people not upgrading would not want their coin transvestites by whatever some random dev manages to push down the Protocol's throat.
"Some random dev" doesn't have commit access, just to name the first problem with your false characterization that comes to mind.
"Some random dev" isn't an accurate way to describe the widespread, albeit not universal nor harmonious, consensus behind segwit.
Do you have a better plan to fix tx malleability and accrue the other benefits segwit brings to the table?
Besides the excruciatingly nuanced 'better as a hard fork' critique, I've yet to hear a good reason to eschew segwit, much less a plausible way to prevent other people from using that soft fork. Ranting about transvestites and vague threats involving gold purity metaphors won't cut it.
You know you can't force unwilling miners to keep tx and sigs desegregated (and malleable), right?