Take, for example, the brilliant idea that the way that snow has been ploughed in Stockholm is sexist, and needs to be "gender equal". Why is it sexist? Because ploughing has been prioritized to first plough the busiest and most important roadways. I especially love this part of the article:
Inspired by authorities in the municipality of Karlskoga, Helldén explained that snowploughs in Stockholm typically target areas frequented by men, such as the roadsSuch as the roads...
Anyway. They now implemented a more "gender equal" priority to snowploughing, which of course in feminist parlance means that places frequented by women (such as daycare centers) are ploughed first (because, you know, that's what "equality" means in feminist vocabulary).
What happened? Traffic chaos.
You know. The thing that happens when the busy roads of a metropolis are not ploughed in time, and are full of snow. And this surprised how many people? Something like zero, I guess. (At least sane people.)
But of course, as the article says, the new "gender equal" (which means "women first") snow clearing is not to be blamed. Because of course it shouldn't be. It's the morally right thing to do, and the busybodies having the moral high ground enacted it, and thus it's impossible that must be the cause. When you have the moral high ground, you can never be wrong. The cause must be something else.
I bet they'll end up declaring that the cause is the patriarchy. Somehow.