Remember that thread last year, where Hayton was too busy to discuss why using female spaces where children and women had not consented was a complete breach of boundaries, and DH offered to chat about it over a beer, debate women's and girls consent with them, but intended to carry on regardless?
I'll stick to MN guidelines.
But I should mention that my thoughts do not.
My thoughts are that, HYPOTHETICALLY, if 5 years ago a middle aged man had announced he was entering any and every private female space, whether children were present and undressed, or not, knew we expressly did not consent to his presence, and didn't care?
Well, I expect no amount of evidence of future 'allyship' to women's and girls rights would cause women to overlook that abuse.
And I'm not sure that there would be anything that hypothetical man could do, grow his hair, wear a skirt, or have surgery, that would make it acceptable for him to impose himself on female children and grown women despite their emphatic demand he doesn't.
A man who hears women and girls say no to him, and pushes right past that no, because he thinks he's entitled, all the while laughing, and publicly claiming that other men should not be able to do the same, knowing that where he leads, all similar men will follow ....
What should that man be called?