And another gem of succinct fact :
I will make this concrete, and no doubt Professor Norrie will think it unkind of me to do so. But there is a range of possible reasons why a man dressed in women’s clothes may be in the ladies’. He may be a man who genuinely believes himself to be a woman in his inner essence, and wants to pee, and feels uncomfortable using the gents’, and means no harm to anyone. That’s the least bad possibility, but even so he is betraying a disquieting contempt for women’s boundaries, and a willingness to prioritise his own comfort over the comfort and privacy of the female users of the space. But there are other possibilities. He may be a fetishist. He may be a rapist in search of a victim. He may be there to place hidden cameras to spy on women in a state of undress. He may be there to enjoy a sense of power that violating women’s boundaries gives him. The point is that we can’t tell at a glance which of these things he is: what we see is a man.
And when it's just a case of 'but you shouldn't say/notice that because 'unkind' to the man' -
I wholly agree, the only way this can be argued at all is from a standpoint of utter contempt for women and anything they may say. It is misogyny. It cares about nothing but enforcing the men's right to use women and silence them to ensure it.
Going rather well with the picture of the men in a woman's space, enjoying the fantasy of enacting violently battering a woman. For- well. The sin of being a woman. Nuff said.