The reason why other people's interpretation surprised me is because there's a difference between comparing and conflating, that I recognize, and assumed other people would recognize as well. There are reasons why you might want to point out one similarity between two people or groups, without wanting to imply that they should be lumped together more broadly.

A kid who steals a piece of candy, and Jesse James are both guilty of theft. But does my saying so imply that I'm conflating a renowned criminal with a normal kid? I would argue that it does not. Both committed theft, but only one committed murder as well.

I feel like the same logic applies here. Activists didn't kill anyone, so they shouldn't be conflated with anyone who has, no matter what else they might share in common. And so it seems like it should be possible to point out one thing that they do have in common with the understanding that we are not conflating them.

Does that make sense? Can you at least believe that it made sense to me at the time?