I can not understand all these fighting against software I2C.

I see nobody "fighting" what I see is "Any reason not to use its hardware I2C".

To go through the throes and implementing bit-bang with its drawbacks (not the coding thereof, you just need to know how to copy, but the timing overhead) when already using a uC with HW IIC is downright silly.

If you, for whatever reason am using a uC without HW IIC there is, of course, no reason not to go bit0bang.

With this said, why use bit-bang when you gan get an uC with HW IIC for less than $1?

Software I2C has lots of advantages:
1 easy to use
2 portable
3 flexibility (every port pins can be used)
4 no hardware bugs
5 no hanging state
6 smaller code than using hardware I2C
7 equal execution time as hardware I2C as long no I2C interrupt handler was used.
what advantages?
1) no difference
2) who cares
3) Good if you screw up designing the hardware
4) know of none in HW IIC
5) know of none in HW IIC
6) have not checked, but "smaller code" must mean less explicit
7) how can you have an IIC interrupt w/o IIC HW?

And I repeat if you, for whatever reason am using a uC without HW IIC there is, of course, no reason not to go bit0bang.

Erik