It’s funny how SJWs throw this word around to describe their “oppressors” (aka anyone who’s different than them) when these definitions describe them to a fucking T.
I’ve said before, maybe it’s true that not everyone can be racist or sexist (depending on if you use academic or layman’s definitions of terms), but anyone can be a bigot.
Bigot is one of the few terms describing this thing that doesn’t describe what the intolerance is, as racism/sexism/ableism does, but just simply describes the attitude. That’s where the difference is and how someone who is in a marginalized group can still be a bigot.
Bigot doesn’t act on the group, as it were. so it isn’t describing racism, which invokes imbalances of power (e.g. the oppressed-persons-can’t-be-racist statements) or sexism, which also invokes imbalances of power (e.g. the oppressed-persons-can’t-be-racist statements).
Bigotry simply describes the attitude that one group of people is better than another group of people, regardless of race/sex/gender/ethnicity/etc
However, that probably won’t stop any of the folks referred to by the OP from screaming that ‘you can’t call me a bigot’ when actually it’s simply the most accurate descriptor around for it.
Largely because it isn’t “the most apt descriptor”, unless you’re willing to overlook the circumstances in which this occurs (hint: you don’t reffer to retaliators as “bullies” for a reason).
I might also add that descriptors that act upon the group do not exclude X from being Y. Then again, your examples reek of petulant mockery, so you probably don’t disagree with that anyways.