“Rachel” Saunders trying to convince onlookers that he’s a deep thinker:

My contention is that the history of gender critical discourse is rooted in a reaction against third wave feminist approaches to trans inclusive feminism…

So his contention is that gender critical discourse is rooted in criticism of gender bullshit. Well ya don’t say, Sherlock. How long did it take you to work that one out?

The history of feminist discourse is littered with ascendent ideas which wane as society moves on…

Hahahaha got enough mangled incompatible metaphors in there? How can history be littered with something? How high can ideas ascend? What are the signs of a waning idea? Where does society move on to?

Raymond’s book spurred anti-trans backlash during the 1980s which saw the closure of trans healthcare and the rolling back of trans normative rights movements. However, as the queer libationary movements emerged…

Oops. Too many libations while writing this epic consignment of geriatric shoe manufacturers?

At law countries across Europe and individual US states began to roll out tentative trans rights which blossomed into a normative framing of trans identities around the turn of the millennia. 

At law? Did he mean at last? And how does one “roll out” rights? And what are tentative trans rights? And how do tentative rights blossom? And how does anything at all blossom into a normative framing? And it’s turn of the millennium, not millennia.

From 2000 to 2015 trans people saw their lives shift from the shadows…

How do lives shift from the shadows?

This is what you get when stupid people try to do Fine Writing. Mr Saunders should skip the attempt and buckle down to fixing his thought process.