Thank you: Debbie Hayton in the Mail

[Needmoresleep]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13011839/I-went-agonising-operation-thought-woman-finally-make-happy-devastating-revelation.html

I found an interesting thread on Twitter (can’t screenshot at the moment but thought I’d post a link and the text here for folk to read):

MotherofDragons (@ Lambikins67) https://x.com/Lambikins67/status/1751287161536577683?s=20

'Confession: For years I watched as people were critical of Stella O'Malley, Debbie Hayton and others like them. I didn't quite understand the problem. Now I do and I can't believe I didn't see it sooner.

This fight has splintered into those of us who want to abolish gender ideology vs. those who seek to make a living from it.

This is so clear to me now and I can't believe it took me this long to see it. The lines are being drawn. It's not about being nuanced or taking a reasonable middle ground.

The fight is and always has been about protecting women's sex based rights and children's safeguarding in law and policy.

If you are not approaching the issue from this perspective you are part of the problem, not the solution.

This is not a philosophical debate about truth and we don't need to understand men's paraphilias better. We need the perversion out of public spaces and the grifting to stop.'

'We need the perversion out of public spaces and the grifting to stop.'

What does this mean in practice? That we should be lobbying for mandatory gender role conformity for men?

If we did that, 'trans' people would have fewer rights than before this whole mess started.

You're being disingenuous. Yes, we're all prone, but you are saying clearly that I have been/am being manipulated by DH - simply because I recognise that he makes some true statements.

There's no need to be defensive about having been manipulated

Precisely.

It's why I posted quotations from a 2018 thread earlier in this thread.

I thought the scales had fallen from my eyes several months ago and realise now the scales had only fallen from the scales. The process of burrowing down beneath the layers of gas lighting, compromising, desire to be kind and inclusive that have clouded the arguments and caused people to find these issues confusing is really a journey in understanding how massively the world is run by men, for men

The reflexive desire to be kind and considerate left so many of us vulnerable to manipulation and the reality of how things are. And the default social set-up for favouring one sex over another stripped us of the right to have our realities and anger recognised or expressed.

Some people went through it in 2018 (or earlier). Others have been through it since or are going through it now in 2024 and only just realising that they have scales upon scales.

Yes, that’s a piece of evidence that perhaps Karen wasn’t aware of. To me, the fact that this occurrence has been publicly aired is quite significant.

Transmen are falsifying reality, though they are far from the only people doing that. They do not, as far as I am aware, threaten men’s safety or steal their prizes, though they do sometimes cause some distress or discomfort. So I agree that it is largely transwomen rather than transmen who directly cause societal problems when they demand rights beyond anyone else’s rights. However, the few publicly outspoken transmen mostly seem to support transwomen to the detriment of women. And transmen seem to be generally supportive of removing all “gatekeeping” when it comes to medical treatments.

This is not a philosophical debate about truth and we don't need to understand men's paraphilias better. We need the perversion out of public spaces and the grifting to stop.'

I'm not interested in a philosophical debate about truth for the sake of the pure pursuit of truth, and I certainly don't wanrt to make a living from GI and I certainly do want it to end.

My point is that government, education, health services, police, prison services etc and still many sports, are currently basing their policies and practice on a foundation of lies - which many people blindly believe in the name of being progressive. I think getting rid of gender ideology from public spaces and policy necessitates people understanding the reality that hides behind the lies. I don't think the pursuit of truth/reality is a different goal from getting rid of GI - they're aligned.

We don't generally make public policy, affecting healthcare, education, the justice system etc - on the basis of untruths or a lack of solid evidence. But in this case that has happened because a variety of people with an agenda have managed to get those lies widely accepted.

Reality can come from scientific research and data, from people pointing out logical consequences and explanations, etc, but it can also come from those involved in transitioning in various ways - whether they are detransitioners realising how they were let down, or TRAs or earnest allies accidentally giving away how they don't really think TWAW, or people like DH talking about the realities of transition and AGP (as others have done too). It's all reality that needs to be understood and taken on board to move forward into evidence-based, actually fair policy that will protect those who GI harms.

The reflexive desire to be kind and considerate left so many of us vulnerable to manipulation

OK but I am not trying to be kind and considerate to DH. I simply recognise that he makes some true statements about things that are being widely lied about and those lies are being believed and influencing policy. He is serving a reality that needs to be served - however unpleasant he may be.

Yes I said I'm sorry for him, as I'm sorry for anyone who has been misled about what transition would do for them. That doesn't mean I like him, think he's a great guy or think he's an ally to women.

The true statements that he makes are made to enable him to push a boundary further each time. Hence him going from being a "transexual" to now being praised for admitting he has a fetish. This enables him to minimise the fetish and begin advocating for understanding and acceptance of it. It's always partial truths for selfish reasons.

Yes.

The true statements that he makes are made to enable him to push a boundary further each time. Hence him going from being a "transexual" to now being praised for admitting he has a fetish. This enables him to minimise the fetish and begin advocating for understanding and acceptance of it. It's always partial truths for selfish reasons.

So do you think that as more and more people understand that a lot of TW are actually AGPs seeking access to female spaces for sexual thrills, they'll be more or less accepting? I think less, because I think your typical ally thinks TW are poor sad women trapped in men's bodies who wouldn't hurt a fly and have no idea about it being a fetish or that many are intact.

The more people understand the reality the better - whatever DH's motives are. Even if that's what he wants, it doesn't mean that's what he'll get.

And again, understanding that he makes some true statements does not mean he has manipulated me. True statements are true statements. Being glad the truth is being made clear doesn't mean I'll believe anything he says or think he should have anything he wants. Certainly not praise. As others have said, he's not making himself look good.

I had a similar experience reading DH's tweets on the subject of women's prisons. Back in November 2020, DH mused on the feasibility of mixed-sex prisons for people who had committed non-violent crime like tax fraud.

DH was hardly new to the subject of women's safety in prisons, and still claimed to think it a great idea. For most people, it's entry-level safeguarding that women shouldn't be locked up with any males, even if the men or male transitioners are there for dropping litter. But not for DH, apparently. Perhaps because women's safety isn't that deep a commitment for Hayton?

DH seemed a bit shocked by the strength of the pushback, and deleted the tweets. The whole episode was revealing.

It's going alongside a campaign to "understand" and destigmatise AGP and to claim that it's innate, like a sexuality. So yes if successful this will make people more accepting.

If you always assume Hayton is 10 steps ahead of us, you won't be far wrong.

Debbie has a profitable line in being the ‘reasonable’ TW, the one who accepts (hm….) thé problems that the rest of the non trans world may have in working out what to think and do about them. When Debbie was writing on UnHerd it was quite cringe- making to read how much the male BTL praised and accepted Debbie’s statements. So reasonable! So balanced! So reassuring!

So we don’t have to worry about any of this, it is all fine because look ! A trans woman can speak reasonably and persuasively …..just as if it was a man speaking.

Some of this complacency was a bit disturbed by Isla and Lia, though, so now Debbie has to up the stakes a bit.

So yes if successful this will make people more accepting.

If you always assume Hayton is 10 steps ahead of us, you won't be far wrong

Why? Because he's a man and they're cleverer? I don't think so. You seem to be excluding yourself from this, as you are in the know and not naive like silly old me, so he's not 10 steps ahead of you, just me?

That "if successful" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Why should people be more accepting of a man coming into female spaces for sexual gratification, then because he really is a woman trapped in a man's body? The more people realise "woman trapped in a man's body" isn't a real thing, but "same old same old, man wants to get his rocks off" is what's going on, the more they'll realise gender ideology is bunk. (As is happening, though it's taking a long time)

The same goes for paedophilia of course. Yes they'll try to get it normalised and made acceptable, and those efforts have waxed and waned, waxing now of course with GI as a handy trojan horse. People tend to fight back though.

I said ahead of "us" not of you, although I do think I'm more aware of the dynamic than many, having lived it and then been immersed in the fight back against it for the last 7 years.

Hayton is very clever and extremely strategic. Men like him have a lifetimes experience in secrecy and manipulation. They are very good at it.

The campaign to destigsmatise AGP is not being conducted by him alone, there's other people and groups involved, particularly Genspect. Partially they've been groomed but also they can see the profit in AGP financially being like a new trans.

I understand the potentially useful aspects of men being open about their sexual motivations and fetishistic drives.

However, it's hard to forget that in the background is often/usually a wife and children who asked for none of it, and are not benefitting from any of it.

This is no different to the glossy stuff peddled by the Beaumont Society since forever.

I expect the happy couple to be pictured out shopping together in the next episode.

I thought as soon as people realise children are given puberty blockers, or when they see the a man in a female race, or find out that rapists are in womens prisons, everyone would see sense and it all would stop.

But it hasnt.

Praising Hayton for being GC and admitting hes doing it all for sexual attention, could work, i suppose. But it not very likely, is it?

This is all very PIE

I realise this is in danger of becoming well I think it's turquoise, and you think it's aquamarine!

We both think we're right. And I don't think that's going to change. And we probably agree far more than we disagree.

The basis for AGP is the worst kind of misogyny. Feeling sexually aroused by the thought of women being subjugated. Any admission of having it should preclude you, instantly, from having any further opinion about women at all.

But when you've got a man who enacts his fetish in public, on his family, and in his job, and writes articles about it and now a book, and you still think his goal is to expose the lies and reality of the impact of AGP, then we're probably never going to agree that what he says is useful.

What's that saying? Something along the lines of men are unlikely to dismantle the very thing that's responsible for their livelihood (and, in this case, sexual excitement).

Also, look out for AGP being rebranded as a sexual orientation, directed inwards towards the self, instead of a cross dressing fetish reliant on misogyny and public participation.

The basis for AGP is the worst kind of misogyny. Feeling sexually aroused by the thought of women being subjugated. Any admission of having it should preclude you, instantly, from having any further opinion about women at all.

I agree that we’re possibly debating quite fine distinctions, but I’m not clueless about where AGO comes from. I said in my first post that I would prefer DH to understand the sexist roots of his AGP. This is my point. Because I think what DH is putting out there is helpful in establishing some of the realities behind trans ideology, some posters assume I know nothing and thought this through and need to brush up on feminism 101. No. I understand that AGP is about a view of women as submissive and weak and fetishising that submission and the “shame” that AGPs find exciting. And…

But when you've got a man who enacts his fetish in public, on his family, and in his job, and writes articles about it and now a book, and you still think his goal is to expose the lies and reality of the impact of AGP, then we're probably never going to agree that what he says is useful

…again you ignored what I actually said. I said I don’t know what his motivation is. You see me saying that I think the realities he’s exposing are good for the public to know, and fellow feminists are turning that into me praising him or saying he’s trying to help, when I said nothing of the sort. As I’ve pointed out, those realities can come from a range of sources some of which aren’t trying to help the GC cause at all.

It’s as if you want me to be a manipulated naive handmaiden so that you can show you’re not. So you’re ignoring my actual posts and casting me as someone who thinks DH is aiming to do us all a good turn and is in our side - when I’ve clearly said I don’t think that.

That’s interesting in itself, that some feminists need to see others as less feminist and clued-up so as to push a narrative that a man is too clever for them and they haven’t seen through the wolf’s disguise. But if the wolf in disguise says “I eat grandmas” and I agree that is true and something people should know, that doesn’t mean I think the wolf is the good guy or trying to help.

I think I try and see it as part of shifting the Overton window. Mentioning AGP was verboten and still on here is deleted the majority of the time. Getting this in the Mail and having a man say I thought I was trans but actually it’s AGP and I didn’t know it at the time is a step in the right direction. I think a man talking about it will have more impact than a psychologist. I would like trans widows to be platformed but they would probably be anonymous and the impact is lessened slightly. And, being women, less likely to be listened to.

Yes DH has his own motivations and is a narcissistic pornsick misogynistic man who should not be platformed by feminists or GCers. But once these men have said AGP out loud we can use that to further our cause. Yes some people will feel sorry for him, but hopefully more will feel a bit disgusted and think again about the whole concept of trans. How many people on here were “true trans” originally? And how many are “true trans” now? We just need to keep pushing the window. Imho.

I'm sorry if I misrepresented what you said, and I'm not meaning to paint you as anything.

Because I think what DH is putting out there is helpful in establishing some of the realities behind trans ideology,

I know I've said this, I've probably said it ten different ways - what Hayton is putting out there is not the realities. It's a deliberately sanitised version.

The below the line comments to the article are positive. Do you really think, that if those people knew of the possibility that he was getting sexually aroused from making his pupils called him Miss, they would feel positive?

You're not getting the realities.

Deliberately.

Also, look out for AGP being rebranded as a sexual orientation, directed inwards towards the self, instead of a cross dressing fetish reliant on misogyny and public participation.

That. That is absolutely crucial. The AGP fetish is a paraphilia, which relies, like most paraphilias do, on non-consensual participation of others. It only is arousing, engaging, compelling in as far as the power imbalance is maintained. And that depends on an unwilling audience and/or participants.