Yes of course women here do.
The whole point is that there is pressure, constantly, to indulge the wishes of these men to be in women's spaces, where women are in a state of undress, vulnerability or carrying out intimate actions. This is sold as an entirely innocent thing across the entire group of such men.
As the article says, it is widely evidenced and undeniable that the sexual thrill of this is enormous and the main cause of why many men who dress as women wish to be in those spaces. Often linked to an obvious and gleeful enjoyment of intimidation, harassment, exhibitionism and otherwise adding the sexually exciting emotional aspects to the physical ones of enacting being a woman in a woman's space, and of being in the taboo space where, crudely, they're among women with their knickers down who are uncomfortable and can't say no. Like that bastard journalist who used to share his 'journey' in the Guardian and that hideous article of how he liked to target young women assistants to help him buy lingerie to enjoy their discomfort, and how he liked to give them a smile as he paid that said - in his words - 'I know you're not enjoying this, but I am'. It's sexual abuse.
It then follows that there is no way to separate these men from the Nigels of other women in deciding who gets to access women's spaces. And I have to say, those women often end up further down the line shocked to realise that yes, it was sexual for those men too.
So the question then is - to what extent do people believe it is right and acceptable to permit these men to use and abuse these women in women's spaces for sexual gratification? And how very sexist one would have to be to think that men have 'needs' and a right of access to women's bodies to meet those 'needs' that women should not be allowed to refuse?
And what do we then do with the women who won't or can't make the price of their access to spaces and resources in essence, providing the use of their body to men, rather dodgy men who do not respect women's consent and boundaries and wish to use those women as props in their personal sex life? Do we just expect them to go without until they submit?
And yes, it is using women's bodies. It is not the space, it is the women in the space, and no other part of the woman but her body is of any interest to a man who dresses as a woman and wishes to be in a women's space. Her mind, feelings (although her fear, distress or anger might be quite exciting to some), consent, views, identity, it's all wholly irrelevant. It is about her being physically there being a biological woman, it's about the validation her body provides emotionally, it's about her bodily functions and the experience of being present with them, it is about being permitted access in the way that other men aren't. How much is it ok to let men use women's bodies in this way, against their consent and their equality? Particularly as we watch Philipson try to gerrymander the law to get these men back into women's spaces?
Malcolm also nails it that misogyny, actual real serious and fundamental misogyny is at the root of all this, from those men - even the nice ones - and from the women supporting it.