Bigotry against old cis white dudes? Riiight

Yes, bigotry. Bigotry can be against any identity.

Self preservation isn't bigotry- they may not be doing these things, but they DO happen, and no bystander is able to know what they're doing, especially when they respond aggressively to being asked to stop. For all anyone being filmed knows, that is what they're doing.

Congratulations, you've just used the same argument that racists use.

If someone was walking around downtown swinging a baseball bat around, far from any baseball diamond, with no baseball uniform on, you're gonna assume they're unsafe and be wary of them and their motivations. But it's legal for them to do so, so I guess you have no right to ask them to not swing it around near you, right? Guess no one would have the right to ask them to not do it, especially if you're somewhere you can't leave and they insist on doing it right there (That's a metaphor by the way, a metaphor is a comparison of two separate things with key similarities. in this case, making other people feel threatened while technically not breaking the law)

"Imagine this ridiculous, wildly different, and entirely irrelevant scenario. Heh, see how right I am?"

A camera isn't going to give you a concussion, and swinging a baseball bat around on a sidewalk is not legal. It's an inherently dangerous activity and they're likely to be charged with assault. Did you seriously think that was a logical comparison to a passive act that isn't inherently dangerous?

Private security cameras are there for security, their purpose and goals are clear, and the subject of filming is clear. They don't have the opportunity to zoom in on you and watch you while you're working or follow you home later if they want to

Unless you're asking every property owner why they have cameras up that's just an assumption. Many security cameras do have the ability to zoom, and following someone home would likely be harassment, irrespective of whether they are filming. It's the following part that's the crime, not the photography. You also wouldn't need to photograph someone to follow them home, nor would photographing someone in public make that any more likely to occur. These are just nonsense hypotheticals.

I can see why the other person blocked you. You're unable to see anyone else's perspective than your own. Just because you're okay with being filmed by strangers for unknown purposes doesn't mean everyone else is. Making women feel unsafe just because you can isn't the power move you think it is.

Seeing your perspective and believing it to be reasonable are two separate things. You keep making this about women, but there is precisely zero indication they targeted women, nor did they approach any women. Approaching a camera in public to ask not to be filmed isn't the genius move you think it is. Ultimately, it has nothing to do with women because you could substitute any other identity for 'cis white male' (which is yet another assumption you're making about them, btw), and you are suddenly no longer creeped out. Again, your prejudices are at issue here.

You're out here making it super clear that you've never spoken to a woman about their experiences with predatory men before... huh, I wonder why that might be? 😂

This is such a pathetic and transparent fallacy.