Debbie and Stephanie Hayton interview transcript

It’s been noted on the Jane Fae thread that Fae also told their child they were transitioning during an exam period. Seems to be a thing.

That was a hard read.

It struck a chord with me that at one point, Stephanie wanted to end the marriage and Debbie said “Actually NO, I don’t want it to end.”

That happened to me once, and I felt so much pressure to continue the relationship. And I didn’t have decades of emotional investment in the person, let alone three kids to think about.

It’s kind of weird to me that in “coming out” as a woman, someone would act selfishly, with seemingly little regard for others, including their own children.

Along with ironing and bread making, prioritising your children’s needs over your own has traditionally been expected of women.

Possibly at a slight tangent, but all this desperation to "come out" as AGP after years of torment at hiding their true selves...well, doesn't it position a paraphilia as an identity akin to being gay and in the closet?

How hard is it to keep a sexual fetish to yourself? Genuine question.

Very much agree RedToothBrush

I doubt anyone with any form of paraphilia or fetish chose to have those sexual orientations either, but everyone has the same choice and responsibility of not inflicting unwanted, unwelcomed and unpleasant sexual behaviour on others, and of not involving non consenting participants in their sexual expression and experiences.

The case of trans windows is uniquely awful. I would not wish that on anyone but neither would I wish AGP on anyone. Neither side had much choice

When we think of sexual behaviour of any kind and identity that springs from that, it always remains the case that no means no and that other people who do not wish to be party to it are protected in law.

Except for transwidows apparently. They have to suck up someone else sexual behaviour and identity issues because to do differently is 'bigoted' or somehow 'unsupportive'.

This double standard is fucking appalling.

This is why AGP needs to be identified and named as sexual behaviour not just an identity because of the impact it has on those in close relationships with those with this sexual behaviour.

It is not a neutral issue which has no impact.

We know the impact on wives - there is a significant impact on their mental health. And we know that this can affect children too. There is more than one well known AGP who has confessed to stealing their daughters clothing. Psychologically this has to have an impact. And thats without the narcissism.

I find it wholly upsetting that AGP behaviour is minimised and is framed as something that women just have to put up with.

No. These men, no matter what their urges, must be held responsible and accountable for their actions.

Otherwise we leave the door open for other sexual identities and behaviours being something we just have to put up with too and can no say no to because these men are unable to control themselves.

No means no.

AI77 The case of trans windows is uniquely awful. I would not wish that on anyone but neither would I wish AGP on anyone. Neither side had much choice

AI77 There is a massive difference that you seem to be ignoring. Trans widows are innocent bystanders, they are the side that has not done anything, it is something that is being forced onto them.

reposting my deleted comment from 13:39:57 which quoted part of a deleted post:

The idea that male abuse of women/control pattern behaviours are solely caused by their testicles is naive at best and rather surprising to see posted on FWR during #16daysofaction

thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3452784-Coercive-Control-a-need-for-better-awareness

The lesbians in my life have been a very positive influence, and not at all like men.

I’m sorry, but no, there were never any arguments that lesbians were sexual predators and therefore shouldn’t be allowed free access to women’s spaces. That’s such a huge red flag lie. This assertion is really only made by people who aren’t old enough to remember what the time of section 28 was like, or people who use it disingenuously to try and pretend that men in women’s spaces are safe.

There is no way to distinguish the 'getting on quietly with my own life transexual from the transgender woman fantasising about smacking women with baseball bats. And I appreciate that the people with bats have ruined things for the nice quiet ones but that is not women's problem to solve.*

Abusive / controlling men (whatever their gender identity may be) are not distinguishable by the demeanor that they present to the world. Men who choose to abuse children and women often go to great lengths in order that they pass unnoticed within their community, job and social circle. Its part of the pattern of abuse / control.

We really have got back to "no means no", No men in women's spaces.

I find it interesting that only one person has done the thought experiment of where they'd like to be imprisoned were they to have a catastrophic lapse of judgment.

As far as I can tell all the women here are either empathising with women in prison or with Hayton's hypothetical example.

That's how women work out what they think is fair, by using empathy for others.

Unfortunately it's something used by manipulative men to get women on their side.

I feel it bears repeating: no men in women's spaces. That's the boundary we need until everyone gets the message.

It's also a horrible sleight of hand to say oh come on, not all men are predators, whilst simultaneously using the fact that an awful lot of them are, to force women into a position they don't want to be in

Somehow the predatory nature of men is then given credibility when males decide they will be unsafe amongst other males..

Which is it?

It's also a horrible sleight of hand to say oh come on, not all men are predators, whilst simultaneously using the fact that an awful lot of them are, to force women into a position they don't want to be in.

There is not a woman alive who hasn't encountered a man who is either predatory, or sexist, misogynistic, intimidatory, domineering, disrespectful, bullying, etc. Almost every woman will have encountered a man who is one or some of those things.

To pretend it doesn't exist is lying.

To then utterly disregard what women are saying, (even in the teeth of them receiving rape threats, threats of violence, doxing, etc,) and claim that actually, no, they can't just say no, tells me, at least, that irrespective of how many times you assert that men are not a threat, you're using the fact that they are, as leverage.

1. Debbie, you don’t have any female sex characteristics. None. Nadda. Zip. Zero.

2. In what bizzaro world do you think prisons have “options”? It’s fucking prison.

3. Just because a man has been convicted of a minor, non sexual crime doesn’t mean he isn’t a danger to women. It just means he hasn’t been caught.

I can attest that the number of times my mother (who as I have discussed before, felt very strongly about the local council employing male cleaners for women's toilets) warned me to look out for 'predatory lesbians' in the toilet as a child was absolutely zero.

If she'd thought it was a thing I would have been told about it.

Similar arguments about safety were used about gay men and lesbians using public toilets only a few decades ago, people worried about the dangerous sexual predators hiding in plain sight.

Oh bollocks did they.

Gay men encountered vile jokes and prejudice about backs to the wall and worse, and plenty have been beaten up in toilets or because of a man feel threatened, or in other ways failing toxic masculinity policing itself. That's what that was. Straight men have never gone in fear and trembling of a gay man assaulting them; plenty of gay men did though.

Women have been used to butch and masculine presenting women since the 1920s, and no, there's never been the fear of the predatory lesbian.

No. Your male enabling is falling on deaf ears. If you want to give up, you give up. I'm not.

Similar arguments about safety were used about gay men and lesbians using public toilets only a few decades ago, people worried about the dangerous sexual predators hiding in plain sight.

I have never made those arguments, and since these boards are visited by quite a few lesbians, I doubt they have either.

And, of course, unless you are saying that gay men and lesbians commit 98% of all sexually violent crime, then so what?

Using a prejudicial, and clearly irrational argument from the past to back up your argument now, probably isn't the most logical premise i've ever seen.

Similar arguments about safety were used about gay men and lesbians using public toilets only a few decades ago, people worried about the dangerous sexual predators hiding in plain sight.

Were those arguments made, tho?
Why would they be? - No-one was going to start using toilets that they hadn't previously used, so what's the problem?

[quote Al77]@Datun That is exactly what I am saying. Transexual women have been sharing my toilet spaces for my entire adult life. I have met them in clubs, pubs , public toilets and work toilets. This is not new. As far as I can tell the current legislation backs this up, perhaps I am wrong on this and maybe it has been illegal for them to access toilets all along but I don't think so and they have been. I don't think it is an affront to anyones dignity or safety.

"We do not agree to men in our spaces. And whether you feel that is acceptable or not, or whether you understand that or not, is irrelevant.The answer is no. Because they are our spaces. Ours to gate keep. Not Debbie's, or India's, or Tara's, or Jan's."

I agree they should be, but I think you underestimate how far this ideology has spread and just repeating the mantra is the same as a TRA repeating TWAW. Standing guard at a gate when someone has just removed the boundary fence.[/quote]
I did not underestimate it. But I'm under absolutely no obligation to accommodate it.

There are no laws over who uses which toilet, but there are customs and protocols. At the moment, women are becoming frightened to object to a man, any man, in those toilets. Hence events like that involving Katie Dolatowski. These customs and protocols need to reflect what women want. Not what men want them to want

It's wrong.

The solution is patently a third space. There is no rational objection to that.

Your solution is unworkable. No one can tell whether a man is pre-op, post op, trans or otherwise.

But the point is, it's completely irrelevant. Just as if every man dyed their hair, and no one can tell the true colour of their hair, it would be equally immaterial. It's got nothing to do with nothing.

The sex of the individual is the issue, not the individual's own personal, internal, unknowable and irrelevant attitude to it.

The reason this is so hard to grasp is sexism. All these decisions, according to you, and Debbie, are dependent upon what the man wants.

You're just finding ways to make women agree.

And, funnily enough, and surprising to no one here, there are any number of other transwomen who are doing exactly the same, just using criteria that applies to them, and not someone like Debbie.

Do you think your solution is unique? It's not. It's identical to every other transwoman's solution.

(It's also a red herring. Toilets can be solved, in a heartbeat, with a third space.)

I think you underestimate how far this ideology has spread

I feel confident that Datun is very well appraised.

For those more recently aware of the issues, many people have found this thread useful:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me

That is exactly what I am saying. Transexual women have been sharing my toilet spaces for my entire adult life. I have met them in clubs, pubs , public toilets and work toilets. This is not new. As far as I can tell the current legislation backs this up, perhaps I am wrong on this and maybe it has been illegal for them to access toilets all along but I don't think so and they have been. I don't think it is an affront to anyones dignity or safety.

So, what, we should ignore the Katie Dolatowskis of this world and shrug their victims off as unfortunate incidents when the benign 'eunuch' (your word) turns out to be a predator?
Seriously, what are you saying?

I think you underestimate how far this ideology has spread

Are you trying to say it's too late to do anything about it?

Usually we're accused of 'scaremongering'. It's a change to be told that we're underestimating the spread of this ideology.

And the point about should males who have had surgery and hormones be accepted in female toilets.

I'd seen pictures of Debbie Hayton on their profile. When I first saw a full length picture of Debbie I was jolted with shock because they were so obviously male, just in their body shape and their posture. If someone like that came into the toilets I was in I'd panic.