But he's not claiming to really is he? He's a gay man concerned primarily about gay men. I think he should be entitled to that priority, in the same way that I am entitled to prioritise women.
I don't think it's helpful to immediately jump to "he said a twattish thing once so I don't want to support anything he does". This is a extremely simplistic and unhelpful approach. It suggests we should only look at who is saying a thing, not what is being said. It reeks of purity spirals and it will not move the GC cause forward.
Many, many people (most, in reality) will share GC beliefs to a greater or lesser extent. The fact that (outside of Twitter) we are a majority is a good thing. We aren't a niche, bigoted, unreasonable belief. We are simply people who prioritise biological reality above ideology and feelings. As such, many people who hold other views we may dislike, will also be biological realists. Picking out and casting aside all those who we don't like, who have different priorities from ours, our who have pissed us off in the past, is an insane strategy.
I don't want to win this fight because I have the purest, most righteous ideology, am a Good Person.
I want to win this fight because believing, in my heart of hearts, that the sun will not come up tomorrow will not make it so. Belief does not shape reality. And no-one should be able to dictate to me, or anyone else, what reality is, based on their subjective belief.