The article's explanation of mask-wearing in 2026 (2026!!!) is really illuminating and makes me think of parallels in the trans debate.
Because of the right's absurd mistrust of covid protections, Lewis explains, mask-wearing became 'left-coded'. No longer a realistic response to relevant facts but a costume.
You can say the same about 'being a trans ally'. Just a couple of decades or so ago, men who sought to present as women WERE 'the most marginalised ... (etc.)'. They were harassed, discriminated against and often terribly isolated, lacking a political or social home. The feminist groups that embraced them could reasonably perceive them as victims of the same authoritarian gender conservatism that marginalised and harassed women (since both groups were being persecuted for breaking restrictive gender norms) .
Embracing them was a realistic response to conditions at the time, and to a hostility that was arguably right-coded and anti-feminist-coded. So the embrace became left-coded and feminist-coded. That coding has persisted WAY after the external conditions changed. The laborious centring of 'trans vulnerability and pain' is precisely as reality-respecting as routine use of anti-covid masking in 2026. But still compelling for some people, just as mask-wearing seems to be for these strange types in the article.