I see a lot of universalists deny atrocities the bible attributes to divine command or action. Is this a common position among universalists?

From my anecdotal experiences and engagement with universalists here and elsewhere that may not represent the whole group a lot of them particularly struggle with the actions or commands of God in the OT. Usually this is because they read into Gods supposed character of love and mercy and fairness which is often a part of why they take the universalist position and so cannot fathom him calling for or assisting in atrocities like the multiple genocides, condoning slavery in multiple forms,generational punishments,killing people especially children in horrible ways for seemingly trivial reasons and so on and so forth. Often I receive the answer that these vile acts and attitudes are only attributed to God by the authors as justification for their behaviours and just straight up fabrications and not actually God. This raises lots of questions about the inspiration or inerrancy of scripture but I guess if the alternative is God being a monster that’s acceptable to them. Other solutions aren’t great either. Other Christians say those atrocities didn’t happen anyway,and the bible is largely allegory communicating God’s character and how Jesus works although I don’t exactly think this fixes things because that would mean his nature is consistent with these actions and that does not solve his permission of horrible acts outside of scripture. Some make apologetics like the kids go to heaven when killed so despite the brutality of their deaths it doesn’t matter(this really doesn’t seem right to me and would essentially make abortion highly beneficial which no christian I know would defend) or arguments about moral progress for the condoning of slavery( this is in my opinion a weak argument and I hate it for many reasons though I suppose it’s better than just saying slavery is good like one crazy person I saw) and so on. Some more extreme folks just say God can do whatever he wants which whilst that would be true definitely makes him a contemptible character for that to be his excuse for some of the horrors of the Bible.I only want to focus on this first answer however because of how prominent it seems to be from the universalists I’d spoken to. To me it seems like ignoring the parts of your holy text you don’t like by attributing it to lies or misattribution whilst believing the rest is inspired and wholly true is not a position I really understand nor can it really be supported on its own. It’s a bit like what Marcion tried to do. Yknow to remove from his canon and discredit all of the OT Jewish parts because he didn’t agree with them essentially asserting that this “God” was not Jesus or a benevolent deity but some sort of villainous monster. Whether it was out of antisemitism or moral outrage or a combination of the two it is what he tried to do. Obviously this is a much different situation than that or another gnostic(I’m more referring to the more Sethian notion that God is expressly evil than others) interpretation as the people I talk to don’t disdain the whole OT or call God a monster or incompetent(like Valentinians) they just exclude the parts that would make God a sadistic bloodthirsty tyrant. Anyway to cut it short I just wanted to ask what your position is on these issue of does God commit,command or condone horrific behaviours or are these parts of scripture wrongly attributed to God? I want to ask more of you to better gain understanding rather than stereotyping all universalists under this more liberal lens.