Thank you: Debbie Hayton in the Mail

I think it is a myth that ‘transsexuals’ have been rubbing along just fine with women all this time. Jan Morris, for example, is held up as an exemplar of this just-fine-ness, and it turned out that the rubbing along was painful, abrasive and unwelcome with the women in his life.

I would say it was a case of ‘too polite to say anything’ or ‘not wanting to be rude’ not ‘rubbing along just fine’.

There are useful accounts from all kinds of people who are addicts, abusers, and psychopaths, for example.

But it's mostly one side that has the public coverage that is largely sympathetic to them. And through dramas, books, and popular understanding, we're largely acclimated to the idea that they are in the grip of a disease (certainly true for addiction) and cannot be responsible for their actions.

That's a useful idea for the them all. Psychopaths are retained at work despite their impact on people's careers. Look at how difficult it is for victims of abusers to speak up, far less leave their abusers (all the desperate threads on MN protesting, "But I love him…) and the chaos that addictions bring to family (the more chaos, the more egregious the behaviour, the more it proves how serious the addiction is).

We don't hear enough from families and victims. All the decades of research, and we still don't have an evidence-base that would guide families on assessing the course of action that would work best for them or the likelihood of recovery for the abuser/addict and just how long it might take and the implications for other people's life chances and resources.

Public understanding and sympathy is largely skewed to one side, shaping a narrative that harms others and even normalises substance over-use, abusive behaviour etc.

Really agree with this

The insistence on full compliance and ideology forced many feminists to push back to the detriment of many transsexuals who were just getting along in peace.

I think the non binary crowd are now doing even further damage with their utter rubbish about using them/they and making a whole belief system out of just wanting to be special. It’s so painful and just causes disagreement and irritation.

It may fall under one of those things that are so obvious nobody mentions them.

Like the fact humans have two sexes and sex is immutable. We had to get that written into law as a protected belief!

I would imagine teachers are forbidden from sexual behaviour and acting out fetishes at work.

I can’t think off the top of my head, but is this the only sexually driven behaviour, which is allowed at schools?

With the idea of ‘whole self to work’ - are there other things? I know that a guy felt entitled to wear fetish rubber under his work clothes, and although he was driven to do it for the same reason as cross-dressers, he still hid the rubber under his work clothes, so he wasn’t entirely overt. There are probably a number of transvestite men who wear women’s underwear under their work clothes too, but I don’t this open and overt thing of wearing the gear openly, being addressed by the name associated with their kink persona, etc, is really done in the workplace is it? Especially in schools.

It still amazes me that people say they don't believe men can become women so will use sex based pronouns. But when a man says he gets a sexual thrill out of people thinking he's a woman, the same people say they will call him 'she' as he's being honest!
The same man who created guidelines for schools allowing men and boys to invade women and girl's spaces, who later says he realises that's wrong, but has never done anything to remove the guidelines and still uses women's spaces!
A man who says he regrets transitioning but again continues to wear inappropriate outfits and still expects students to refer to him as 'Miss'!

Abusive men can only be abusive by showing everyone a reasonable side!

It might, but how are schools going to explain to pupils and parents that a teacher will now have a female name because he has a sexual fetish and that pupils must play along?

It's a question rising across several threads this morning, on various topics, somewhat like 'if a tree falls in the woods and no one is there, does it make a noise'.

Is it the case that a transition can happen without breaking other people's boundaries? And would it be a sufficiently satisfying and need meeting experience if it did not involve breaking other people's boundaries?

Because the sticking point is always this. Not to have freedoms to do things themselves - use third spaces, leave a family and transition privately having permitted the ex partner an escape through annulment, be honest with sexual partners about physical reality - but the freedom to break other people's boundaries and have those other people told, they cannot escape, they are subordinate to the transitioning person's wishes and interests, in ways often rather similar to coercive control. Which makes it look like it's almost as if not only that other people's feelings have to be labelled as less important and subordinated, but that other people's inevitable emotional responses to this are part of the necessary experience.

Thanks for that. Referencing that and @Datun who mentioned "mirroring"

Did any of you notice Stephanie's shoes?

That does make for very upsetting reading but the information is useful. One thing the men all have in common is trapping a woman in the relationship before confronting them with non-negotiable cross dressing. And if the women object, the men employ coercive control until they get their way. Also, women’s boundaries (those of their wives and of women at large) are trampled over by these men with triumphant glee. My heart breaks for the women and children having to deal with these men in their families.

TempestTost

My comment wasn't general. It was specific in response to the idea that it is Debbie who has shifted the Overton window in understanding AGP.

Which I disagree with. Because I don't believe that's his intention. You can tell from the btl comments. none of them are any nearer to understanding what it really is. Just that he's selfish towards his wife and family.

If anyone has promoted understanding of what AGP actually is it's women's groups.

There isn't anyone else out there doing it.

For instance, since Musk lifted the censorship on Twitter, there is barely a commenter about it, who isn't au fait with its impact.

Transwidows have had to talk to politicians about the spousal veto, etc, all of it. This is why we had Scottish politicians talking about 'erotic cross dressers'.

I agree most of the general population won't know about it, though. my point was, they won't be learning it from Debbie Hayton.

Just came across this on Twitter/X.

Very apposite.

Very difficult reading.

https://twitter.com/hatpinwoman/status/1752066291630735476

The vast majority of people are not reading MN. And of those who do many are not reading on that particular subject. Go out in the street and ask 100 people what it means, using either the acronym or word. Not many will know what you are talking about.

Older people will have known about fetishistic cross-dressing, but often have not connected it to gender ideology. Which seems odd, but it is startling how much many adults "forget" when a new thing comes along. And many younger people do not know about it.

I don't expect people to learn all the "realities" from DH or anyone else, why would I? No account from individuals, whatever their relation to the discussion, can offer that.

Anyone who wants to understand any psychological phenomena will need to look at it from different perspectives, including the ones of the people affected. That doesn't mean assuming their insight is clear nor necessarily that they are being honest.

There are useful accounts from all kinds of people who are addicts, abusers, and psychopaths, for example. Others that are less useful, but I am not sure why you think fetishism would fall entirely on one side of that.

I'm just trying to think of all the groups who either started here, or whose members are or were mumsnetters.

Fairplay for women
Let women speak (Posie Parker)
Sex Matters
Man Friday
Safe Schools alliance
Children of transitioners

I'm sure there are loads more.

Every single one of those women knows exactly what AGP is, what it means, and how they and trans widows are trying to combat its effects, including talking to law makers.

None of them don't get it. (Yes I know there are far too many negatives in that, but it expresses what I want to say!)

People have heard of fetishistic cross dressing, transvestitism, etc.

There's even a joke. What's the difference between a transvestite and an autogynephile? - about two years.

They may not have heard of autogynephilia specifically, but the general concept is fairly commonplace.

But the issue is they're still very unlikely to hear about the realities of it from Hayton. In terms of the Overton window. In fact, it's my opinion that Hayton is wanting to shift the Overton window in the opposite direction.

Mumsnet has something like 10 or 12 million unique uses per month. Many of the politically motivated cg women's groups either started on mumsnet or many of their members were or are members here too.

And it's monitored by journalists all the time.

There's absolutely no doubt that as a website, the women here have been responsible for disseminating information about AGP. And that mostly originates with the transwidows.

Thread about recent-ish Sarah Pedersen's paper (Pedersen joined it):

Pedersen, S. (2022). ‘They've got an absolute army of women behind them’: The Formation of a Women's Cooperative Constellation in Contemporary Scotland. Scottish affairs, 31(1), 1-20.
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4478528-theyve-got-an-absolute-army-behind-them-womens-cooperative-constellation-in-Scotland

I think it's a little naive to think many people have learned about AGP from transwidows. Most people haven't heard about it at all, still. A few more have heard it and that it is a myth.

I see Hayton as very similar to accounts by addicts, who, by the by, are also quite often extremely selfish, manipulative, lacking in personal insight, and inclined to self-deception.

It's still useful for many reasons to hear their accounts. And accounts of other observers, both people close to them, who can of course have their own biases, and people who are observing from a therapeutic background, and scientific sources, can contribute to building a picture.

No one is required to read any of it if they don't want to.

I found it strange that he talks about who people would refer to “the tall man with the grey hair” or “the tall woman”. In most cases, you could just say, “the transvestite in the corner” and everyone would know exactly who you were referring to - clocking him instantly. It seems a bit disingenuous that. Also about him admitting the driver to look like a woman is a sexual one and how he prefers his body this way, it seems slightly antisocial- to live a sexually driven preference in public - especially working at a school.

I can see my reading list is going to expand somewhat.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0C129WKDD?tag=mumsnet&ascsubtag=mnforum-21

Thanks arabella see i know fuck all

https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/9781839094712

😁

Othering myself to say what i hope is meaningful. This is a very significant thread for me, because it reflects the experiences and feelings of the original vanguard of the GC movement.

We newcomers arrive from wherever, and question things or seem to the vanguard to fail to understand the history of some of the players that rightly piss them off.

But until recently none of this was really in the public domain and for newcomers some of the history, the vanguards knowledge is untraceable, without spending endless hours….

As is some of the code words our sisters use, to not be deleted. To keep their efforts going, to educate, to inform. Providing me with relevant links.

I am slowly working code words out, as part of my journey It’s bad that this was a method of communication, that was required. And to some extent still is.

Although it became fun with the Christmas special “Scraper the Rossers are coming”

I also think this board is now attracting some left females such as myself. I thought Joyce was very salient about GC and our bedfellows. GC is a broad church it must be focussed on its objectives, women’s rights, and not worry about, left, right, centre allegiances.

I have not had the time to track this board or how it was conceived but it is historically important, and a book ought to be written about it when we have won (or lost) oh and the key players.

I was involved in the miners strike and the similarities of where one stands in history are very familiar to I me.

PS I have committed to read DH book so i am going to need a GC helmet and radio contact.

All the very best to all of you xx

Pratchett described it so well (and apposite in this case).

Any explanation of an observed phenomenon which, while not 100% scientifically accurate, is simple enough, and just accurate enough, to convey the beginnings of understanding to anyone who is new to the subject. There is always time to fill them in on the fine detail further down the road. This describes the sort of axioms we tell young children when they are beginning to get to grips with science.
"A “lie-to-children” is a statement which is false, but which nevertheless leads the child’s mind towards a more accurate explanation, one that the child will only be able to appreciate if it has been primed with the lie."
"Yes, you needed to understand that” they are told, “so that now we can tell you why it isn’t exactly true”(The Science of Discworld, Ebury Press edition, quotes from pp 41-42)
There are many well known lies-to-children including that electrons orbit the nucleus like a little solar system, DNA looks like a spiral ladder and Albert Einstein's hair having something to do with his discovering the theory of relativity.

It can be so difficult to unlearn lies…