You would think that if there was worthy a social cause, breaking down taboos would be the order of the day. However taboo is such an effective tool for controlling a narrative, creating them goes hand in hand with activism these days.
There is not a lot of difference in technique used by China, North Korea or the Khmer Rouge. The principle works the same way. You are a bad person if you don't toe the line.
If an issue is a hair-trigger, that you couldn't possibly be sensitive enough to speak, then you may have no option not you considering expense of becoming an pariah in your community.
If people are told their perspectives should matter less to redress some injustice, or they need acknowledge a part of themselves that makes them tainted through a guilt by association, these people are less likely to speak up, especially in an environment like a lecture theatre or where their job could be threatened.
This idea that you can't speak on a subject you are not supposed to know about, yet the reverse doesn't apply to those you wish to question, you cannot freely challenge these ideas in such a climate.
So sure these group will seek break down some taboo within a limited narrative, but in the process they will create more of them, to sure up their ideas from criticism.