Luckily for us, Akua Reindorf KC has clarified a point that has been repeatedly doubled down on within this thread.
Starts between 34-35 minutes in, but the entire session is good with Naomi Cunningham, Akua Reindorf, Ben Cooper and Sarah Vine.
Either way this is the transcript that I tidied up, although there could be typos.
This is the bit about associations and whether there can be an association with women and males who identify as female.
"But everybody has to have ALL the protected characteristics in question."
And then
"What you can’t have is a group for people with two separate [protected characteristics] …where some people have one protected characteristic and others have a different one".
"Because then let's say you have a group for lesbians or women and men who identify as women, trans women, it's not a… it doesn't satisfy the condition of being a single sex association. A single protected characteristic association for women because not everybody is a woman. It doesn't satisfy the condition for being um a single characteristic association for people who have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment because not everybody has that protected characteristic ."
"So you can't have that kind of an association. So you can't have a so-called trans-inclusive association. I mean as Maya says, you can always have two associations that join up and do things together. There are ways around it. But fundamentally, what we have started to call sumptions law is wrong both for services and for associations. um "
"Of course, if it was possible to have a self ID service or association, For Women Scotland simply would not have won the case. Because this is what the Scottish government wanted to do. They wanted to have transidentified males in a quota for women."
I think I will listen to Akua Reindorf KC on this. She kind of has specific experience and relevance in getting the interpretation of the law clear. You know, being part of the EHRC and all.