First, "combat said harassment"? Not only does that concede harassment, it's putting the onus on the harassed to combat something that shouldn't be happening in the first place. That's like saying, "It's her fault she got raped because there were tools she could've used to better combat being raped."
Second, "as simple as turning comments off"? There's nothing simple about that because comments are an integral part of what they're doing, so people are supposed to shut down a major component of what they're doing because some people who should know better are harassing them? That's especially true where it's part of their livelihood, making it like suggesting that if someone's getting harassed at work, it's their own fault for continuing to go to work. Never mind that that doesn't solve the problem any more than it solves it when somebody tells a kid to avoid and ignore the bullies. Just like no kid should have to not go to a dance to avoid getting bullied, nobody should have to turn the comments off to avoid getting bullied.
Yes, "should" is an ideal, but what we're talking about here is an ideal-- right and wrong. It's the harassment that's wrong, not the harassed that's wrong for not "combatting" those harassing them in ways the peanut gallery deems they could've or for not "simply" avoiding the situation where they're getting harassed and forgoing all of the benefits of that typically go with that situation that those harassers keep inserting themselves into. So quit blame-shifting from the harassers onto the harassed.
P.S. There is no "majority" and nobody gets to dismiss anybody else's harassment as "microscopic," even if it were founded, which it's not.
