the definitions of words like ‘racist’ and ‘anti-semite’ and ‘homophobic’ change over time. When Rebecca says she’s not being friends with anyone who exhibits any of these traits — the view is simplistic. The intersection of people is complicated. For some people ‘racist’ applies to every white person on the planet, for others it’s a term applied to a particular subsection of white people. Some people term any critique of Israel as anti-semitic, some Jewish people happily critique Israel and its foreign policy all the time.

So, yes…in the example she gave it was very much cut and dry and I can see why she ended that friendship — but what about people who have racist family members? Are they excluded from her friendship circle, or do they have to cut all ties with their family? Is she basically saying… you must agree to my definition of these words and if you do not, then we can’t be friends?

Your thought experiment is a good one, I think many things would be different and many things would be the same. It would make for an excellent TV show and perhaps some political figures would benefit from being part of it.