Via the comments, and the pages of Gay Community News, more attempts to justify the odd and improper:

Ah, a glimmer of realism, one might think. Perhaps the fever is passing.

Or put another, less dramatic way, cross-dressing men will be excluded from ladies’ toilets.

And yet:

You see, not being allowed to violate the intimate boundaries of other people – specifically, women – in order to exult in a deception, a sexual fantasy – is deemed both oppressive and terribly unfair. Indeed, “cruel and demonising.”

We’re then told, in ways both emphatic and unconvincing, that restoring normal proprieties to toilets and changing rooms is “actually dangerous for cis people as well.”

If a law keeping weird, cross-dressing men out of ladies’ toilets and changing rooms doesn’t sound obviously dangerous to women – unlike those aforementioned weird, cross-dressing men – some crumbs are scraped into a pile:

As you might imagine, the word many is doing some heavy lifting, to a degree one might call deceptive. However, we’re steered towards a handful of examples, spread over a decade, in which actual women were mistaken for cross-dressing men and questioned on their use of female spaces:

A slightly absurd situation, granted. Though readers will note the phrase a man twice her size – and perhaps ponder how that phrase might inform objections to men intruding in women’s intimate spaces. Including rape shelters, where, as we’ve seen, events much like a nightmare can rapidly unfold.

Because it turns out that when forcing brutalised women to share a space with mentally ill men, the result is not, amazingly, one long, girly pillow-fight.

Oh, and we mustn’t forget Mr Morgane Oger, mentioned here, who spends his time campaigning to financially cripple women’s rape shelters, on grounds that said shelters don’t also cater to cross-dressing men, i.e., men much like himself. A preoccupation that possibly tells us quite a bit about the kind of man he is.

The author then performs a bold rhetorical manoeuvre:

Female readers – sorry, “so-called ‘biological women'” – are welcome to say whether they would feel safer in toilets and changing rooms with or without the presence of weird, cross-dressing men who feel entitled to violate normal boundaries. And whether the overlap of cross-dressing and unsavoury phenomena is a thing one might wish to bear in mind.

Unsurprisingly, the piece includes many questions of a somewhat disingenuous nature. Among which,

And,

Regarding the latter, it turns out that human beings are actually quite good at determining the sex of other people, especially adults, and especially men. With studies suggesting an accuracy very close to 100%, even in restricted conditions – i.e., no visible hair, no make-up, no facial hair, ears hidden, no movement, etc.

The author of the quoted piece, Mr Sophie Molly, aka Sophie Sparkles, aka Euan Weddell, is, you’ll be shocked to hear, one of those weird, cross-dressing men. The ones that women and girls should welcome into their toilets and changing rooms. His activities include boasting of demanding needless bra fittings from lingerie department shop assistants, and sharing photos of himself wearing only a ball gag and improvised nipple-clamps.

So, hey, nothing to worry about, ladies.

At which point, readers may wish to consider some of the factors pointedly not mentioned by Mr Molly. Among which, the fact that the incidents he refers to, in which actual women have been challenged on their use of female spaces, are not only extremely rare, but have only occurred since cross-dressing men – men much like Mr Sophie Molly – have started barging into women’s spaces, heightening sensitivities. Which one might think has some bearing on the case he’s trying to make.

As commenter Ollq puts it,

Indeed.

Should any readers be blissfully unfamiliar with the boastful, territory-marking nature common to such boundary violations, a compendium of intrusions can be found here. Though I should add that the linked video, while strongly recommended, is rather vivid and not for the faint of heart.