The thing is, it's understandable wanting to have more minority representation.
People are up in arms about a just cause using the wrong means to an end (which is pretty much my own definition of SJWs), becoming villains/racists themselves.
All of this really comes from the perspective that 'punching up' is okay and 'punching down' is horrible; it uses a hierarchy as a base, implying that naturally a white male is simply above all others - that they are different because they are male, and white. Not saying that statistically, white males don't have some sort of advantage in some scenarios, but in the end I'm not being put into CEO position just because I'm a white guy. I have had and still have my fair share of problems in life and no, a minority person having problems too does not invalidate my own, simply because individuals are not statistics. I don't gain anything from the fact that the top 1% are white men and even if I were to become a top 1%, there are going to be millions of white people who still won't be there. I'm not a number.
It's morally just trying to bring awareness to subconscious bias (i.e., just bringing up the question about your own bias, then answering it: if your answer is still 'let's use a white male', that's okay too: you made a conscious choice instead of letting your subconscious influence you too easily), and dismissing that this bias exists by simply stating "lol just take the one best for the job" is too simple., even though I agree with the idea.
What is not just is trying to remove individuality of white people for the sake of some minority representation.
Simple scenario:
1000 voice actors, 100 of them a minority, all about the same skill level.
100 voice acting roles, 50 of them for minority characters (all actors are up to all of those roles in terms of skill).
In my mind, all those 1000 voice actors are just people. They are the same. Trying to live their lifes, earning money, advancing their careers, looking for opportunities.
If we give 50 of the voice acting roles to 50 of the 100 minority actors due to matching skin tone ('punching up' is okay), then distribute the leftover 50 'majority' roles evenly (we'll have to evenly distribute roles for white characters; if you matched white voice actors with white characters only, that would be wrong again, because it's 'punching down') we'll have 75 minority voice actors on 100 roles and 25 majority voice actors on 100 roles. Even if we didn't distribute the leftover roles evenly and instead proportional to the percentages of voice actors, we'd end up with 55 minority actors and 45 majority actors, due to wanting to be 'fair'.
Realistically, people's skills aren't going to be the same, especially not their voices. So a 55 minority + 45 majority actors distribution would be perfectly fine if no politics were being pushed and I'm sure most people here on GAF would not deny that.
The majority is called majority for a reason. Minorities need to be respected and people need to be aware of their subconscious bias, but pushing any farther than bringing this to attention is racism, textbook definition.
EDIT:
Maybe I went a bit offtopic.
I never like seeing small devs apologize for twitter outrage, because in the end, numbers in reality are much larger than anything we can fathom. Huge outcries on twitter account for a minimal number of people that you are trying to reach so even if you feel like you are in social media hell, it's not as big as you think it is. It's media blowing things up and the internet in general that things feel much bigger than they are. You are sharing yourself with the world, and most people just don't give a fuck and never will.
That being said it's also understandable that they don't want to risk anything. Livelihoods are at stake (or that's what they think), so just apologizing publicly is a small price to pay if you think it will help you secure your livelihood and also your ability to keep following your passion.
2nd EDIT:
Actually, I think it goes farther than just livelihoods. I think it's about the game dev space in general and that is in accordance with my own experiences.
Being indie means being public and being a manager in a big company means being public, too. It's only the 'lowly goons' in big companies that aren't visible.
Also, given that game dev is a heavily team oriented endeavor and the industry exploits people, networking becomes so much more important. Rather than just 'having the skill' (and the personality), it often comes down to faking your personality to improve your network. I've seen so many students and young studios presenting themselves in way that seem much more dishonest than just 'presenting your better side' - and not in regards to their customers, but to their own peers. Lots of game devs see other game devs as opportunities. That's why no one wants to show their individualistic sides. I think that's also largely the reason why many games are so stale nowadays. People surpress themselves in order to cater to other game dev people.
Just me posting here is honestly somewhat of a risk. I'm employed in a game tools company and we have connections to companies all over the world, even big ones that I'm not allowed to name. Realistically nothing is going to happen to me because I keep a low profile. I don't tweet (much, if at all), I don't make YouTube videos; the only thing I'm doing is posting here sometimes, really. But if I'm going to go the indie dev route at some point, you can bet that this post right here will get dragged through the mud were I to start becoming a bit more of a public person. If the first thing a future potential employer finds about me is accusations of racism, or a bit more personal, if I were to network with people and after the event they'd look me up and find a shitstorm on twitter about me being sexist or racist, you can bet that this will have professional consequences; not because people necessarily believe it, but because the game dev space is highly competitive and you don't want drama. You can always find someone your equal or someone better, without the drama.
So Chucklefish probably doesn't want to have negative publicity: not just because of potential loss of customers, but because of perceived loss of future possibilities in the game dev space.