People following the rise of the far-right (and to some extent the MRA movement since there's a strong overlap) have, yes, because it's been a focal point for a good long while now.

MRA? You mean the group of mostly men pushing for equal rights to custody and/or visitation of their kids? Wasn't that group started by a male feminist scholar?

What do they have to do with this fringe hate website most of us never heard of before?

Well, for a current example, there's Christopher Cantwell - Daily Stormer writer, helped organise "Unite The Right", was at the rally waving guns around, unabashed racist, etc. - and also quite a popular contributor to A Voice For Men (until he fell out with Elam.)

Also many articles along this theme, eg: https://www.vox.com/culture/2016/12/14/13576192/alt-right-se...

And Hitler himself was a big believer in no smoking spaces. That doesn't mean that anti-smoking groups have anything to do with the genocide Nazis engaged in, just because Nazis were also officially against smoking.

Ok, I can't even understand how you've got to this analogy.

Giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're trying to understand, I'll restate the logical fallacy a bit more formally:

    Person A believes thing 1.
    Person A believes thing 2.
    Therefore people who believe 1 also believe 2.

This line of reasoning can be rhetorically powerful but it's flawed and, IMO, toxic to the discussion.

> the far-right (and to some extent the MRA movement since there's a strong overlap

What I actually said was:

    People in set A believe thing 1.
    People in set B believe thing 2.
    There is a strong overlap between set A and set B.

You'll note there's nothing about a causal connection, only a correlation.

[edit for formatting]

"You're either with us or you're against us."