You should read the whole thing. I want to highlight this bit:

If a person who is accused of bias attempts to defend his intentions, he merely compounds his own guilt. (Here one might find oneself accused of man/white/straightsplaining.) It is likewise taboo to request that the accusation be rendered in a less hostile manner. This is called “tone policing.” If you are accused of bias, or “called out,” reflection and apology are the only acceptable response—to dispute a call-out only makes it worse. There is no allowance in p.c. culture for the possibility that the accusation may be erroneous.

That I've responded to the erroneous and sometimes malicious accusations of anti-trans bias laid against me—that I've had the nerve to defend myself against charges of being transphobic* (because sometimes, upon reflection, you conclude, "Hey, this is bullshit")—is frequently held up as proof that I am, in fact, transphobic. And if I failed to respond? That would mean I didn't take the charge seriously enough to respond, that I didn't object to being labelled transphobic, etc., and my failure to respond and defend myself would be held up as proof that I am, in fact, transphobic.

Anyway, Chait's entire piece is worth your time.

* I'm not talking about accusations of sometimes getting it wrong, giving shitty advice, etc. We all make mistakes. I'm talking about the charge that I bear a deep-seated animus against trans people, that I hate and fear them, etc.