HQ, The law commission are currently involved in this very issue. What we can and what we cannot say. They have concluded
We do not agree with GIRES that such discussion necessarily amounts to ‘vilification’ or ‘dehumanises’ trans people, still less that it encourages others to do so. Indeed, we think that characterising it as GIRES does demonstrates the risk that without explicit protection, such discourse – which has been recognised as protected speech – risks being perceived, reported, and potentially investigated as hate speech.”
They're saying that normal discourse needs to be protected because if it isn't, it will be deliberately misrepresented. They are using GIRES attempt to do so as an example.
I believe you have every right to allow women to use the word men, when they are discussing women's rights being taken over by them.
Take a look at what the law commission are saying. They are fully alive to the fact that women are being silenced on the basis of using language that some people don't like.
Letting women talk freely about this means you have the law on your side.
Correct terms and language cannot be deemed uncivil on the basis that some people don't like them.
The Law Commission highlighted that the rulings in Miller and Forstater have now made it clear that the expression of “gender critical” views is protected under human rights laws. The issue, therefore, is not whether such expression should be protected, it is whether the stirring-up offences would require a provision to make clear it is protected.”
It concluded that it would
The law commission is going further than protecting the belief of gender critical women, they are allowing it to be expressed freely. This is because transactivists have decided that you can hold a belief, but you can't express it.
The law commission is saying that is simply not the case. They are going out of their way to say so.
sex-matters.org/posts/the-legal-system/law-commission-recommends-protection-for-gender-critical-views-from-chilling-effect/