I don't think it's unreasonable to point out that a) racist and sexist abuse are a thing which b) in the US and other western countries white men experience rarely, by virtue of being neither women nor belonging to an ethnic minority group.
That doesn't mean that all white men are to blame for such abuse, and it's fallacious of you to claim the article is advocating that. It's also super important for us white dudes to consider that the volume of such abuse we see ourselves is much lower, because we are not targets of it. You gotta give weight to other people's reported experience, too.
If the majority of the abusers fall into class X and target class Y, and your goal is to explain or stop this behaviour, then that is informationally relevant, yeah.
This does not imply that all or indeed a majority of all members of class X are abusers. (And more importantly, this article doesn't go anywhere near making that claim.)
Not all victims of abuse are black or women, but black women get a disproportionate amount of abuse. Should be ignore that, too? How do we hope to provide systemic solutions if we ignore such important data?
That sounds an awful lot like profiling to me, and the social narrative is that profiling is wrong and immoral. Or is it ok to profile as long as you are profiling someone you perceive to be a member of a privileged class? I have a hard time keeping the rules straight.
The straight white men who (largely) built and run Twitter failed to manage harassment on the service. Presumably they just don't think it's a big problem because they don't see it. They have actually admitted this a few times. http://www.theverge.com/2015/2/4/7982099/twitter-ceo-sent-me...
