When questioned about hatred, the first Group she talked about was TRAs which I was surprised by. She was clear JK Rowling is a national hero - good start.
Other than that, she sounds like an awful lot of people on here before they realised the were GC. She wants people the be able to live their lives. Generally ok with transwomen in safe spaces post surgery (which plenty of us were fine with/tolerated before the last few years) but no women don't have penises... I got the impression she's just not confident about it all yet given how contentious the debate is, and is conflicted between what she's (likely) being told by the party (nasty GC right wingers are just trying to deflect from the disasters of the Conservatives so avoid the questions) and her gut reaction (well obviously a man isn't a woman and why on earth are people being so vile to JKR when she's fabulous).
I see her leaning to GC more than Genderist in reality. Whether she'll be willing to nail her colours to the mast or will just follow the party line for self preservation is a different question, but the hesitation and confusion isn't exactly unusual for someone who hasn't been embroiled in the debate for years like others, so, in lieu of a firm GC position, I'd rather hesitation and a bit of hedging while she considers it, than a definitive 'of course women have penises and don't you know transwomen can have a cervix'.
I got the impression she can sort of see what's going on, but is looking through the frosted glass rather than opening the window and seeing clearly.
Time will tell (and this might age very poorly!) but I hope common sense will prevail.