There is a genuine clash between two sets of human rights here. It would seem reasonable to argue that this should mean that the decision as to which to give priority is a political decision, rather than one where a judgement at a particular time by judges (appointed by politicians) should expect to be decisive.

But treating it as a party political issue is a pretty disastrous way of going about it, as illustrated by the episode that started this thread.

There are no perfect ways of resolving a clash like this, but perhaps the best one might be on the basis of a popular referendum with voting restricted to women.