Dr Debbie Hayton interview

[ChristinaXYZ]

In case you haven't seen it.

“I worry that trans people are being used in a political campaign to compromise women’s spaces”

Dammit - was so excited about a sensible trans voice in the discussion and it’s now heartbreaking to read of the previous behaviours of DH - I felt like some light and clarity was being brought back for a moment. Why does it feel like there is so much contempt and hatred for women - what have we done to deserve this treatment? We support and support and support EVERYONE to the detriment of ourselves. I am hoping that DH reads the responses on this thread not as hatred but as a call to bravery - to get in there and address the historical actions that are leading to utter distress and misery that these ideas have wreaked upon our daughters. There has to be more action and not just words.

I think many women in this movement have allowed themselves to be used as support humans to an entirely different agenda, which is a dynamic that is very familiar to trans widows.

The important thing though is that individual women shouldn't feel bad about having previously been used. it goes (and remains), right to the top.

Imagine what it must do for an AGP male to be called “she” by radfems/gcs. Why perform that service?

@Mn753

God I love mumsnet

It's a fantastic place.

For me, it's quite important to remember that I don't need the permission or encouragement of any male involved in the gender identity ideology in order to disagree with it. I don't need anyone's agreement, nor does their endorsement of anything I say actually add to my authority in saying it.

I'm speaking as a women concerned with her rights and liberties. And as such, the only authority I need is my own.

I think it's quite important to remain critical in our thinking to the very end.

If for example there was a woman asking her children to call her Dad, whilst criticising the surgeries on young 'gender' non confirming people, I would agree with their views but not in what they practise at home.

If there was a teacher who criticised self ID as 'a bad thing' for women but asked for the school children they taught to call them Miss when they were male I would struggle to square that particular circle.

For me critical thinking doesn't stop when you agree with someone on one issue, and there are some things that are just hard lines you do not cross and again, for me, most of that involves children as a priority and second to that women.

You can agree with someone and not like them as a person and not promote them or elevate them, whilst also supporting their point of view.

@Wandawomble

Dammit - was so excited about a sensible trans voice in the discussion and it’s now heartbreaking to read of the previous behaviours of DH - I felt like some light and clarity was being brought back for a moment. Why does it feel like there is so much contempt and hatred for women - what have we done to deserve this treatment? We support and support and support EVERYONE to the detriment of ourselves. I am hoping that DH reads the responses on this thread not as hatred but as a call to bravery - to get in there and address the historical actions that are leading to utter distress and misery that these ideas have wreaked upon our daughters. There has to be more action and not just words.

Hi! Yes, I have read the responses and I can offer further comment on some of the issues raised.

My thinking has changed enormously since I transitioned in 2012. At the time I thought I was some sort of woman because I had a female gender identity. It took me a long time to discard those ideas. If you go through my writing and interviews I have given you might discern the path I have taken.

One example is prisons. In 2019 I argued that transwomen could be housed in the female estate on the basis of external sex characteristics. The prison service have been doing that for over 40 years incidentally. I would no longer defend that position. In my most recent piece for CCJS I was clear that male people belong in the male estate.
www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/resources/prison-service-needs-work-facts-not-fiction

I find it interesting to look back at that Buzzfeed interview. I'm pleased they have kept it up. They have come under pressure from other transgender activists who have Tweeted them about it. At the time I was still very conscious of the different experiences of Lucy Meadows and me. One person contacted the press at Lucy's school. Nobody did at mine and that made all the difference. I was not as confident then as I am now.

The Triggernometry interview is a good summary of what I think now. No doubt I will change my mind about some things going forwards - I am human after all - but I cannot foresee myself wavering from the position that transwomen are male and we have no business encroaching on female spaces or female places.

I cannot foresee myself wavering from the position that transwomen are male and we have no business encroaching on female spaces or female places.

Good to hear. Are you also working on changing the NASUWT guidance to reflect that?

I'd bloody love to see TinselAngel on @triggerpod. Or hear her voice as I imagine it would have to be incognito.

Sadly I don't think anyone else is brave enough to go there, bar those who have so far eg Glinner.

I cannot foresee myself wavering from the position that transwomen are male and we have no business encroaching on female spaces or female places.

Have the children you teach been advised that you are a male teacher and as such they should treat you as other male staff eg he/him and sir?

My primary concern is the safeguarding of children. Teachers are in a considerable position of influence and with that comes responsibility.

In the Buzzfeed article you reference that a letter was sent to all parents advising them you would return to school in a 'female role' (sic). Parents may not have followed your 'path' of evolving positions and may still be unaware that you now accept you are a man/male.

The main issue is of course the NASUWT school guidance which is to the detriment of women working or visiting schools and includes misleading claims contrary to the law. Many readers of this thread would like acknowledgement of that (as has been made clear).

Are you also working on changing the NASUWT guidance to reflect that?

Good question, Empress.

What’s it called when someone won’t answer a direct question with a direct answer, won’t even acknowledge that particular question has been asked?

How many of us have asked this very reasonable and pertinent question now, or expressed interest in hearing the answer?

Quite a few, I think. And yet Dr Hayton has given no indication of having even noticed we asked it.

Is there a term for that? Not exactly stonewalling... or gaslighting... but somewhere in that area.

Stonelighting? Gaswalling?

Can anyone help me out here?

Sidestepping?

One example is prisons. In 2019 I argued that transwomen could be housed in the female estate on the basis of external sex characteristics. The prison service have been doing that for over 40 years incidentally. I would no longer defend that position. In my most recent piece for CCJS I was clear that male people belong in the male estate.

A male body which has been modified by cosmetic surgery and/or cross sex hormones does not have external female sex characteristics Dr Hayton.

Many boys and men develop gynaecomastia for reasons unconnected with their gender identity (sometimes associated with serious underlying health issues). To suggest, by implication, they have become 'feminised'/ have 'external female sex characteristics' would be inaccurate and offensive to them just as it is to women and girls when TRAs make claims to have acquired vaginas and/or breasts.

www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/mens-health/what-is-gynaecomastia/

@WarriorN

I'd bloody love to see TinselAngel on *@triggerpod*. Or hear her voice as I imagine it would have to be incognito.

Sadly I don't think anyone else is brave enough to go there, bar those who have so far eg Glinner.

I have done an interview for the Straight Spouse Network. Funnily enough it was a couple of weeks before the one with the linked transcript earlier in this thread.

Sidestepping? Ah yes, Datun. Sometimes the most obvious answers are the hardest to find!

That was such an interesting post from Dr H. We get taken on a roundabout tour of Dr Hayton’s changing views, Dr Hayton’s Buzzfeed interview on prisons, Dr Hayton’s acknowledgment of his maleness and indeed the rights of women and girls to male-free spaces. [I’m presuming sex-accurate pronouns are acceptable in this case? Please do let me know if not and I will ask for my post to be edited.]

And yet... and yet, no reference at all to that toxic NASUWT guidance, which NASUWT was so very grateful to Dr Hayton for assisting with. To the fact it persists. Despite being apparently quite at odds with Dr H’s current views.

What’s it called when someone won’t answer a direct question with a direct answer, won’t even acknowledge that particular question has been asked?

Is there a term for that? Not exactly stonewalling... or gaslighting... but somewhere in that area.

Stonelighting? Gaswalling?

Can anyone help me out here?

Ghosting?
'Ghosting' like 'stonewalling' is a common pattern of controlling behaviour.
People are left hanging, waiting for a response.

I suggest we stop repeating the same behaviour whilst expecting a different response.

It's got to be said that the unanswered questions are very enlightening in themselves.

@Datun

For me, it's quite important to remember that I don't need the permission or encouragement of any male involved in the gender identity ideology in order to disagree with it. I don't need anyone's agreement, nor does their endorsement of anything I say actually add to my authority in saying it.

I'm speaking as a women concerned with her rights and liberties. And as such, the only authority I need is my own.

I think this bears repeating.

I think it’s a journey a few of us have been on.

When we’re new to this, we are delighted to find trans voices that echo our own attitudes. Part of it is relief that someone who is not us “gets it”; part of it perhaps is a kind of reassurance that no, we’re really not bigoted after all.

But after a while we buy into that paradigm that suggests that biologically male trans people are the oppressed and biologically female people are the oppressors less and less. And eventually we don’t buy into it at all.

And we question the value of someone who “gets it” but whose actions are still detrimental to us. A common theme with male “feminists” whether they identify as trans or not.

And once we’re free of one thing, and we’re questioning another, we don’t need the “endorsement” of a biologically male person who identifies as trans any more. We recognise that as women, as the oppressed class in this dynamic, we are just fine with endorsing ourselves. We recognise instead all the amazing, articulate women who are putting our side of the issue with such clarity and passion without the accompanying mixed messages and sabotage that undermine all those fine words.

Internalised misogyny takes many, many forms. Shaking it off is glorious. Here’s to the women of FWR!

And we question the value of someone who “gets it” but whose actions are still detrimental to us.

Exactly. The proof of the pudding and all that.

Internalised misogyny takes many, many forms. Shaking it off is glorious. Here’s to the women of FWR!

It really is liberating. And it took me a while, too. I locked horns with a very clever woman on here once over the issue. Convinced I was right. It was a marvellously civil exchange, but she was determined to make me see.

I wasn't wholly won over, but, because I respected her opinion, I gave it some more time. And, sure enough, the more I saw, the more I understood what she meant.

I'm now always far more impressed by men if they quote women, to show their allyship. Or promote women, instead of talking about themselves.

It appears to be a lot harder for men to put women first in feminism than you'd think!

I'm now always far more impressed by men if they quote women, to show their allyship. Or promote women, instead of talking about themselves.

It appears to be a lot harder for men to put women first in feminism than you'd think!

Almost as if men who identify as 'gender critical' are unaware and/or uncritical of their gendered behaviours?

Almost as if men who identify as 'gender critical' are unaware and/or uncritical of their gendered behaviours?

Apologies, I should have said some men.

I think it was R0wantress who posted about Dr Hayton's most recent suggestions concerning prison allocation.

The suggestion towards the end of last year, just prior to the piece Dr H wrote for Centre for Crime & Justice Studies (Murray Blackburn Mackenzie, Rhona Hotchkiss and I all wrote pieces for that series - we have campaigning experience in that area, and Rhona has a wealth of experience gained from her role as Prison Governor) was that not merely TW should be able to be housed in women's prisons, but ANY MAN where the conviction was not one that indicated a risk to women should be free to transfer to the female estate.

Of course, if you look back on Twitter, you will find no record of this on Dr Hayton's page. After the 'strenuous disagreement' that ensued, the post was simply deleted. I always find that an unsatisfactory way to proceed - if you disagree, say so. If your mind is changed, retweet with an update and thanking everyone for their input. Deleting like this, with next to zero engagement in consistent with an intention that the event in question be consigned to Things That Never Happened.

Of course, if you look back on Twitter, you will find no record of this on Dr Hayton's page. After the 'strenuous disagreement' that ensued, the post was simply deleted. I always find that an unsatisfactory way to proceed - if you disagree, say so. If your mind is changed, retweet with an update and thanking everyone for their input. Deleting like this, with next to zero engagement in consistent with an intention that the event in question be consigned to Things That Never Happened.

Discussed on thread from page 8 (with screenshot)
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4053058-Debbie-and-Stephanie-Hayton-interview-transcript?pg=8

but ANY MAN where the conviction was not one that indicated a risk to women should be free to transfer to the female estate.

Towards the end of last year? We're only in bloody April.

Strewth.

@DebbieInBirmingham

Given that you say your attitude has involved, do you now understand that it is the women in a female prison whose situation, views, and rights must be taken into account? Not that of the males who want access?