Regarding Singal's latest piece, Serano's threads deconstructing it are sufficient for understanding it on its 'merits.' As to the man himself, every time he writes something this abusive from so lofty a perch I keep thinking I should say more and stop letting him terrorise me.
So here goes. Here's an email he sent me almost a year ago, swearing a storm at me because I tweeted something he disliked that he felt was untrue. The screencap of my tweet there was his; we're mutually blocked, for reference. 
On the substance of his email: I expressed myself unclearly in a side comment to a friend, but my point was that regardless of Singal "staying out" of the Green mess, he had lent his imprimatur to the "conversion therapy lite" meme. That was the point.
He had likened trans people making complex arguments about genitals and attraction to "conversion therapy." He did so at the same time Green was making similar arguments, so I said what I said. Even if not defending her by name, he was echoing her talking points.
If this seems like trivium and a really minor point to get hung up on, welcome to being an outspoken trans woman dealing with Jesse Singal, who interprets every critique as the most vicious of slights against him when it comes from us.
For speaking out on this, I expect another email. Or perhaps he'll try to contact an employer (he's done that to other women). But this illustrates how well he handles criticism, and I've feared courting his wrath.
With everything else happening in the world, I don't have the luxury of that fear anymore. That kind of sweary, unsolicited contact, fuming about how a trans woman is "abusing" him, is not unique to me unfortunately. This is how he conducts discourse with us.
It'll also be interesting to see how the civility-loving liberals who often defend the man would respond to a case like this.
Another detail to add: this is not the only such email I have from Singal. The first batch was from when I was trying to talk him down after his first, infamous NY Mag piece defending Zucker. Private matters were discussed and we agreed to keep those emails under wraps.
I do not consider the July 2017 email--posted above--to be covered by that agreement. That email was entirely unsolicited; I did not contact him at all. It was sent 10 months after we last spoke. And you can judge the contents for yourself.
I say this because it would be very like him to claim I was violating his confidence, when no such agreement was made, and I wanted to preempt that. It's probably why he attached that email to the original thread of 2016 emails, if I had to guess. But no, it's its own thing.
As a final note, I should point out that his thoroughly unprofessional behaviour--from sending emails like this to his “I done goofed" mea culpa for misreporting research in deleterious ways--would get marginalised writers fired and blacklisted. He gets to walk it off.
