If you think this was about "silencing" transwomen you understood the exact opposite of the point that was being made.
I don't want to appropriate Garlic's horrific experience to make the argument so I'll go back to my point from my orginal post.
You were at that point having fun with the idea that women cannot always tell immediately (probably true, I suspect I don't always notice with a passing glance, although over time and contact that changes) and the well worn trope that apparently we've had trans women all round us forever and never noticed.
My point was that deceiving women is not harmless and "hey, we violated your boundaries for ages and you never noticed so why worry about us now?" is not the killer argument you seem to think it is.
Women and girls (original female meaning) grow up as prey. We grow up knowing we are to many men fair game, that taking from us something we would not willingly consent to by lying, deceiving, coercion, emotional blackmail, negging, future faking, sneaky voyeurism, sharing private photos to friends and sex tapes to porn sites is basically considered no foul no crime if it's in pursuit of a man's orgasm. The French case is not an abberation to women, it's just the natural result of men's belief our boundaries are there to be cicrumvented.
And when we complain society tells us it's not his fault, of course he's going to try it on, it's our own fault because we should have known better, been smarter, we shouldn't have been stupid enough to trust someone who swore up and down we could trust him, who told us how much we hurt him with our reticence and lack of trust, who made it a test of our love and good faith to believe his lies.
That's the context that you come into when you try to tell women if we don't find out then it doesn't matter.