My hottest take is that that panel about "materialist transfeminism" featuring a trans guy, a cis guy, and a cis woman where they say wild shit about types of trans women they don't like is the natural outcome of how this imagined conflict between "transsexual women" and "nonbinaries" has played out
Bc every transfem thought leader, from Contrapoints to Andrea Long Chu to Jules-Gils Peterson to fucking Hunter Schafer has made it out like the bigbest intracommunity obstacle we face are nonbinary people, who are imagined as "liberal idealists" who are "playing with gender" and basically aren't really trans
And the issue is the phenomenon they are all actually mad at is TRANSMISOGYNY. TME trans ppl hold more social power and live safer lives than TMA trans ppl. But the only people talking about transmisogyny as a serious category of analysis are a bunch of tumblr queens and a few twitter girls who used to be on tumblr. Meanwhile everyone with a big platform does not dare consider that maybe, just maybe, being a trans guy doesn't make you more of an embattled "real wombyn" than trans women. All our thought leaders are still stuck in reddit brain where they imagine trans men as somehow even more oppressed than us, and plus they do not have the conceptual vocabulary to identify transmisogyny and faggotry. No, we have to view trans men as "natal females" and thus they are even more "materially" women than we are, somehow.
And so this leads inextricably to a world where a panel of ppl who are neither transfem nor nonbinary sit down to repeat the same transmisogynist bullshit we have been hearing for decades. Because turns out the issue wasn't too much glitter or neopronouns or people with mullets named Sock, it was transmisogyny the whole time!