Janice Turner interview with Debbie Hayton in the Times

[CaptainWarbeck]

Share token link here: Debbie Hayton: the trans woman taking on the trans activists

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/df87fe47-3dd3-4f35-ac48-81f54aeb418f?shareToken=a53b2f201cdd4c204b9009b204cb1ef3

Janice neatly runs through a history of trans issues with Debbie including a discussion of AGP. An excellent read I thought and will get a wide audience as a Saturday Times Magazine article.

I quoted merely because I thought it was a good point and it inspired my following thoughts.

Historically we managed it socially, with the understanding that everyone knew what was appropriate, and applied social behaviour as a result.

Yes* *@Datun I've increasingly been thinking this and discussing it elsewhere and have realised that one of the functions of social codes around men and women's clothes was to prevent men who fetishize femininity performing it in public.

20 years ago everyone knew transvestitism was a sexual fetish that's why it was done in private.

Now we seem to be having to intellectualise what we always knew to be true with talk of agp.

The problem is while we maintain clothes are just clothes there's never going to be any way to stop a man with fake boobs wearing a dress and make up to work for his fetish.
All he has to do is say it's not a fetish.
But we all know it is. We knew it 20 years ago and it's still true now.
But the social code has disappeared.

But if a man is wearing a knee length dress, heels, long hair and makeup what argument is there for this being inappropriate?

Thank you! Apologies if that sounded like a spiky response but it's a fast moving thread and I thought maybe I hadn't expressed myself clearly.

How would we just say this?

They would have to be a legal framework which defined paraphilias and banned them to do that?
Would they be banned in all public situations?

Until comparatively recently, teachers were not allowed to live at the same address as someone with a criminal conviction for violence or sex crimes.

Schools are a mess. They're rife with bullying. Sex assaults among pupils are far too frequent and treated too lightly.

It's interesting that societies are implicitly expected to accept the public indulgence of paraphilias without the consent of those who end up facilitating them. And we're expected to accept the rape and sex assaults of children as a necessary consequence of bringing children together. And to tolerate school staff upbraiding, minimising or ignoring the victims.

In the first incident, a staff member saw the children in the corner of the playground – but then proceeded to tell the girl off.

“She was told off for having her knickers and her tights down around by her knees with one of these boys behind her,” Anna said.

On a second occasion, another member of staff saw one of the boys with his head up her skirt. The assistant told off the girl for letting the boy stick his head up her skirt, and the boys were just told to “run away”. The girl was not talked to separately, asked what had happened or whether she was OK.

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3364173-Our-kids-were-raped-by-classmates-DfE-wont-listen

The indulgences largely seem to flow towards the transgressors of one sex class. And, sadly, they're facilitated by the members of the oppressed sex class. I wonder why we're in the mess we're in.

There are now 394 comments, with the aforementioned top one, still the top. It has 394 votes. The other two remain in 2nd and 3rd place, just with more votes added on.

Times readers have rejected the article, it would seem.

Paraphilias are wll defined in medical literature and sexual offences likewise in legal terms, in addition education has rules and policies about behaviour.

I don't think it's that complicated.

All staff have the option of the clothing choices typical of their sex - within the appropriate dress code of the school, and there is one in most - or gender neutral clothing. That's it. Any clothing choices beyond this boundary and the member of staff can either be spoken with or in extreme cases asked to go home and change. No different to if they turned up dirty and scruffy, or in a too short skirt at one end, and with a t shirt with an inappropriate message on, tiny shorts or a low cut top with boobs falling out at the other end.

The guy with the enormous fake boobs should have been told to take them off the moment he was seen on site with them, that was a ridiculous situation to have enabled. A male teacher who chooses to have fake boobs implanted under the skin or to take hormones that involve breast development can have a bust perfectly well with trousers, shirt and jumper or jacket as the majority of the women staff will be managing, he does not need to wear a top that shouts the visual cue of 'look, I have boobs'.

If someone finds that they cannot feel sufficiently 'them' unless they are able to do these things freely, then that's a 'them' thing, and they'd need to make a decision on whether teaching was for them. Professional jobs come with boundaries and putting your own convenience second to the needs of those you're in the job for. There are many other jobs out there where you can do you all day without problem.

How do we say it now? You're not allowed to come to work in a rubber gimp suit. Or a bikini. It's not constantly tested by inappropriately dressed employees.

Work dress code should say appropriate clothing, including non-fetish clothes.

Most people can tell the difference between a man wearing female clothing (the occasional Harry Styles outfit) and a man wanting to look like a woman.

Obviously, this is going to have to be a process, because at the moment, people won't even use the correct pronouns.

But it doesn't mean it can't be done

Lots of teachers wear skirts, dresses and some wear high heels.

How would you prevent agp men who don't declare their fetish getting kicks from dressing as a women.

Even if we can insist that they are men, use male pronouns, use male spaces we'll still have agp men getting sexual thrills from how they dress in public.

As Datun said this used to be socially managed as it was understood it was transvestism and sexual so not socially acceptable.
But once clothes are just clothes it's happy days for transvestites.

My point is we can no longer prevent men getting this sexual thrill in public. It's been socially sanctioned now. Even if we win on pronouns and spaces.

I don’t know the answer to that, just as I can’t prescribe an appropriate skirt length for a female teacher. There used to be some sort of understanding in our society as to what was appropriate, and that included men not dressing in a way that was coded as ‘for women’. That understanding has relaxed hugely, but there are still some remnants - in my workplace, I no longer had to wear a suit, or even a tie, but I would not have got away with tracksuit and trainers. Savile Row suit would have been acceptable, J Saville shell suit not so. Most people knew what was going to trigger an uncomfortable conversation with the boss.

Does the protected characteristic of GR include the legal right to pronouns? Is this a legal statement?

And this is not gender identity, this is reassignment.

And latests guidance says GI is not applicable under the EA.

Which means there's technically no legal rights for the they thems

www.gov.uk/government/publications/public-sector-equality-duty-guidance-for-public-authorities

Thank you Rex!

I'd love to see more of the comments, but don't worry if you haven't the time.

The work dress code would have to state what was a fetish.

How would they distinguish between a man with boobs in a dress and makeup with a fetish and one without?

How would I prevent it?

I'd do it exactly as I said in my post.

Have a dress code.
Speak to or send staff home who arrive cross dressed instead of making an appropriately professional gender neutral choice.
Exactly the same as if they turned up in other inappropriate and unacceptable clothes at work while in charge of children and a position of responsibility.

The schools I've worked in have all had acceptable dress codes.

You just are clear that biologically male staff have a dress code.

Just the same as if they turned up in tiny shorts and a t shirt saying 'fuck the patriarchy'. Their intent at the time of putting on the t shirt is irrelevant: they can't wear it to work.

They'd use their eyes. And they wouldn't be frightened to form an opinion.

And then they wouldn't be scared to make a decision.

And it's been added to with explicit descriptions of what's not acceptable over time

A local school has a no shorts for men policy. Or boys for that matter (there are complaints and some boys wear skirts with shorts beneath in protest. As all the children are wearing skirts with shorts!)

This is a reply to the top comment. It has 219 votes:

"I agree with [name of top commenter]. Truth matters. It especially matters when the safety of women and girls is removed because of a culture's refusal to shoot down a lie. You are a great and kind journalist, Janice, and I know you look at this from all sides; but ultimately we can't have it both ways. We cannot 'be kind' to some of them whilst saying that others have proven that they are not worthy of the kindness (like the rapists). Truth has to be universally applied. We cannot know what is going on in that 'nice' man's head....or what he will do when given the opportunity. The ONLY way to ensure safety for women and girls is to decree that ALL men must stay out of their spaces. No exceptions. All good men will understand. Indeed, all good men already stay out of our spaces willingly in order to protect us. They also do not pretend to be one of us.
Pronouns are a foot in the door. Once applied, they make it extremely difficult to exclude a man. That is why the gender lobby have been pushing so hard for them. We must all say no. Being kind to one man is being unkind to all women.
I hope you will reconsider your approach to this , Janice."

I agree.
It's going to need to be enforced socially. I just think there have been many steps taken that have undermined our ability to do this.

One of which is the clothes are just clothes belief.
And the belief that gendered clothing codes are just oppressive and can be thrown out, instead of realising they might be actually protecting women from fetishistic men.

It's going to be hard to restore any codes around this which prevent men from wearing women's clothes in public to get a sexual thrill.

I think what's happening here is people can feel discrimination looming.

If a woman can wear a dress, why can't a man. Is that not discriminatory?

I'm sort of supposing it is.

So I understand why people are wondering how this would happen.