I mean, she's still not a smart person; but, she had the sense to stave off the checkmate by a couple of moves.
When asked to define "the patriarchy", she had the sense to use the term "people in male bodies" rather than simply saying "men" in regard to who is dominant in the supposed patriarchy.
This was a step to protect the intersectional bullshit of woke ideology. Namely, if trans-women are women, trans-men must be men. Therefore, if she used the word "men" in the context of the patriarchy, trans-men, particularly white trans-men, can't be oppressed. Rather, white trans-men must have joined the oppressors by transitioning.
Still, again, this is just staving of the checkmate by one move.
If the patriarchy is dominated not by men, but by people in male bodies, as she put it, then trans-women, particularly white trans-women, are beneficiaries of the patriarchy.
The reality is that this whole trend of intersectional bullshit only survives through word games and abstractions. They rely on never having clear definitions. They know that, if anybody is smart enough to cut through the bullshit, they'll be revealed to being snakes eating their own tails.