If there's no spectrum of opinions, what's the point? If people were genuinely interested in exploring or making decisions about what constitutes womanhood from an open minded position, how will an echo chamber help them?
Both the Guardian and the Independent regularly give voice to biologically-protective women. I'm not sure comments sections should be the gold standard of reasoned debate, though - attracting as it does, the worst of either side.
What I do find, though, is that biologically protective women invariably claim to speak for all cis/natal/not-trans women and girls. It's a poor kind of feminist who dismisses the considered and reasoned views of other women. At worst, they describe us as deluded, brainwashed etc.
The first demand of the group organising this symposium, is for discussion to be evidence based.
Vintage Paw has twice posted an excellent, entirely factual analysis of the proposed law change, but is consistently ignored.
How are women (even by the narrowest definition) supposed to agree on this complex issue if no one is prepared to have a reasoned discussion about facts.
Evidence has been offered of non trans men committing offenses, and of problems in America which has not implemented a change in legal identification. But no one seems interested in looking at what has actually happened in countries that have introduced self id.
And still people claim to speak for me as a woman, without being interested in speaking *to* me.