In my experience I don't really see the word empathy being weaponized like you describe (in actual good-will conversation, as opposed to a generalized social media blast). My first instinct is to believe that you may very well lack empathy for reacting in such a way, but it's also possible that some individual[s] did unfairly or harshly use it to shame you.
But this just seems like any kind of disagreement on cultural expectations for interpersonal interactions. Some people will value what they call "empathy" more than others. We can't really say in the general case whether anyone levying these terms is doing so fairly or not, and all one can do is try to route around or find common ground with people that don't...empathize...with their methodologies. If that ends up being most people, then you (the royal you) may be an outlier (or "psycho" in the parlance of our times) and that's gonna be a tough road.
In other words, how is "telling somebody that they lack empathy" that much different from "accusing someone of failing to consider other people's values and enquiring about what those values are"?
I haven't experienced what the parent commenter is referring to either, but it wouldn't surprise me if there was an internet culture bubble somewhere that behaved this way a lot. In general I have noticed a lot of social media bias towards the least respectful interpretation, which is one of the reasons I prefer spending my time here.
And as I posted in grandparent I share your sentiment about what empathy means in a most respectful interpretation sense.
I also think that we all have a limit of how much we can bend our behavior to other people, especially when we are unexpectedly pushed to our limits (extremely bad days). To have empathy for everyone always is a type of genius, and to also have the will to act on it always religion generally reveres as saintly. (It's exceptional)
So one can have a lot of capacity for empathy and usually act on it, but still be called out for lacking it sometimes by a culture taking the least respectful interpretation. It's like road rage in another context. No one's perfect, and most people are average at most things.
But this just seems like any kind of disagreement on cultural expectations for interpersonal interactions. Some people will value what they call "empathy" more than others. We can't really say in the general case whether anyone levying these terms is doing so fairly or not, and all one can do is try to route around or find common ground with people that don't...empathize...with their methodologies. If that ends up being most people, then you (the royal you) may be an outlier (or "psycho" in the parlance of our times) and that's gonna be a tough road.
In other words, how is "telling somebody that they lack empathy" that much different from "accusing someone of failing to consider other people's values and enquiring about what those values are"?