Stock leaving x, what have I missed?

It's useful that Hayton is open about his autogynephilia but that's even more reason to not call him "she" or "her".

To be honest he creeps me out and I am surprised that so many purportedly gender critical feminists fawn over him.

I agree with your statement but DH keeps being invited to major GC events (or turns up anyway) and is often involved in media debates (rather than a woman) as the designated GC person.

What I’m trying to say is that Hayton is a source of discord in the GC movement because Hayton’s beliefs are not gender critical; Hayton believes that 'true trans' should be allowed to claim womanhood. This discord caused by Hayton attaching onto the GC movement hasn’t in any way damaged his ability to make a living from journalism/media appearances, or to have a platform as a 'GC commentator' but pushing his own particular version of how he wants things to be.

And, frustratingly, many prominent GC campaigners seem determined to fight tooth and nail to protect his prominent place (as someone media outlets consider to be part of the public face of the GC movement) rather than listen to women (and men) who object to any man with AGP having this outsize influence on the debate largely based on the fact that Hayton cultivated friendships with prominent GC campaigners.

I think cuckoo in the nest sums up how I feel about Hayton; I accept others feel differently but I see Hayton as an irreconcilable issue for many GC people and therefore, sadly, there will be more disagreements which won’t harm his ability to campaign for what he wants but will undermine solidarity in GC campaigning and the fight to improve the situation for women, children, and gay people negatively affected by gender ideology.

There’s a similar discussion on this issue taking place on Ovarit, thought people here might like a link:

https://ovarit.com/o/GenderCritical/534609/thought-experiment-re-janice-turner-s-use-of-she-her-as-courtesy

I agree with your take on this. And I am tired of the Inquision-like looking for reasons to divide the political coalition that's made GC successful. We need both our open-minded head girls and our traditionalist street fighters. Of course we're not always going to agree on everything, but it's been a fruitful alliance when we have.

we should not now be relying on the DBS to do its job as it is now a compromised system.

And even if working perfectly, it is not a magic wand. Its job is - and has always been - only to show past convictions. It is not a risk assessment. It doesn't assess someone's suitability or capability for any position. It only tells you whether they have been convicted of a crime (I think in some cases also cautions, which involve admitting a crime rather than being convicted).

I've never felt the animosity towards Hayton that some do. I accept that there are quite a number of men who are AGP and there probably always will be. It seems to be a condition which males are susceptible to. It doesn't mean i 'approve' of it, or like it.

What is most important to me in the short to medium term is that he is challenging the notion that TW are women or that they are female; and is is revealing the fact that AGP is what motivates many men to transition. Plenty of the public are unaware of this. It is important that this is known that AGP has roots in eroticism and the sexualisation of women.

always emerges from the ensuing dust cloud smelling of roses

I don't know anyone who likes DH. Certainly not popular with TRAs.

Yes, it is all a massive and damaging distraction. As we approach a general election we need to keep our eye on the goal. We are not going to be rid of gender ideology over-night - it will be incremental; and legislation is the first hurdle.

Janice Turner's article did advance the issue in important ways since it highlighted and outlined what AGP is and how it effects those caught up in it.
I too was irritated by the pronouns ( because Debbie Hayton is known for declaring he is a man, so their use seemed gratuitous to me)

Twitter is so destructive. Anyone with a pubic profile is mad to use it in my view. You have to be incredibly disciplined not to get involved in horrible spats and exchanges with people. It brings out the worst.

Like you I can see the issue from both sides, and I too have had horrible experiences - even on here - when groups of totally uncompromising posters make insinuations that you are misogynistic, or don't care about women; or prioritise men, and so on -which are simply not true.

I’ve noticed this before; Hayton has been at the centre of a number of these divisive disagreements over the years and, I’ve said elsewhere, always emerges from the ensuing dust cloud smelling of roses 🤷‍♀️

In the end DH has had DBS and checks to ensure suitability for teaching and I don't think ability to teach is being questioned.

Activists worked behind the scenes to get the Trans DBS loophole hotline set up, and DH himself worked with his union to get himself and any boy who wanted it, access to female spaces in schools.

So yes, some women and men are going to be angry that others put him on a pedestal and say how he is 'on our side' when he patently is not.

Outside of that, we should not now be relying on the DBS to do its job as it is now a compromised system. Thanks to activists.

DBS and checks to ensure suitability for teaching

DBS doesn't cover suitability, or any of the questions you've raised. What other checks have there been?

I can see why the DH issue is particularly thorny, especially in education - which is KS's experience/professional background whereas KJK is coming from a parent's point of view.

Schools are coercive environments that generally limit student's choices and freedoms in favour of good order for all.

How far should they go to balance respect for DH, respect for student's differing opinions and good order in general.

How far should DH be seen as 'female' - in all things? Are there limits? Are these self imposed limits or should the school decide?

Would this include entering female bedrooms during a school trip? Chaperoning female individuals when unwell/taking for medical help?
Does DH use female staff facilities? If so, is this to the detriment of staff who have reasons to prefer single sex?

How should DH be referred to in school? Who makes this choice - individuals, the school, DH?

If you leave it to the students then this will cause conflict so I can understand the school taking a fixed position but this is coercive (as are many things in school).

In the end DH has had DBS and checks to ensure suitability for teaching and I don't think ability to teach is being questioned.

I think I would come down to what is best for good order and limiting conflict in the school, which would probably be accepting female pronouns, even if I would find that difficult personally if I were a colleague or parent.

There are always going to be divisions/sub divisions in a large group - especially when there isn't really a leadership structure to 'pull together' towards a common goal - it risks splintering which weakens us all

I am not a fan of people being unable to tolerate a healthy level of disagreement and debate. Although leaving Twitter is not synonymous with the above, there are lots of good reasons to drop off social media and nobody should have to tolerate abuse.

I've had a couple of weeks off Twitter go back and all hell had let loose! So this thread comes at a good time, hopefully I'll be enlightened!

There has been some real nastiness - on both sides, I think, though I haven't followed it in enough detail to be sure. Andrew Doyle got very upset and said he'd had some homophobic tweets from women on the anti-preferred- pronouns side. Alessandra Asteriti, who was very anti using preferred pronouns, got a whole load of abuse from Fred Sergeant in return, including comparing her to Mussolini, which shocked me.

Isn't it amazing how one high profile transwoman who's supposedly on "our" side has, through promoting their book, opened up such a domino effect of infighting, flounces and arguments?

I am not on X, so not following all the ins and outs of this in detail. I did read around enough to get the gist of the Genspect/blue dress and DH hoo ha. I listened to KJK and Stella O’Malley debate this, which was a sensible conversation. I’ve also listened to Andrew Doyle on Benjamin Boyce on the pronouns fall out.

If I’m honest, I am beyond frustrated with all the infighting and positioning when there are serious issues that we are being distracted from by all this noise. I understand the different positions of people on both sides of this debate and accept their views are sincerely held. What annoys me is the finger pointing and positioning. I can’t currently listen to some of the podcasters I previously enjoyed. They’re so busy casting shade on ‘the other side’ they’ve lost sight of what made their podcasts worthwhile. Can we not just agree to disagree and keep our eye on the ball?

The way things are going I will be spending the next 12-18 months on a media blackout, re-reading the classics and sci fi for a break from all this shit.

The people who are offended by this don't understand safeguarding and how - if you're a student in school - you really DON'T have any power and if teachers are modelling wrong-sex wrong-grammar wrong-part of the language pronouns to you (which will be linguistically and educationally confusing before you get to obvious safeguarding risks of telling children they need to 'not see' sex) then THAT'S compulsion. It's really hard to go against what a teacher says.

Also the children in Hayton's school are being forced to participate in his fetish. I don't think someone with a paraphilia which they take to work should be working with children.

This just all sounds so ridiculous

Nothing to do with Brianna then Lemon? Strange how posters who are less concerned about women’s rights like to bring up that particular name 🙄

Great post pronounsbundlebundle

Well explained @prpronounsbundlebundle

I'd really like to know how anyone is 'compelling' Janice Turner or Andrew Doyle's speech.

Women disagreeing is not 'compulsion'. They both have far more power and a public platform than those disagreeing with them. They can and do (obviously) ignore those saying wrong-sex pronouns is a safeguarding risk.

The people who are offended by this don't understand safeguarding and how - if you're a student in school - you really DON'T have any power and if teachers are modelling wrong-sex wrong-grammar wrong-part of the language pronouns to you (which will be linguistically and educationally confusing before you get to obvious safeguarding risks of telling children they need to 'not see' sex) then THAT'S compulsion. It's really hard to go against what a teacher says.

They have a lot of public power and freedom and money, far more than the parents struggling with distressed kids who are being emotionally abused by this shit in schools.

And still there's nothing we can do get them to bother doing a safeguarding course, or read KCSIE, obviously. That much is clear. Where the hell is the 'compelling' coming from. Will they lose their jobs if they don't use correct English sex-based pronouns? All their money? Go to jail? I doubt it.

What the hell is wrong with people that robust disagreement is being cast as 'compulsion' whilst children are being routinely emotionally abused over very long periods of time in school, where they literally cannot escape, their parents get fined if they don't attend, and the self same people moaning about how some women disagree with their pronoun use are doing nothing.

Words have lost all meaning.

What @Woman2023 said.