Identity politics is pretty much accurate, it's just it's opponents are loud. Very loud.
It used to be an Or statement. You were either Male OR Female and your life was decided based on which way your chromosomes folded, but there has always been resistance to that, it's only now that the science has pretty much confirmed that it, like a whole lot of other things, is a spectrum.
Much like early computers could only do on or off for speakers ((not quite true, but close enough)(The original Lemmings soundtrack was written for PC speaker and was burning into my brain lol(Pachelbel's canon sounds impressive even on limited hardware lol))) or could only do a limited amount of colour within a fixed amount of bytes, as computers have gotten more powerful the amount of space allocated has increased and thus colour and sound depth have increased and clarity is much improved.
To tie it back into the topic, kinda, this is why I'm frustrated with computation as a whole, a lot of this stuff, like abstraction, was designed when computers were HUGE, Expensive, Rare and most importantly, kinda absolutely useless at anything, and now none of that is true, but we still write and design and teach software/hardware as if nothing has changed.
Hardware is still relatively expensive, but what you can buy for the same price dwarves what you could buy in the eighties, and if it fails, you can claim it on warranty. (most of the time)
Which is why I think abstaction has to go. We now have the ability and capacity to watch the machine in real time instead of guess and work around, and the baseline is still "trust the machine" and given a lot of the quirks of modern software hardware are because of those machine issues, see floating point for example and it's absolutely insane. We can solve those problems, but instead we hyper focus on decisions made in the eighties or earlier as if they're set in stone.