Your interpretation makes no sense at all. As if it's just a random series of disconnected events as opposed to a clear line of reasoning critiquing the original point. Like, you can't possibly believe that the author's intent wasn't to critique the original point, right? You even said as much.
You're completely missing the point. Whether or not you buy a car that doesn't have seatbelts, it's still a good idea for cars to have seatbelts. The criticism of individual choice is irrelevant, it's ad hominem.
That is what it's saying, but that completely contradicts what you said before, that he's "right" in the first case and "debatable" in the second. The point is he's wrong in all three and the comic is demonstrating that by applying his logic to increasingly absurd situations.
Because you asked how you could possibly know someone who's username is "katy ✨" was a woman. That is clown shit.
Doubling down on misgendering is transphobic. It's fine if it's an honest mistake at first, but the correct response to being called out on it, or seeing someone else get called on it, is not to downvote, not to argue about it, but to say, "sorry, I didn't realize" and correct it.
But no, I'm sure that your motives for fighting me on this have nothing to do with transphobia, you're just fighting on it because, what was it again? I was "too aggressive" in calling out transphobia? I guess if people can say, "I'm not fascist, I'm just anti-anti-fascism," then your version is, "I'm not transphobic, I'm just anti-anti transphobia." My sincerest apologies for not making the distinction.