Hmm, interesting thought. The problem I see is it would just be an exercise in reinforcing the narrative for them. It's asking for agreement on a manly dude being called a woman, which they will gladly agree with and it won't cause any infighting. It's still lying to them and spreading disinformation that happens to be the disinformation that their thought leaders want them to have any way. We think because we are psyopping them into accepting disinformation we are somehow helping or doing something novel / difficult and therefore valuable. Instead we should look at what disinformation there is already and attack that. Somehow people get this idea that strategy has to be complicated therefor the more complicated and difficult it is to see it's value the better the strategy it is. It's simple. Look at what your enemy wants to accomplish, and do the opposite.