HerFemaleness
Case in point. If there was no evidence that the individual in the toilet was trans or seeking to transition, there would be no offence in removing them from a female only area.
Yes, there would. There is no law that excludes men from ladies toilets or vice versa. It is difficult to imagine how the security guard might "remove" someone without committing an assault, or using g threatening behaviour.... ergo, a criminal offence.
Trans activists are telling women that we must always assume that a man in a woman's toilet or changing area is trans.
On the contrary, I (and I think most others) have been pointing out (repeatedly, every time you post this straw man argument) that any man can use ladies'loos. They don't need to put on a wig or a dress or change their name or get a GRC to do it. That is why all this fuss about the GRC is so ridiculous: it doesn't make a shred of difference to who can go into which loo!
We must not question his presence there and to do so is to commit an offence. Trans activists tell us that there isn't a clash between trans and women's rights, but here you have it spelled out to you in black and white.
I can see no clash, and so far no-one has been able to show me one. I don't want rapists or pervs in the loo that I'm using any more than you do -- particularly as (statistically) I am at more risk of violence from them than you are.