One can be post-X, thus non-X, without in any way being anti-X. One can be trans-X without any view about what post-X would be, yet without in any way being anti-X.
For instance, let X = a particular ethnicity or religious life or anthropological lineage. Charging an other with being anti-X because the other’s stance is not yet recognizable is pathogenic.
This is apparently very difficult for some persons to understand, let alone exemplify. It’s especially difficult for persons disposed to confusing difference with opposition, complementarity with concealed conflict; and difficult for persons who believe that German dialectic is insightful or that projective identification only happens in therapy sessions and is not also a version of “critical” scholarship (also called “radical critique”).
Projective identification (always unconscious) is especially useful for holding others culpable for not having the solution to one’s own difficulties. For example, if the other is not suffering in an immoral situation, they must be collaborating because the constructive engagement of, say, a diplomat, teacher, or counselor is not practically cogent for the accuser who secretly admires martyrdom or unconstructive, if not childish, rebellion.