No, it doesn't have to be me.

But being shamed by someone who has stronger credentials than you do in an area you aspire to be virtuous in is not good evidence of you "responding to logic and reason". Of course when the stakes are low and the disagreement is small, it's easier to be reason-responsive. That doesn't mean that logic or reason is in the driver's seat, though. "Social factors suggest I should accept this position, and here is my rationalization for why it's okay," is not the same as making decisions because of logic and reason.

I bet Kane also goes along with slightly different ideas presented from people he admires and respects who already have ideas pretty close to his.

The top-voted comment on your post is from a woman who makes a reasonable (and obvious) counterargument. And the second-top-voted comment is from a man making three obvious counterarguments (one of which is the same as the woman's). Now, you do admit that they had a point, but you also said when thinking for yourself, "I’m doing that thing in my head where I’m trying to justify myself, jumping to a series of defenses that I know would make me roll my eyes if they came from anyone else"

So overall this is very much not the kind of display that showcases that logic or reason has much purchase.

You say, and I agree, that things are not black and white--but you certainly can't hold that you aren't grouping people into camps because you say even in this response, and I quote, "Kane and his ilk are...".

You charge that I'm telling you to slow down the pushback. I'm not. If you think that Kane is worth pushing back against, sure--I don't see it, particularly, but maybe your view into that perspective is better than mine and I've erred in thinking that he wasn't worth much attention. I fully admit that this was a hasty judgment on my part. What I really emphasize, over and over, is to push ideas, not people. You (and SC) keep pushing people. "This idea is superficially kinda okay but also kinda wrong, but it's a dogwhistle for this much worse idea and this means that this person is garbage and let's attack them for it (at least by writing them off as hopeless)" is basically what SC was arguing for in this exchange. However, creating more deeply committed enemies whose ideas haven't changed is not progress.