Janice Turner interview with Debbie Hayton in the Times

Same.

there are so many many posts on MN of women collapsing under the mental load

Yet men like Hayton are using it as a costume to feel sexy, and then make a joke of it.

“ It does look as if the patient years of explaining and explaining that yes, using female spaces does cause harm has finally and eventually sunk in and he's moved on a step, but that has taken frigging years. And doesn't the article make clear how it was his self reflection and his decision and his deep thought and conclusions and isn't he wonderful - as opposed to the woman centric view of mate, wtf are you doing?”

Precisely, and I’d see it more as “this lot over here are making all of us look bad, so I’m going to set myself apart from them”.

Also, what Datun said about changing the story to rewrite the points that have caused criticism / scepticism / disbelief in previous story telling attempts.

And the real give away - that's funny to him. A joke.

Yes. It's the throw away bits that give away the resounding misogyny and dehumanising of women and their lives behind the carefully presented main course. Which tbh is quite typically framed as stunning and brave.

I think Tinsel has talked before about the frustration of all the attention and celebration for transitioning and then all the attention and celebration for detransioning... wtf do women come in to all this performance and drama? You start to wonder about whether this is just curtains up on a brand new stage for the next evolution of the show.

Stuck celibate in a marriage she didn't sign on for.

And the person Debbie is in lust and in love with is himself. He's walking around talking about his love affair, putting it in the papers, and satisfying his sexual needs by presenting as a woman.

He might technically be celibate, but he's still having a comprehensive and public sex life.

Hayton jokes that, alas for wives, “living as a woman” doesn’t involve doing more chores.”

even with all the many many issues about TW, it’s throw away remarks like that that give me the absolute rage!

there are so many many posts on MN of women collapsing under the mental load of either doing everything or doing the organising so everything gets done, looking after everyone else but themselves

you can tell TW are so very definitely men because there’s no way they want to shoulder any of the grunt work of being a woman. Not for them the endless mental load and organising! Nope far too busy thinking about themselves which is just male behaviour 10 fucking 1!

But reading that, all I can see is me, me, me, me, me, me, me. That absolute self obsession, the absolute inner focus at all times and everything and everyone else being just grist to that mill. His poor wife. Stuck celibate in a marriage she didn't sign on for

I totally agree which is why I think people here are being a bit hard on JT over this article. It's all sunlight - yes, this is a different and more subtle kind of sunlight to the trans women in female sports/ employment tribunals etc but it is sunlight nonetheless.

Thank you for sharing that article.

Yes, I get the use of someone (who is allowed, being a man) to put the concept to AGP and the addiction terms/comparisons into the public consciousness, and yes we've all been through the stage of realising 'look, even some TQ people are unwelcomed and horribly treated by the lobby that claims to be the voice of them' which is when you get that this is not a movement that actually cares about anyone or anything that is not a useful tool to their agenda. Despite all the emotive rhetoric. That too has its uses. (Later you see how they treat detransitioning kids and your hair stands on end.)

But reading that, all I can see is me, me, me, me, me, me, me. That absolute self obsession, the absolute inner focus at all times and everything and everyone else being just grist to that mill. His poor wife. Stuck celibate in a marriage she didn't sign on for. And then I wonder what all this that looks like courage and resilience to be unpopular and stand up and say the unwanted things is really serving. Except a bit more me.

It does look as if the patient years of explaining and explaining that yes, using female spaces does cause harm has finally and eventually sunk in and he's moved on a step, but that has taken frigging years. And doesn't the article make clear how it was his self reflection and his decision and his deep thought and conclusions and isn't he wonderful - as opposed to the woman centric view of mate, wtf are you doing?

So very very sick of women being nothing but the props in the never ending drama of the lives of males with psychological and behavioural issues.

Are you honestly sure you want to know?

Same here,I've got an oven to clean.

Yes it's revealing.

She is under the impression that, as long as you don't feel 'passive', then you're not being coercive controlled.

Yet he's wearing the gloves, but doesn't wash up, and she's sad, but as long as he's happy it's fine.

Trans issues were not in the mainstream then,” she tells me. “And my priority was our three children, then aged nine to thirteen.” The couple agreed Hayton should not transition yet, just grow longer hair.”

That's not what quite what the other article said. The other article said Hayton said okay I won't transition if only I can grow my hair long.

And then said he wouldn't tell anyone, but three months after he told the children, he told everyone. Hardly prioritising the children if he could only wait three months before making it public.

Can he not keep his story straight for five minutes, or is he using the negative comments after one article, to tweak the next.

@OldCrone yes true that is something of a call back. I just find that the article is played straight and yet the photo implies irony. I think perhaps the "joke" is an irony which is never explored. Pity.

You're right that I don't have that experience and I'm sorry to hear of yours.

I agree that those things wouldn't be tolerated on this board, but the Times isn't this board. We are free to disagree/agree as we see fit with what they publish. Fwiw I don't have much time for Hayton who I think flip flops as the wind blows. But I just don't think it's fair to say that Janice Turner has gone full Owen Jones on this.

The only comment relative to that picture was this:

Hayton jokes that, alas for wives, “living as a woman” doesn’t involve doing more chores.

So what are the gloves for?

I don't blame Janice Turner for being taken in.

A lot of people appear to have the same reaction to Hayton. I hope she reads the comments about him here, and realises, though.

And without the testosterone in your body, you just can’t be bothered.

lol. How does that work, then? What's the point of parading your fetish in public, if there's no sexual arousal?

Plus the washing-up gloves? Come on.

Debbie must be laughing up his lavender scented sleeve.

@Pigeon851 as someone who came home to find their partner in my underwear I will draw the hardest of boundaries.
Janice is a seasoned enough journalist she wouldn't have a sub-editor re-writing what are important bits of her article. She could've followed suit from the Guardian writer the other week in the article re Lia Thomas and avoided pronouns altogether. But in calling Hayton a she, Stephanie being a side-note, has slapped us in the face.
It really is time to draw very hard boundaries. This 'being nice' has got us in to trouble.

(And I thought this was supposed to be a feminist board, not somewhere where it's perhaps ok to call an AGP a she and therefore satisfy his sexual fetishes).

Actually the thing about the picture that I find odd was that it said so much but was just there with no comment. It reminded me of that TV piece about water companies and the man with the breast pump. Or a reference to sort of 1950s housewives. Or a sexual fetish reference.

I know! I suppose we should be grateful they didn't give him a pinny and duster.

Yes @Pigeon851 the picture! What the hell was that? Imagine that photo shoot...

Is it possible Janice wrote 1500 words on “eeezaman!” And a subeditor tweaked it because of an agreement with DH’s publisher?

she’s been brilliant on gender so this seems a bit odd.

Interesting article - thanks for sharing. I do think it's a bit unfair to say that Janice Turner has been captured and is now in the same category as OJ - come on. She's been great and doesn't have to write things that people on here exclusively agree with. Yes it's broadly sympathetic to Hayton but there's no way that article would appear in the Guardian.

I'm mostly irritated by the pic of him in washing up gloves tbh.

I think Janice Turner is going to reverse the trend of the great writers Suzanne Moore and Julie Burchill and move across to the Guardian.
After this completely distasteful and tone-deaf piece of writing she truly does belong with Owen Jones.

All the puff pieces in the world and DH still comes across as a selfish lying arsehole in every one.

Curious that the Haytons chose to relocate to Bristol, that bastion of all things trans.

Stephanie, feisty and tough, balks at the idea she is a passive victim, a “trans widow”. “I feel sad at times, but I’m at peace and Debbie is so much happier.”

So long as Debbie is happier, eh?

I understand not wanting to think of oneself as a victim. But in my experience victims are often enormously tough. That implied suggestion that women can avoid abuse by being 'feisty' is quite mistaken and damaging - and a subtle form of victim blaming.

Thanks for sharing, that was an interesting read, lots I didn't know.

I don't mind what pronouns Janice Turner uses, I just change them in my head as I read.

And the fact that the narrative presented is not complete doesn't bother me. It's an article promoting a memoir so I expect that. I haven't read the comments below it so can't really reflect on that.