This was great. As others have said, it's interesting hearing arguments in the wild rather than on Twitter. Many of these people won't be used to having their foundational arguments tested - it's not enough to talk about liberation, rights and inclusion, or the omnicause - you need to define and defend your case.
I am gender critical but this kind of open, questioning conversation would have given trans people a far better chance of winning hearts and minds than a decade of "no debate". I had a lot of sympathy for the older trans woman who spoke about therapy, and the passing long-haired blonde trans women. I can appreciate how destabilising the recent clarification must seem to them. Self-ID and the ever-growing trans umbrella have not done them any favours.
The problem is, we started out with be-kind and pronouns, which slid into self ID, which slid into men in women's sports, women's prisons, women's crime stats, men stealing women's prizes and men benefiting from programmes designed to lift women into equality.
Some interviewed still seem to think it's about relative trivia* - pronouns and bathrooms - and the only explanation for people not making such small concessions must be bigotry. They don't grasp that the outrageous overreach of members of their own community has led to this pushback.
*I know these aren't trivial and act as gateway drugs to the hard stuff, but I think if trans demands has been limited to pronouns and bathrooms for tiny numbers of people with diagnosed gender dysphoria, we could perhaps, maybe, have rubbed along.