I don't quite understand--did you mean that the women who are safe in female-only spaces don't need to be in those spaces to be safe? They're safe anyway?

Or that they are, in fact, safer in those spaces, but their safety won't be compromised by any proposed changes?

Either way, the phrasing you used before didn't suggest either of these things to me. It suggested something else, as I said, which doesn't deliver a solid argument.

(Also--absence of evidence isn't (conclusive) evidence of absence. Maybe you mean, "The evidence we have so far indicates that rates of sexual violence in bathrooms is not impacted by whether there are transgender-friendly bathroom policies in place."? This is correct (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Brian-Barnett-5/publication/326547236_The_Transgender_Bathroom_Debate_at_the_Intersection_of_Politics_Law_Ethics_and_Science/links/5d00389ea6fdccd13093ef6b/The-Transgender-Bathroom-Debate-at-the-Intersection-of-Politics-Law-Ethics-and-Science.pdf), though it would need to be re-examined now and then to see if it remains robust to societal changes.)

(Note that access to an appropriate bathroom is very important for the safety of trans individuals. This is well-documented, but a separate point.)