But, the issue remains that SOME males will use identifying as a woman to access vulnerable females. Either putting them at direct risk, or indirect risk.
Those men always have, and always will find a way to access vulnerable people.
So we just throw all protection and safeguarding out of the window and mop up the damage after the fact then?
Some men become teachers to get access to kids. Should we stop men becoming teachers because of a few bad ones?
Why do you think DBS checks were introduced?
Some men become famous to abuse others, should we cancel all famous men?
Should we just make it easier for them to do so?
Some men deliberately get with single parents to access kids, should we stop step families?
You've heard of Clare's Law? Shall we ditch that?
It is such a daft argument. It really is.
The daft and offensive argument is yours, which boils down to men will rape, sexually abuse and be violent anyway so let's just provide them unfettered access to potential victims.
Safeguarding is not saying all men are rapists or violent or paedophiles or sexual abusers, it works on the basis that some are and in order to prevent the harms they will cause all are subjected equally to the same measures and restrictions.
Women and girls have the right to safety, privacy, dignity and comfort, they have a right to single sex spaces and services that cater to their needs, wants and wishes.