It's not just a difference of opinion though is it. It's alignment with an ideology that is actively seeking to undefine and delegitimise biological sex, in particular female biology, as something people can even consider, as a basis upon which people can understand and speak about themselves.
Female people do have a history of and indeed in many ways still do face being sidelined, exploited and abused as a direct result of our physical sex and how our sex is seen within our culture.
We do have very good reasons to speak about the challenges and experiences that come with that body and to sometimes need single sex spaces or other resources either for protection or empowerment.
So this social change, not organic but defined and imposed upon us politically, is a massive thing to do to half the human race.
Now even with ll that said, perhaps undefining "women" in the original meaning as a valid legal and social group is still, given the needs of trans people, a reasonable thing to do.
However, if it is a reasonable thing to do it should also be reasonable to talk about it openly and honestly with the people being most impacted.
But when it comes to Gender Identity and GPEW that isn't what is happening.
The opposing voice, the other perspective, isn't just being treated as "you can make your case but it's not GPEW policy", it is being actively censored.
That is the problem. Not that the GPEW policy is falling on the other side of a contentious question but that they are pretending there is no legitimacy ti the other side. No conversation needs to be had to justify undefining the historically meaningful group "women".
So no, this is not just a normal 7/10 agreement issue, and it isn't just about TW vs women's rights.
It is a fundamental crisis of morality and leadership.
it's a decision about the type of politics and society you want: one that allows for honest debate or one that forces its agenda through silencing and denial.