Well of course it is. You need to lighten up. Can’t you take a joke? Are you one of them humourless feminists? Etc etc BARF.
And proud of it. ;)
Devil’s Advocate is supposed to be a way of testing an argument for flaws, not deliberately pissing someone off.
Also, it really helps to take a look around when you’re tempted to play the Devil’s Advocate. Pro-tip: If there’s a pervasive smell of brimstone in the air, Satan’s probably not the one who needs the help. God know I don’t really need to hear one more time the arguments for why I’m morally equivalent to a child-molesting animal-shagger. Really. Don’t.
Folks who get twitchy about "feminist jargon" might want to look away for a moment, but Melissa McEwan really nails the essential bullshit-osity of Devil's Advocacy in social justice discussions:
The first is that what gets called Devil's Advocacy in social justice discussions tends to be a privileged person, ahh, challenging a marginalized person's perception of their own lived experiences. And that's not actually Devil's Advocacy; that's emotional auditing. Um, because it implicitly suggests that a marginalized person's perception of their own lived experiences may somehow not be valid, um, or may be compromised by virtue of their very marginalization. That someone with privilege is more, um, objective. And that is not accurate. Someone with privilege is merely, um—merely has a different perspective on oppression; they are not more objective about it.