Two things here.

First, I never said there was evidence of men pretending to be trans to abuse women in toilets In fact, the only article I've ever written on the issue of trans women in toilets argues in favour of trans people using the bathroom of the gender they identify as. The nuance on this issue is that bathrooms are not the same as prisons or rape crisis centres or even communal changing rooms. And that if they don’t pass as women, they shouldn’t be in the women’s bathroom or any other women’s space.

Second, I note your use of the word "systematically." I find this so frustrating. Yes, there's no evidence of a patriarchy wide plot to pretend to be trans women and infiltrate women's bathrooms. Is that really all that will give you pause? Because you're obviously and deliberately setting an impossible standard there. It's not subtle. There is, however, plenty of evidence of women being assaulted by male people (call them cis men or trans women, I don't care) dressed as women in women's spaces

Is there evidence of men "systematically" attacking trans women in men's bathrooms? Or is your concern about trans women using men's bathrooms based simply on the risk of it happening and the fact that it does. Again, this whole issue would be so easy to sort out if trans women directed an ounce of the compassion they show for other trans women towards women.

Of course autogynephilia is real. Take, again, just off the top of my head, Kayla Limieux. Or Johanna Clayton. Or Debbie Hayton. Or pretty much any transvestite. Are you telling me there's no difference between these people and people with genuine gender dysphoria? Because if you are, you're doing an immense disservice to people with gender dysphoria. Some men are sexually aroused imagining themselves as babies or dogs or dead bodies, but you think imagining themselves as women is a bridge too far?

I am listening. Honestly I am. But all I hear (in general, I'm not directing this solely at you) is word games, insults, lies, emotional manipulation, and claims that things are, for undisclosed reasons, "problematic." Why is Buck Angel problematic? Because you disagree with him? Why is my article problematic? Because every single word in it wasn't wholly affirming? How am I "harming" trans people? What is the harm? How is it connected to my article?

"Problematic" is meaningless. It cannot be persuasive or illuminating. Certainly not to a complete stranger. If you want me to listen (and hand on heart, I want to listen), say something meaningful and not obviously false. Show that you've thought about this issue from any perspective other than your own.