@PP82, I’m not sure what you mean by your post above. If by “manifestly fail to protect women“, you mean that single sex spaces can’t actually prevent all assaults, then I think this is, regrettably, fairly obvious!
What we’re interested in is why you’re arguing again something that does the next best thing: massively reduces the risk & occurrence of such assaults.
For example. You may have found some stats proving the contrary that we’ve not seen. Or you may have a new argument for mixed sex spaces that outweighs the data showing their negatives - how much more dangerous these are for women & girls?
Or you may agree with me, that there’s no way of responding directly to my post & still upholding the total removal of women’s & girls‘ legal right to single sex spaces. In which case, please acknowledge this!
At horrible risk of sounding patronising… If there’s anything braver in online debate than taking on a majority who disagree with you, as you have here, it’s 1) doing so directly (no evasion / logical fallacy eg. single sex spaces can’t prevent all assaults, so are valueless, as implied above) or 2) acknowledging something new that may shift your thinking. It’s genuinely hard - I’m not fab at it, & not too resilient in it!
I’m not going to ask for a direct response to 8.47 again now, as I have to run & it sounds as though you’ve a huge amount on at the moment - it’s of course up to you whether you respond any further. Also - heck - nine new posts since starting typing, painfully, on my phone, so apologies if the above is now totally out-of-date!
Best of luck with everything to you.