I think the issue here is one of polarisation of the discourse and doubling down. There are consensus positions on shared spaces which can be reached - and people do reach them... but the ideological battlefield now contains rhetorical lines which cannot be crossed. Rather than discussion of any sort every attempt to see a compromise position is taken as an act of bad faith by both sides.

That's how centre ground writers know we're centre ground. We get attacked by all sides in the comments sections. Society has always been about competing rights and, by logical extension, social responsibilities. Whilst the conversation between the TERFs and trans-activists is largely centred around the rights each feels they have and each feels the other infringes upon, I think the dialogue would be better served by talking about the responsibilities each group owes each other.

With the current state of discussion - I'm not convinced that's going to be any time soon. Identity politics continues to be a zero sum pissing contest guaranteed to produce stalemate and acrimony - even in the face of benign boundaried positions like yours.