Honestly just bizarre
Yes yes, that’s right, we’re the ones who are saying the equivalent of “the moon is made of apple pie.”
Abigail Thorn is a British actress (formerly known as Oliver Thorn; born 24 April 1993)… Thorn publicly came out as a transgender woman in January 2021.
So Thorn doesn’t have a female body, Thorn isn’t biologically female. It’s just lying, this kind of thing – unabashed brazen lying. It’s gaslighting in its most basic sense. It may be true that Thorn thinks he “feels like” a woman, but if it’s true that he came out as a trans woman last January then it’s not true that he has a female body. (It could be the Oliver version that was not true, I don’t know, but if it is true that Thorn is a trans woman then it isn’t true that he has a female body. “Trans woman” means a man (who has a male body) who identifies as/calls himself/claims to be a woman. It doesn’t mean a man who has a female body.
It’s not Satanic to point this out.
Wait till he tastes the moon rocks, though. It’s peach.
Thorn lives atop a great big bubble of cognitive dissonance. The fact that Thorn is not biologically a woman, has not a single body cell which is female, has only perhaps some surface plastic surgery to create the appearance or facsimile of womanhood – say, some fake breasts or a fake vagina – is in stark conflict with Thorn’s desperate conviction of actually being a woman, for reals.
The social reality we are in now, in which everybody is required to tiptoe about people like Thorn to avoid popping that bubble, so they can maintain their misguided illusions of womanhood and avoid falling into their sad reality, is dishonest, tawdry, and oppressive.
Referring to Thorn as an actress is generous: he creates youtube videos on philosophy under the name philosophytube. I wonder if he ever covered lying in his ethics videos?
I’m having a flashback right now to all the times I’ve heard theists express similar statements about atheists not believing in God — they can’t wrap their mind around it, it’s practically incomprehensible, it’s like denying the sun exists, it’s like someone saying that they don’t exist, etc. etc. And this total state of perplexion is elaborately performed despite the common understanding that belief in God is a matter of faith, a leap beyond the facts and reason to the truth known only to the heart. It’s one; it’s the other; it’s a floor wax AND a dessert topping!
When they first claimed TWAW they made a distinction between sex and gender, with gender being primary and the word “woman” moving over, leaving “female” to the cis. Now they appropriate “female” as well, a step made easy by the now standard recognition that they’re women, and thus the dictionary definition must apply to them.
Thorn is behaving the way we would behave if faced by someone putting forth a logical contradiction. In other words, like the situation we’re in now.
1. I am a trans woman.
2. Trans women are women.
3. Women have female bodies.
4. Therefore I have a female body.
As recently as five years ago, this reasoning would have been the scoffed at by GC and TRA alike. I remember outlining this argument to some TRA on FTB about that long ago, and was told that something so obviously silly was definitely not going to come to pass. I was even accused of exaggerating the TRA position as a strawman tactic. Their theories sure changed rapidly.
That reasoning was why I was shunned and piled on at FTB though – the fact that I made a distinction between the political and the ontological. FORBIDDEN. That was more than 6 years ago.
My, how time flies when you’re having fun!
“Irrational disgust.”
Well, disgust is an emotional response, so irrational is redundant. Grabbing a definition: a feeling of revulsion or strong disapproval aroused by something unpleasant or offensive.
In all candor, I experience disgust from seeing tattoos, some piercings, and ear gauges. More extreme body modifications would not alleviate such feelings.
cause like
I assume “she” means “because, like…”
I wonder if Oliver ever spoke or wrote like that, or is this is performative by Abigail, assuming that is the way women speak?
Kind of Twitter performative I think – look how slangy and casual and down with the kids I am. Youngspeak more than womanspeak.
I believe that one of the major issues that is causing so much confusion for the general public (and Labour Party Officers) is that everyone involved thinks that they have the scientific position and that the pop sci magazines such as Discover, Sci Am, the two male showrunners at Science-Based Medicine, and I am sure that there are a host of others, assure us that because of clownfish and interex people it’s all science so shut up, bigots.
There is not even a testable definition of what a transgender person is. And, all deference to Miranda Yardley and Debbie Hayton, and the “good transgender people” who don’t insist that gender trumps sex, but it’s quite reasonable to be skeptical that such a condition even exists. It’s an extraordinary claim. So, when our Katy claims that science is on their side, he’s not lying. He’s wrong, but he’s not lying. He’s been told by authoritative sources that it is valid science.
It’s an extraordinary claim, that men can be women, without even a shadow of evidence, let alone extraordinary evidence. I think it’s quite reasonable and not bigoted to be skeptical I don’t doubt that there are men who feel quite out of place, miserable in fact, being men and think that the grass would be greener as a woman because then they could express themselves as they truly want to be and still maintain the gender structure that in fact traps all of us into expectations and social roles. But instead of affirming that they are women, I think that they would be best served if they could learn to accept that they are men, and be free to express femininity as much as they want. Without deforming their bodies.
It’s not apple pie, Abigail. It’s the moon, and it’s rock. Solid rock.