Sorry, not buying that. Just because the sentiments involve extend beyond Northwestern does not mean the Northwestern needs to accept - and indeed, support - an egregiously flawed system for resolving conflicts.
This is a basic sanitation issue. If you run your university that badly, problems like this are a mathematical certainty. The specific set of grievances is immaterial. If it's not one, it will be another.
The problem is not what they believe. The problem the obviously abusive and amoral approach the people in question have taken in acting on those beliefs.
I'll add one more thing and then let it go because (respectfully) I don't think we're going to agree. Only ideology could make someone cling to a measurably harmful idea and insist it's still actually a good idea.
I think you're absolutely right about the negative power that ideology can have in terms of getting (some) people to say that the ends justify means, no matter how atrocious. However, I wouldn't say it's the only thing that can cause people to defend the indefensible.
Indeed, for some, ideology itself in the means to an end, and these people can be quite flexible about how seriously they take it depending on how well it supports their more fundamental goal, which is raw dominance.
But since you asked, no, there's no moral equivalence here. The reason why people who get raped, abused, etc. are not responsible for the crimes and assaults committed by others because they have a basic right to walk around freely and securely.
However, governments (or people charged with the responsibility for governance) don't have the same right to operate without being targeted by assholes. That's because a major part of their job is dealing with assholes. It is literally what they get paid to do. So unlike people (who are generally not paid to deal with rape threats or worse), the people who are paid to deal with assholes cannot accept their giant salaries then turn around and say "hey, we're subjected a bunch of toxic assholes."
This is about as unreasonable as a divorce lawyer getting upset because of exposure to people having distressingly sharp conflicts over irreconcilable differences. Seriously, if you have a problem taking out the trash, don't accept work in waste management.
Professors are supposed to challenge the thought processes of their students so this is more like a trash collector facing lawsuits for dealing with trash in a way that makes a few people angry. It does students no favors to coddle them throughout college instead of preparing them for the real world where nobody cares if it's inconvenient for them to deal with other people's opinions. College is meant to prepare people for the real world.
It's not awful for me to point out that I see people who are the victims of morally wrong actions being blamed for what's happening to them. Who's doing the blaming just makes it ironic.
This is a basic sanitation issue. If you run your university that badly, problems like this are a mathematical certainty. The specific set of grievances is immaterial. If it's not one, it will be another.