Horrorcow Tommy Tooter / Thomas Wasserberg - Dog-Abusing, Trash-Eating Pedo, Neo-Nazi, Fake Tranny, "1st-Wave Incel", Hounded YouTuber to Suicide

[RadioactiveMonkeyMan]

So how is this supposed to happen after this happens?

Second question for @Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg ; how are the Space Jews TM. supposed to clone a afab version of you with your rib if it's charred ash?

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

Projecting your sick zoophilic fantasies at me again, i see , pig woman. For a scientist, you sure are unscientific, my bitch. What's your specialty again? Doping up kids who misbehave calling them mentally ill?

You're the only one obsessed with drugging kids who don't belong to you, so you can fuck them Tom. You're just mad that I hold a doctorate in nursing, which is traditionally a woman's field and should stay that way, and my husband is a physician. You only shit yourself playing with your penis pretending to be a doctor's wife, Tom.

 

[ManShrike]

Psychology is a soft science

What the fuck does that even mean?

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

Your worthless corpse is unlikely to even make it to a Potter's Field, left to rot where it fell when the grid goes down and stays down , killing off you mean , stupid, over paid , underworked exceptional honkies .

Why do you copy everything everyone says? Are you retarded?

 

[BlueArmedDevil]

What the fuck does that even mean?

Google it

 

[Positron]

Psychology is a soft science that is heavily populated with narcissists and sexually repressed people.

Both narcissism and sexual repression -- not to mention your go-to insult, projection -- are concepts in Psychology. You seems to be an eager learner of Psychology; are you sure you're not sexually repressed?

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

nah, that's the face i make when twats like you get on your knees and lick my asshole, cupcake.

You certainly will be doing that AnObvious self-loathing drunken oaf.

My worthless corpse is getting incinerated, the ashes encased in a dirt clod full of wildflower seeds and shot out of a cannon off the sea wall where i grew up.

Your worthless corpse is unlikely to even make it to a Potter's Field, left to rot where it fell when the grid goes down and stays down , killing off you mean , stupid, over paid , underworked exceptional honkies .

You have no family and no one cares about you. Your box that they'll throw your ashes into will rot on a shelf until they finally decide to toss it into the dump. Have fun sitting in the cremation closet.

After three years your ashes will be tossed into a cremation pit.

 

[Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg]

What the fuck does that even mean?

It means the natural sciences are hard in that the scientific methods are more rigid than the "soft" social sciences that allow for more speculative conclusions to be adopted as valid, such as the now thoroughly discredited Blanchard AGP theory mean, stupid people cling to as justification for their transphobic violence. there is nothing to support it but a transphobic closeted homosexual psychology researcher's opinions.

 

[Daisymae]

the "soft" social sciences that allow for more speculative conclusions to be adopted as valid

talk on how this relates to gender vs sex.

 

[Tragi-Chan]

For a scientist, you sure are unscientific, my bitch.

Aren’t you the guy who thinks he’s a woman because he had an undescended testicle?

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

I see Tom here doesn't know what the empirical method is. Hard and soft science refers to how the scientific method is used.

 

[Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg]

talk on how this relates to gender vs sex.

are you ready to pay tuition for the upper lever dissertation on the differences between the hard and soft sciences views of sex, sexuality and gender, none of which are dependent on your chromosomes beyond determining what kind of gamete your gonads produce? The natural sciences and clinical studies are what are proving the theories of people like McHugh, Meyer, Money, Blanchard and Littman to be invalid. Julia Serano and Brynn Tannehill do a very good job on this topic, both of them with hard science credentials.

 

[Tragi-Chan]

are you ready to pay tuition for the upper lever dissertation on the differences between the hard and soft sciences views of sex, sexuality and gender, none of which are dependent on your chromosomes beyond determining what kind of gamete your gonads produce? The natural sciences and clinical studies are what are proving the theories of people like McHugh, Meyer, Money, Blanchard and Littman to be invalid. Julia Serano and Brynn Tannehill do a very good job on this topic, both of them with hard science credentials.

You know someone’s full of shit when they start wailing about payment when their scientific knowledge is challenged.

 

[Daisymae]

The natural sciences and clinical studies are what are proving the theories of people like McHugh, Meyer, Money, Blanchard and Littman to be invalid. Julia Serano and Brynn Tannehill do a very good job on this topic, both of them with hard science credentials.

a.) Not true
b.) Doesn't answer my question.

Tom doesn't know shit about gender. I remember him saying that the Littman study was debunked and removed from plos one, then saying plos one doesn't peer review. None of that was true. He is so out of his league when it comes to research its amusing to watch him flounder. More about Littman's study, even after being reviewed by senior members of the journal’s editorial team, two Academic Editors, a statistics reviewer, and an external expert reviewer, there was no challenge to the results of the study. The only thing the journal asked for was more description of her methods and additional description in the abstract and conclusion. If a study stands up to that scrutiny, then the appropriate rigor was applied.

BTW, Julia and Brynn are lying to you if they have told you that their education has been anywhere near gender or sex studies. That's nowhere near their area of expertise. Try to stay intellectually honest, tom.

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

Julia

Brynn

It means the natural sciences are hard in that the scientific methods are more rigid than the "soft" social sciences that allow for more speculative conclusions to be adopted as valid, such as the now thoroughly discredited Blanchard AGP theory mean, stupid people cling to as justification for their transphobic violence. there is nothing to support it but a transphobic closeted homosexual psychology researcher's opinions.

Literally, nobody takes fat, ugly autogynepheliacs seriously......nobody except for other ugly fat white AGPs anyway.


Tom, nobody values your life or takes your ideas or opinions seriously. Ray Blanchard is a great man, and here's where he was on 76 birthday

This is where you'll be on your 76th birthday

 

[Daisymae]

Julia

Brynn

Literally, nobody takes fat, ugly autogynepheliacs seriously......nobody except for other ugly fat white AGPs anyway.


Tom, nobody values your life or takes your ideas or opinions seriously. Ray Blanchard is a great man, and here's where he was on 76 birthday

This is where you'll be on your 76th birthday

Notice how its Blanchard's identifications of transgender that are discussed in the DSM? Where is Brynn's? Julia's?

 

[totallyrandomusername]

I think you're being a bit generous. That's how Old Tom looks now. Actually, that body may even be a little cleaner than Old Hobo Tom.

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

are you ready to pay tuition for the upper lever dissertation on the differences between the hard and soft sciences views of sex, sexuality and gender, none of which are dependent on your chromosomes beyond determining what kind of gamete your gonads produce? The natural sciences and clinical studies are what are proving the theories of people like McHugh, Meyer, Money, Blanchard and Littman to be invalid. Julia Serano and Brynn Tannehill do a very good job on this topic, both of them with hard science credentials.

You don't even know what hard/ soft science means.

 

[Daisymae]

BTW here is an example of Serano's writing on gender. Its basically a lazy whine about autogynephilia where he offers no evidence, just citations. If someone wants to be taken seriously, they need to offer empirical evidence. Serano is incapable of offering that in this whinefest.

https://www.juliaserano.com/av/Serano-AutogynephiliaEmbodiment.pdf

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

BTW here is an example of Serano's writing on gender. Its basically a lazy whine about autogynephilia where he offers no evidence, just citations. If someone wants to be taken seriously, they need to offer empirical evidence. Serano is incapable of offering that in this whinefest.

https://www.juliaserano.com/av/Serano-AutogynephiliaEmbodiment.pdf

Reads like a typical Wikipedia article

Nothing from Julia Serano on the Lancet so they don't matter.