Yep. When I recently evinced the opinion that Diane Abbott is way past her political sell-by date and was actively harming Labour more than helping it, I was accused of being racist. But I wasn't criticising Abbott because she's Black, I was criticising her because she's an antisemite whose politics remain stuck in the 70s.
The cries of hypocrisy from the pro-DT people on this thread and elsewhere are in fact cries of befuddled rage that the toxic politics of identity can be used against them.
But it's more than that. DT's comments were deeply misogynistic but also hinge on the unspoken belief that only the 'right kind of minority people' deserve to benefit from identity politics. That is, only Black, brown (like me), gay, disabled etc people who toe the line and bow down to our progressive idpol masters (who mostly happen to be white, posh and male for some reason). I regard it as nothing less than colonisation, albeit of the psychological kind. Progressives want to 'help' us minorities, but only if we show slavish (and I use the word slavish deliberately) gratitude and obedience.
Those of us who desist - who decide we like and can benefit from capitalism, conservatism, entreprenurialism, rad feminism, gender crit thoughts, or anything else that idpol folks don't like, are subject to even more vicious abuse than people from the majority ethnicity and culture. We have betrayed our masters! But don't we know we owe everything to our kind masters? We are traitors; we should not exist.
This is why the most rancourous abuse gets reserved for the likes of Thomas Sowell, Trevor Phillips, James Cleverly, Suella Braverman and Kemi Badenoch.
That is also why 'transwomen' are the sacred caste - precisely because they are privileged white men like our idpol masters.
So: what DT said is misogynistic. It is sexist. it is racist. It's misogyny, sexism and racism filtered through the complex lens of angry and bitter idpol progressives who only love minorities as long as they stay in their place and toe the line.