1. Agrees to Clifford's Creedo of Freethought ""It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence", and agrees that asking for evidence or rejecting claims based on insufficient evidence is what a freethinker and skeptic does. Asking for evidence will not be construed as indicating anything but skepticism and will not be used to assume another body of beliefs not at issue (racism, sexism, misogyny, etc).
2. Abandon unfalsifiable hypotheses/theories and discontinue the use of "studies" and "scholarly papers", which assume said unfalsifiable beliefs as part of their premise, as evidence.
3. It could be helpful to require that they define some of their terms. For example feminism (A radical notion... or ?), misogyny (Hatred of all women, or ?), patriarchy (A nation or group whose leaders are a majority male, or ?) etc. Choosing whatever terms are relevant to the topic of the discussion.
My caveat is that #3 should be applicable where they claim that someone is "anti". That is to say, in order to claim somone is "anti-feminist" they have to provide a clear definition of feminism where that claim is applicable.
What would you propose as a condition to a debate with a member of the FC(n) or a baboon?