I think maybe the author was casually mocking their strawperson Stanley (who they effectively characterized as old), by also associating him with other ideas wi

I think maybe the author was casually mocking their strawperson Stanley (who they effectively characterized as old), by also associating him with other ideas widely considered outmoded and shameful. Ironically, if Stanley's experience originated as an Internet-savvy techie of 30 years ago, that would be of the "on the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog" era, when people who were gay, trans, or of other marginalized groups, could go online and find places where they can be accepted. Stanley supported trans friends before most people even knew that was a thing. Or, if we're still trying to link older with wronger, go back to Stanley's counterculture hippie parents, who were more progressive than today's typical holder of now-fashionable ideas. The author discusses their actual ideas at length. I think they went a bit off-track throughout the piece, when distinguishing their ideas from some current model, accidentally straying into tactics of propaganda rather than reason. And incidentally contributing to ageism.