Too much absolutes. 

The assumption here is that a specific individual knows with absolute certainty that their position is correct and that the other person is incorrect.

Does said person actually endorse misogyny or homophobia or racism by the pure definition of those words?

X believes Y to be morally repugnant and racist for Z view because X believes Z view is racist.

Y believes X to be misinformed and therefore projecting T motive onto Z view that does not apply to Z view.

I suppose X could continue to believe Y is morally repugnant and refuse to associate them based on a presumed and absolute certainty of their moral beliefs. Or perhaps X could engage with Y and get down to the actual details of Z view without projecting T motive without data/evidence. 

Personal Belief: Life rarely, if ever, works in absolute blacks and whites. Discussion is favorable to alienation and isolation because the individual mind does not grow without confronting an oppositional idea. X believes Y's views to be abhorrent and therefore Y is abhorrent, but without further discussion can X truly know that Y's views are abhorrent? I believe the answer is no. If X misconstrues Y's argument, X will never understand Y and will never truly know anything.