People on these platforms don't care about Butler, but about attention and clout chasing.

They may not know or care about her, but they do care about her ideas. Because those ideas are how they obtain attention, clout chasing, pressure people into sex in the case of (for example) AGP transwomen, and so on.

See my comment above.

Which I refuted. Let me be more specific, if it might help: Judith Butler's academic theories have infected LGBTQ+ media among my age group. Gender identity beliefs are extremely popular on social media, and social media skews young. You could reasonably argue, "Many young LGB people aren't infected these beliefs, they're just being censored off social media so it only SEEMS like LGB youth believe this stuff." I will admit that's a possibility; I'm one of those people.

The ideology that Judith Butler helped formalize and spread, is the leader of, is the same one that Stonewall's rules go by and that the entirety of "LGBTQ+" social media is run by. You could argue that Judith Butler is not as influential a founder of this belief system as some other people, or that tons of people come up with stupid belief systems and it's really the fault of money-greedy institutions or angry men demanding sex that this belief system took off (as you did argue, and as I acknowledged is an important topic to talk about). However, it makes no logical sense to argue that Stonewall UK has nothing to do with these ideas that came from gender identity ideology leaders such as Judith Butler. They are directly related. I don't believe that she represents everyone in or all of the content taught in the field of gender studies, but I'm referring to her specifically, not gender studies.

I get the impression that we might be using different definitions, here. I have noticed I tend to agree with most of your other comments, though, so I am in inclined to doubt that our lack of agreement here is substantive.