19th century misogynistic and homophobic laws in the UK

The insistence that women must be accompanied by a man just to simply use the premises and make purchases between the hours of midnight to six am is preposterous. This video explaining the situation was made as late as 1982! In my mother's experience, this misogynistic behaviour was not only reserved for women eating out during those night time hours. The attitude problem stemming from it spread out to all times of the day. For instance, when she ate out for dinner, early evening after her working day and was living alone (during the 70's), the waiters left her waiting, and when the food did eventually arrive, it was in an inedible state. 

Why does the UK keep old laws? This one again dates back to the 19th century (Refreshment Houses Act 1860) just as does the Vagrancy Act criminalising homeless people. And it again leaves it open to conflation. In this case, all women on their own, without a man accompanying them, can be viewed as possible prostitutes so enabling discrimination against all women. While the law, I believe, does not explicitly require this conflation between banning any woman and banning prostitutes, this is what it amounted to in practice, in our era. 

It's also a highly illogical interpretation of the 1860 Act. Escorts are accompanied by a man. So presumably you're allowing them but not ordinary women who are not in the prostitution industry and are merely not accompanied by a man. Illogical doesn't even cover it!! Furthermore, it's homophobic and misogynistic because in this video she can't even bring along a female friend instead of a man. 

We again see this after homosexuality was partially decriminalised in 1967: Gay men were still harassed for their sexuality by conflating them with prostitutes eg pretending their flirting with strangers was soliciting under an anti-prostitution law when it was nothing of the sort and the men were not prostitutes. Whereas heterosexual men and women were not mislabelled as soliciting prostitutes when they flirted in public with strangers. 

This prejudicial misapplication of the law is similar to this ludicrous trans toilet ban. It not only affects trans people it affects all women who are then harassed if they don't look the way some bigoted far-righter thinks they should.