Maybe it is a bit of an aside, but there are elements of the climate change/energy debate that really remind me of the gender ideology debate.
Among parties like the Lib Dems or Greens, it's almost forbidden to really discuss the kinds of practical problems with a lot of the supposed solutions that are touted for stopping climate change while maintaining the current standard of living. Like the whole electric car thing - the question of what that will mean for the mining industry is not a welcome conversation among environmentalists, and the tendency is to hand wave and say "oh, we will figure out the tech so that's not an issue." Well, you can say that about carbon emissions too, it's not an answer.
And when you see intelligent conservatives say, ok, great, we need to stop climate change, please show me the numbers on how we can do that, and also what we will do to deal with the fallout to the larger global financial system which is largely upheld by cheap energy (whether we like that fact or not), they are inevitably branded as climate deniers. No answers are forthcoming. Glen Loury and Jordan Peterson both come to mind for as having received that kind of treatment, just to give a couple of well known examples.
I am less and less inclined to think that the bad thinking around gender ideology by people like the LibDems is really so much about gender ideology.