This is a long ramble as i try to sort my thoughts out. So apologies in advance.
I thought we'd managed to put much of this to bed in the 70's and 80's, when we asserted that how you dressed didn't make you any more or less a woman, and by extension that men wearing make-up were not trying g to be women nor, in the vernacular of the time "raging poofters". We tried not to stereotype.
It was well understood that men who wore stereotypical women's clothes - heels, dress, and pearls for instance - were TVs and did other either because they loved the feelings of the clothes, or liked the femininity.
So we had masculine women and feminine men. It seems that those labels were a much better description and attempting to use man/woman and apply it to the newly invented "gender identity" is a retrograde step.
And yes, I recognise that way back then there were people who wanted to, and succeeded, in living their life as the opposite sex.
It seems to me that the major issue here is the trans-activists who have messed things up for many people who were just quietly getting on with life and who were mostly accepted or not even noticed as different.
For me the contention is not "how do we treat trans-women" but the attempt to say that a trans-woman is a women.
By definition that statement has no validity. If you accept its premise then it becomes "women = women". It muddies any discussion if you try and insist there is no difference.
We don't say "disabled = not disabled". We explicitly recognise the difference and then try and make both lived experiences equally good. We also accept that they will never be the same and that, for most people, the world is just that bit tougher if you're differently constructed.
In that scenario we even solved the toilet problems by recognising the difference and providing extra or different facilities.
So I do feel that getting rid of that silly slogan would help a great deal.
But I also feel that we women are also at fault to some extent. As with everything recently the issue becomes polarised and there are people who vociferously assert "no men in women's spaces" without even considering the risk profile. I know some trans people that transitioned in their teens and go way beyond just "passing". They also like men not women and I'd consider them less threatening than many women i know. At the risk of stereotyping and being provocative we don't demand that a super-butch lesbian should be excluded from our spaces because we fear they'll be sexually predatory.
I know that toilets are not the only issue and that rape crisis centres and refuges and hospitals also represent areas where even an "innocent man" can cause major trauma.
That said, I do think the toilet issue is, to some extent overblown. After all, women go into men's toilets when the queues become extreme, and there is actually nothing to stop men going into a women's toilet. What we should have is not really a sanctuary but a way of flagging and immediately responding to bad behaviour by anyone in such a space. For that matter the whole population needs it, not just women in toilets.
I shall post this now. I haven't reread it so my cringe when I do. I just wanted to dump my thoughts if we're having a free discussion.
Feel free to pick holes in what I've written. My arguments can always be challenged.
Just avoid attributing motives to me or trotting out labels instead of disagreement.