I COULD BE WRONG, BUT....

Musings on the 'Hayton Phenomenon'

Who’s the most famous AGP, celebrated by Gender Critical feminists the world over as ‘one of the good ones’ even as he impersonates women for sexual gratification and parades his sexual fetish in front of children every day? Despite this egregious behavior, he’s celebrated by women who consider themselves to be feminists for making the bold statement ‘I’m a man’. This is the ‘Hayton Phemonenon,’

I’m referring, of course, to that infamous impersonator of women, Mr. D. Hayton, also known as ‘Debbie’, who has a media profile the height of which, in certain circles, rivals that of major world politicians. Why do so many otherwise clear-thinking women who understand feminism is view Hayton as, if not some kind of hero, then as a feminist ally?

To be truly committed to freeing women from patriarchal oppression, we have to understand who women are, the various forms our oppression takes, as well as who our allies are or are not. The dictionary definition of woman (the real one, not the ‘I’ll blow up the building if you don’t validate me!’ version) is ‘adult human female’. ‘Ally’ is defined, according to Google, as ‘a state formally cooperating with another for a military or other purpose’. If one seeks to co-operate with adult human females in order to assist them in freeing themselves from patriarchal oppression, doesn’t one militate against that purpose by equating womanhood with the superficial stereotypes of performative femininity? I could be wrong, but I think the liberation of women begins with recognizing women as actual human beings with distinct needs arising from our biology, rather than as dresses, long hair, make-up, high voices and head-tilt. It also follows, please correct me if I’m mistaken, that women who are about the business of securing and maintaining women’s rights would be very clear that a man aping women by adopting these superficial stereotypes, regardless of his assertions to the contrary, is reinforcing the antiquated notion of woman-as-performance, thus participating in the dehumanization of women. On what planet is the dehumanization of women synonymous with liberation from patriarchy? It’s definitely not the planet I live on.

Doesn’t writing, supporting and helping to enact measures that rob women and girls of our safety in public and school restrooms work against the goal of freeing women from oppression? Certainly, feminists can agree that any measure making women more insecure in public or private accommodation increases the burden of oppression so anyone advocating for the revocation of women’s rights to single-sex services cannot be an ally.

I would also speculate that feminists would understand that, as a man who teaches in woman-face, Hayton is selling the idea of ‘woman-as-fetish-object’ to his female students. Since he publishes and appears on televison frequently, at least some of them would be aware of Hayton’s admission of being an autogynephile - a man who is sexually aroused by the fantasy of himself as a woman. He teaches these girls, day in and day out, that a man imitating their biological reality because it arouses him sexually is someone they must share space with. The school officials are not only complicit in delivering Hayton an audience to act out his compulsion in front of. They’re telling these impressionable young girls, by allowing this man to perform ‘woman’ each day, that men of this type are to be accorded the privilege of acting out their fetish without censure. Such grooming makes them less likely to raise a fuss if they find themselves in a women-only space with an AGP; it makes them more likely to support politicians and other public figures who see women’s safety not as an irrevocable right but as a political bargaining chip. Now, these girls will have just that much more difficultly accepting their own femaleness as real, valuable, inimitable and worthy of protection. Am I wrong to think that feminists would support neither the ideology that leads to these actions nor the individual who commits them?

I’m sure this isn’t an activity that only British feminists take part in. It’s entirely likely that there’s an American ‘Hayton’ under the radar that women are all too ready to fawn over because he ‘understands’ and ‘admits that he’s male’. I wonder if Bruce Jenner will assume Hayton’s role in the US. He’s been added to the roster of ‘contributors’ at Fox News, so we’ll be hearing more from him in the coming months. I also wonder if an American contingent of tru-trans feminists will emerge to publicly venerate Jenner, to feature him at feminist events, laud him as an ally for women’s rights as he LARPs about in woman-face. He’s already taken the first step by saying that men shouldn’t be allowed to compete against women in sports. Certain individuals hail this as a mighty insight when he says it, but yawn loudly when women make the same statement. How very feminist.

The Hayton Phenomenon, women falling all over themselves to praise a dreadful AGP for his moments of being slightly less-dreadful, is a re-tread of the same old misogyny. A woman stating basic biological facts, having a grasp of history, etc. - nothing to see here, keep it moving or a reason to call the militia. A man making the same statement - cue the angel choir, everything stops, let’s have a party. Hayton’s running around in woman-face isn’t nearly as important as his maleness, which, for certain women, validates their feminist ideas.

I could be wrong, but…..is a woman really a feminist if she needs to be validated by an AGP? I’m thinking ‘no’ but….I could be wrong.