What's excellent about the interview is that she went straight for the logic of 'gender identity' itself. And brilliantly exposed it for the nonsense that it is.
Usually even when media types allow themselves a critical perspective on the trans doctrine, they pick around the edges of it, saying, ''Do you think an unscrupulous man might take advantage of this?' etc. In a weird way, that has the effect of reifying trans ideology, because you're accepting the central premise that some men are 'really' women inside, and then just asking if there might be the odd problem that arises from that.
And all the while the sheer absurdity of the claim at the heart of it - that being a man or a woman is an internal feeling - goes not just unexamined, but normalised.
I also had a bit of a chuckle at the bit where she was saying to Madigan that there were some men who hadn't had any surgery or even taken hormones who were now claiming to be women, obviously blissfully unaware that she was describing him.