I think a very common type of miscommunication I see online is someone saying "things are X" and someone replying "but they ought to be Y!" with no acknowledgement that yes, they should be Y, but op was talking about the present material reality of the situation and is usually someone deeply affected by things not being Y, so blaming them is not going to help
As an example, if op says "be careful when coming out, make sure you're safe and have a backup plan if you think your parents could endanger you", there will often be a reply that goes "people shouldn't have to do this and it's a little victim-blamey to imply they should, people should just stop being homophobic and endangering their gay kids"
And the thing is the person replying isn't wrong per se (people should stop being homophobic and this argument could become victim-blamey if used incorrectly), it's just that they misjudged what op was trying to convey through a paranoid reading and/or assumed the conversation is about hypotheticals, which makes it particularly hard to explain to everyone involved what exactly went wrong
