Too complicated for me, but I wonder if the arguments are actually over the relevant things, or about what they are presented as being about.
Declaring somewhere a penis-free zone seems straightforward and to solve at least one aspect of worry.
Offering cervical smears to anyone with a cervix, and nobody without, seems easy.
Designing toilet facilities probably isn't a supreme court job.
Deciding on a legal definition probably isn't a job for the OED editors.