What are the things that are really at issue?
One is "cancel culture", the claim that this is a real thing, of which people live in fear etc., and that the right way to look at very polarised issues like trans rights is to see one side as intolerant authoritarians trying to silence the other. To my mind this is like "you can't even dress up in blackface nowadays!", i.e. the problem isn't actually political correctness gone mad, and people who try to frame it that way are not acting in good faith. Likewise "you can't even invite racist ideologists to give Skype talks promoting their racist ideology at an art gallery nowadays". Indeed - you shouldn't do that, and it's good that you feel that you can't.
Take one of Nina's favourite examples - Sam Kriss, who behaved with a regrettably familiar kind of bullish, swaggering sexual entitlement on a date, with someone who subsequently retaliated against him for clashing with her over trans rights by circulating (initially in TERF forums such as mayday4women) a lurid description of his past conduct. The gist was: "this man claims to be a feminist ally, but he's just another #metoo offender, and his use of slurs like 'TERF' to describe feminists like me is of a piece with his generally uncouth and violently misogynist disposition". This was a serious, and seriously effective, reputational attack, which did some real damage. But note: 1) it was, as Kriss acknowledged, actually true that he'd done what she said he'd did, and 2) the direction of travel: this wasn't Kriss's opponent getting trashed for being a TERF, this was Kriss getting trashed for being a sexual yobbo. It doesn't at all fit the narrative of people living in fear of being "cancelled" for holding the "wrong" opinion, or being lied about by enemies who make things up to defame them. Kriss's opinion was the right one, from the point of view of those with whom he was previously in good reputational standing.