The issue here is you can only make accomodations for Tourettes by awareness and explanation. You can't actually stop what they are saying. They are always going to offend. And they will offend in what is essentially a none discriminatory way although some individuals will be more upset by it than others. Their intent is never one that is self centred or malicious. It's a truly awful condition.
In a situation where someone is having a severe bout of Tourettes tics, they are actively very vulnerable and at risk at that moment. They come about due to stress so trying to minimise that and prepare people in advance is necessary because it reduces the potential impact in many scenarios. However it can be in literally any situation from walking down the street, to dropping the kids off, to shopping that the impact happens and is very visible.
And being completely honest you can't stop people being offended. That's the nature of the disability. There is no nuance. There is no compromise which doesn't restrict the life of the person to being homebound or institutionalised.
In terms of the issue for sex and gender, genderists demand validation and compliance that goes beyond wanting rights and respect. They are actively rejecting third party spaces that can be used by everyone - the point is they are using the women in spaces and using others for validation. Transwomen also are not the most vulnerable in every scenario unlike is the case for someone in the midst of a Tourettes episode.
This means the harms and balancing of rights issues are massively different.
You aren't getting another group who are being impacted negatively more than others in the same way. There isn't issues over intent and motivations. There are third party solutions available. There aren't doubts over medicalisation and how you treat different cohorts - it's a medical condition that doesn't rely on fantasy wording and power and control dynamics. It has a clear set of diagnostic criteria and can be described in a way that would have a clear legal definition.
I got really upset by the thread last night because I have a friend with Tourettes. Having spent time with her doing normal things it brings it home how awful the condition is. It's exhausting just being around her. If she's having an episode it's immediately obvious what it is from her physical tics as well as her verbalisation which is notably different from normal communication. It's identifiable even if you didn't know she had Tourettes. You'd be able to work it out she had it. Indeed telling people what's going on they say "well we thought that was the case but we weren't sure" because they havent seen Tourettes 'in the wild' so to speak and for the most part the explanation is enough. Mainly cos her distress and discomfort is very much on display. You can't fake it.
I am comfortable with her being around my son. We have explained it and he gets it. It can be funny. It can be heartbreaking. It can be offensive. It can be embarrassing for those around her. It can put them at risk too. The best thing to do is literally to ignore it because it reduces the stress and anxiety and the tics are more likely to stop and stop more quickly. Staring, making comments or going on about how awful someone is behaving only makes the problem worse which isn't what anyone involved wants.
Honestly if you spend time with someone with severe Tourettes you would soon get over the concept of being offended even if they were saying the most offensive thing ever because you can visibly see the trauma and distress it's causing the person doing it. Even if you initially get upset, you very quickly realise just how awful the condition is and how there isn't offense made. Frankly if you are getting offended I question your own empathy levels - if you are expecting respect and tolerance you need to be able to give it too.
The idea that anyone is being racist, homophobic, etc etc when you see such an episode first hand is really laughable.
Where I have a problem with this current debate is the problem with discussion on the subject on social media is it's coming from people who have had no experience of this and don't have the visual feedback to also consider. Its a theoretical debate not one based on reality. It's a social media story and social experience into thoughts and politics instead of a reflection on the actual condition. It's all about just focusing on the word(s) used not the full behaviour manifestation. As soon as you see this this, it has a very different context and people can see it as well just focusing on the word and the concept of offense being the best all and end all. A tic is visual not just verbal.
The two actors on stage would have seen that from where they were stood. If they don't have prior knowledge and experience of Tourettes it could have completely thrown them and bewildered them. That wasn't fair. But no one was being racist.
They should have been better prepared and informed in advance - for both them and John's benefit. But honestly if you want people with Tourettes to be part of society as anyone else you just have to roll with it unfortunately. Otherwise you are advocating for active significant discrimination on the basis of disability. Being offended by it is unavoidable in certain scenarios but it's not actionable against the person doing it due to their capacity issues and their intent and this is the really important factor. Someone choosing which sexed space to use, is actively free to make that choice in that moment. They have a deliberate attempt to access wrong sex facilities. They have capacity to do this. If they reject third spaces again this is an active choice that isn't available for someone with Tourettes.
There was a massive duty of care failure that occurred by the organisers and broadcasters. This falls on them not the individuals concerned. It has to be a preemptive rather than reactionary response in terms of how you make accomodations and balance rights (which actually isn't a realistic thing to do in many situations - for example if you are out at a restaurant, leaving the restaurant could put someone much more at risk outside from passers by and just changes the situation rather than stopping it). You cant punish or force apologies.
And no he shouldn't apologise for a disability. It should be an explanation instead.
Even then the person is still at risk. And apologising doesn't really help the situation a lot of the time if the next thing you say is a whole bunch of other abusive stuff.
Honestly, I've really not seen many medical conditions I think are this appalling. It's a slow life long torture that impacts on every level of a persons life. You can't compare it to the sex and gender issue. Frankly I think it's offensive to do so and shows a very low level of understanding of the condition.