My point is that I’m not perfect because no one’s perfect. This isn’t an argument that targets me or my arguments specifically, it’s just a fact about human knowledge and reasoning: it’s flawed and can be misled. Acknowledging that doesn’t support your claim.
My point with the clowns is that a collection of news reports of incidents involving clown-generated violence don’t tell us much about how we should treat clowns. Similarly, a bunch of news reports involving men and bathrooms, or even transwomen and bathrooms, don’t tell us much about what the effect of permitting people to self-identify for the purpose of bathroom use will be. Your ‘source’ (which is a lobbying organization on behalf of policies that reflect Christian morality regardless of their empirical basis) includes reports of cis men entering women’s rooms for nefarious purposes. Cross-dressing was available to them, and they chose not to cross-dress. This doesn’t support a claim that permitting people who identify as women to use women’s restrooms will increase the incidence of bad behavior in women’s restrooms.
What you need is to compare rates across natural experiences like legal jurisdictions or the implementation of new laws or policies. The closest I found to support your position looked at the rate of incidents in Target following a company policy change around bathrooms. But the methodology here was pretty silly: counting up news reports of incidents in bathrooms. The problem is that news reporting isn’t an unbiased metric. Millions of crimes don’t make the news because editors and journalists don’t think their readers are interested them. Contrast that with a situation where a policy change by a national corporation occurs during a significant increase in the national conversation about trans bathroom use, and where you should expect an increase in reporting without an associated increase in incidents. (To their credit, they acknowledge the further issue that older news stories are harder to find, which creates the false impression that more such incidents occurred recently).
Supporting my position is reports from police chiefs, civil and human rights commissioners, and people who study sexual assault finding that state laws that protect trans use of bathrooms matching their gender identity have not led to an increase in sexual assaults in restrooms. The methodological problem here is just that there’s no consistent, stated methodology, it’s just asking people who should know of any increase and don’t. Some appeal to internal investigations and review of incident reports, which seem like a good approach but don’t appear to be published.
But that’s the kind of thing you need. Dozens of these policies have been rolled out over the past few decades. If, as you claim, they lead to a measurable increase in incidents, that increase should be discoverable using some sound empirical methodology. To my knowledge, no such increase has been found.