"This article notwithstanding, I don’t typically use the word “gender-critical” because I don’t believe it is critical thinking at all. It’s shallow. It doesn’t hold up. It’s self-contradictory"

Not only that, it seems to chase its own tail, at least in practice. Most of the gender-critical folks I see in action evidently start from a position of "trans people bad, so reasons." In other words, they aren't so much interested in criticizing the philosophical concept of gender as they are in criticizing the existence and behavior of transgender people, whom they seem to intensely dislike.

It's rare, for example, to hear a typical gender-critical advocate calling for the dissolution of gender roles, but very common to hear disingenuous claptrap about how transgender women represent a severe, pervasive, physical threat to other women. Even though actual data shows otherwise.

It's rare to hear talk about how people should be free to live and behave outside the chains of traditional gender roles, but common to hear accusations that transgender men are traitors to women and feminism.

If gender-critical folks really meant what they said, then trans men living as they chose should be a step in the right direction rather than a problem.

But as far as I can see, they don't mean what they say. They're not truly interested in the dissolution of gender roles; they're interested in forcing trans people to live by such roles or suffer serious practical consequences.

They're working to enforce and solidify gender roles.

Because they're chasing their tail.