Asking vague unproductive questions and then ignoring any counterpoints, being unable to expand on your claims and calling any demand to do so "rude" and "insulting" is not how a productive discussion is held.

If the kind of structured debate you expect is "Don't question anything I say and just nod your head to validate me", then yes, a discussion between GC and non-GC people is impossible, and that is indeed the main reason why trans ideology cannot survive these discussions and has to rely on "niceness" and "politeness" in order to have their arguments accepted. That doesn't really count as a discussion at that point, though. GC puts up with talks of how they deserve to get killed and raped on a regular basis, trans activists cannot say the same of their talks with GC. And yet GC is still the side that's capable, in spite of staggering amounts of misogyny and straight up death wishes, to rationalise their stance, while the trans side halts all discussion the second they don't get an agreement on the basis of "because I said so and you should be nice and not invalidate my feelings".