Your questions are all to the same end “under what circumstances can we unilaterally exclude” not “How do we create compassionate, dynamic rules and boundaries that service more people”?

All of it assumes risk to cis women. In the shelter situation did or would anyone ask if those women would react to trans women in the same way they would a cis man? Do you think a trans woman would not be compassionate and understanding in those circumstances? Trans people are four times more likely to be the victims of intimate violence ALSO predominantly enacted by cis men. Is it really so hard to assume in circumstances of shared space they would not have compassion for a scared cis woman or be want to be placed in that situation where she’ll be reacted to in a way that triggers the trans woman’s gender dysphoria? Why in this circumstances would services NOT be talking to everyone involved and reaching a reasonable concensus? Why are the assumptions of the situation posed from the outset hinging entirely on “biology” alone?

In some circumstances in the past I have been approached by women and children in trouble because I am visibly queer.

These don’t need be “interrogations” they can be questions, asked compassionately with a mind to peace that takes into consideration the needs of everyone involved. But that’s not what is happening here.