@Response to Article, not Grothnor.
Seriously though, if the defence for BLM is that it means "Black Lives Matters
too" that should be in the causes/movements name to begin with.
Otherwise even if BLM meant "Black Lives Matters
only" (where a number actions seem to suggest that at least some of the movement see's it that way) it becomes way too easy a fall back/defence/excuse to simply claim "too" was implied. Hell, simply suggesting that it's 'implied' can be used for just about any movement.
(Note: I'm using extreme's to get the point across, I'm not actually saying BLM is on the same level... Notice how I'm clarifying this and not expecting it to just be implied?).
KKK: Implied that it just wants to protest cultural appropriation from black people.
Westboro Baptists: Implied it just wants Religion to be respected.
ISIS: Implied they just want America to stop causing wars over Oil.
MGTOW: Implied they just want men to be respected.
3rd Wave/Extreme/Whatever "Not my Feminism" separation you want to use Feminism: Implied they just want equal rights for women.
Too many horrible causes/groups can start being defended under the subjectivity of 'implied' if that starts to become a defence. Because suddenly the door opens to causes to do whatever they feel like, and then turn around and claim people just didn't understand it right (and honestly? Actions speaks louder than words too. They can claim 'imply' all you want, but if their actions are all about making people feel bad for not being black then I'm going to look at the cause as a hate group).
And also to note. I'm not suggesting in the slightest with the above examples that all Christians, Muslims, MRA's or Feminists are bad people.
I'm highlighting specific extreme's within those groups that work towards dividing people, BLM counting as an extreme.