Some people promote Mac (or even Windows) over desktop Linux because they implement better security features and exploit mitigations. I think there could be valid use cases for preferring Mac over desktop Linux, but I also think a lot of the “anti-Linux” proponents take it way too far. Some go so far as to say that desktop Linux must be avoided at all cost, implying your security will be compromised if you use Linux.
While desktop Linux (excluding ChromeOS) is fairly small, there are still many millions (or tens or hundreds of millions?) of desktop Linux users. There is no epidemic where desktop Linux users are getting infected and hacked, certainly not more often than Windows users. To be fair, this is at least in part because desktop Linux has a much smaller market share and cyber criminals are less likely to target it. There could be other factors too, like the fact that most Linux users are meant to install applications from an app store rather than trying to search the web for an executable file.
I’ve seen friends, family, and myself easily get infected on Windows before, but never on Linux. Until we start seeing that change, desktop Linux (especially less bad distros) should be good enough for the average person for now. That being said, depending on your irrelevance for your security is a terrible situation to be in. It is extremely important that developers improve the security of desktop Linux to at least match what is offered by its more mainstream competitors, especially now that it is gradually becoming a more popular option and therefore more appealing to cyber criminals.