Philosophy Tube / Oliver Lennard / Oliver "Olly" Thorn / Abigail Thorn - Breadtube's Patrick Bateman.

[Oliver Onions]

This is a Darwinian selection event. The mutant genes of the lefties are terminating themselves and we'd be fools, damned fools, to stand in nature's way.

#TransHealthCareForKidsNow

For adults whatever (although they should still foot the bill themselves) but the kids who are indoctrinated into this shit don't deserve to have their lives completely ruined because they were groomed into a stupid fad all their friends were doing.

We reached this agreement universally about everything else that can fuck up your life (tattoos, the army, marriage etc) so it's insanity to suggest an amhole installation should be the exception based on 'scientific' evidence that is flimsy at best when it's not just flat-out wrong.

 

[AssignedEva]

He's not using evidence to inform his position. He's decided what his position is and he's pantomiming evidence to support it. It's almost as if we've stumbled into The Sorcerer's Apprentice. Little Mickey puts on the hat and declares "I know how this works! You stand up all big and tall and say 'I have a study that says you have to do what I tell you'. That's how you always play it. Well, this time I've got a study, so you have to do as I say!"

This is literally what Ollie does. Except he often doesn't even bother pantomiming evidence in his arguments, so he uses "I/we want".
Trans people don't want to go to "segregated" clinics to see a specialist, so you should make GPs prescribe trans healthcare!
Trans people don't want to have diagnostic assessments, so you have to just give them the medications no questions asked!
Trans people don't want evidence based medicine, so you have to fund any and all plastic surgery they request!
I have a voice, so you have to do as I say!

"Oh, look at you, moving the goalposts. Look at you, gatekeeping. Deciding which studies count and which ones don't. Well, I believe this one's every bit as good as yours. And I believe it proves me right."

This is also literally what Ollie does. Ollie is in no more of a position to judge what studies are good or bad because he doesn't have so much as an undergraduate degree in biology, biomedical science or pre-med. Given the choice between the President of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health or a guy who did an undergrad in Philosophy and makes youtube videos with a dress on, I think I know who's more likely to have clinical insight.
Ollie would of course point to groups like WPATH or some trans people working in the medical field as disagreeing with Cass... but that's obviously based in picking people who agree with him, which Ollie is classifying as "doublewrong". And ultimately the decisions made in the Tavistock to disregard the Dutch protocol and just hand out puberty blockers to children with comorbidities, sudden onset claims of gender dysphoria with no prior history and indeed who were already midway through puberty were not rooted in clinical evidence... which is why the NHS is soon launching a clinical trial and a wider joint programme of research. Ollie has already decided that if this doesn't agree with him, it will be proof that the clinical study is ideologically poisoned and so doesn't count.

If there was a drug with a 1% chance of healing your terminal cancer and a 99% chance of dangerous side effects, I'd support your right to take it if you wanted

I would too. But I don't support taxpayer funding for that, sorry, because we have a finite pot and need to focus that money on treatments that demonstrably have a better impact based on cost. This is why the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence rejects multiple drugs, including - in the last year - Olaparib (but only in the treatment of prostate cancer, it can be used for breast cancer) and Enhertu. In both of these cases the treatment was too expensive for the potential benefit to the patient.
I also think doctors play a diagnostic role. In this case it's not even "the drug has a 1% chance of healing my terminal cancer", but "I think I have terminal cancer, and therefore I demand this drug". Maybe you don't have cancer and the doctor needs to assess you? This is why breast augmentations outside of reconstructive surgery post mastectomy, or finasteride for male pattern baldness (but the same medication is given for other conditions) are not provided on the NHS because in both of those cases you can learn to live with your flaws and just giving you cosmetic treatments doesn't help you. In that regard the "government" (NHS clinicians) "own your body and force you to do things you don't want" (decline treatment because you don't actually need it).
Anyway, always fun to get a peak behind the curtain with Ollie. If his new tactic is to literally argue "gender criticals are writing their own studies, they're gaming the process of peer review and are lying all the time, so research is a ritual and you need to just do what I say" then that's going to get precisely zero traction in the NHS.

Even if we're generous and agree Olly's vending machine idea is correct about healthcare, like Ollie was told there is only 8 clinics that can provide what Olly wants. A quick guess based off a 2021 census means there is about 1 clinic for every 14,250 people likely to seek out those services in the UK. Any reasonable person would understandably conclude waiting in line for a vending machine with over thousands of people ahead of you is going to be a massive wait and that is not including the clinic staff needing time to rest and resupply, and additional resource scarcity due to treatments for the non-trans citizens like hair treatment for balding men.

This is actually a key tenet of his argument. "The waiting lists are too long to go to special clinics and get a diagnosis, so scrap the special clinics and scrap the diagnosis".
At the end of 2023 there were 31,000 transgender patients on a waiting list for an initial assessment at a Gender Identity Clinic. In part this is due to the massive jump in referrals; in 2012 there were under 250 referrals of under 18s to gender identity clinics while in 2022 there were more than 5000 (which itself was more than twice the number in 2021). I don't see figures for year on year totals of all adult patients, but there's various figures getting thrown around; 18% year-on-year increase in Oxfordshire over a 6-year period (2011–2016), 49% increase in referrals in Nottinghamshire 2018-2024, 94% increase nationally 2016-2020, 500% increase in transgender identification 2000-2018. And from what I've been able to work out, there's not been a point where the discharge rate has exceeded the referral rate, so the number of people in treatment is continually growing.
For comparison a 13% increase in referrals to paediatric emergency mental healthcare in the last year has basically caused collapse of the paediatric emergency healthcare system (no, this increase is not from all the trans kids on waiting lists, Ollie). No secondary care service would be able to handle that massive jump in that time frame and - very obviously - this also triggers massive alarm bells that this specific form of treatment is seeing continual surges in demand. Which Ollie would probably frame as just being the result of increased acceptance and compare it to handedness... he would of course be avoiding "research as a ritual" when asserting that and going off vibes. Thus part of why he argues the only way to cope with this surge in demand is to just get GPs to issue prescriptions for anything anyone wants.

 

[Oliver Onions]

In this case it's not even "the drug has a 1% chance of healing my terminal cancer", but "I think I have terminal cancer, and therefore I demand this drug".

This is the crux of the trans healthcare issue imo. It's the equivalent of demanding chemotherapy because you feel like you have cancer, and threatening to kill yourself if doctors refuse to sign off on your treatment.

It's why I get so unbelievably MATI when dishonest troons talk about how kids already get prescribed hormone blockers so it's not even a big deal, but never actually explain why they are prescribed them (spoiler: it's to stop them starting puberty early, not so they can nerf their entire adolescent development).

 

[kazuhiro]

Olly is coming at it from a supposedly philosophical position, him talking about medical studies or evidence is chaff and misdirection. No amount or quality of evidence will be sufficient for him to change his demands. He insists on complete bodily autonomy (for things he wants, of course; I bet he supports vaccine mandates, for example), with any costs to be borne by others. "Do what I will" is the whole of the law for him. He also just really likes making unreasonable demands in a condescending manner.

(Incidentally, anyone see this, from Leor Sapir:

A new paper argues that “gender-affirming care” for adolescents should not be measured by whether it’s “effective” at reducing psychiatric distress and improving life functioning.

Authors (inc. A. de Vries) gesture toward an “autonomy” focused model.

To be clear, this line of thinking has animated the “affirming” model for a while now. The authors are now saying it explicitly. Clinical/psychosocial outcomes don’t really matter, apparently.

This isn’t medicine.

Many "ethicists" should get the rope.)

Spoiler: Bluesky posts

4chan.

Pitching a show with an asexual lead.

A repost.

New PT episode filming in January, plus Patreon shilling.

He was wearing this hoodie in the patron pics.

 

[The Jackal]

I also think doctors play a diagnostic role. In this case it's not even "the drug has a 1% chance of healing my terminal cancer", but "I think I have terminal cancer, and therefore I demand this drug".

This is the crux of the trans healthcare issue imo. It's the equivalent of demanding chemotherapy because you feel like you have cancer, and threatening to kill yourself if doctors refuse to sign off on your treatment.

But actually I think it's even less reasonable than that, because cancer is an objectively real medical condition, whereas gender dysphoria is questionable at best. And Olly himself doesn't even believe it exists.

So it's more like saying, in Olly's case: "I admit I don't have cancer, and in fact I deny the very existence of cancer, but I still want the drugs that are prescribed for cancer because I think it would be fun to take them."

 

[Oliver Onions]

So it's more like saying, in Olly's case: "I admit I don't have cancer, and in fact I deny the very existence of cancer, but I still want the drugs that are prescribed for cancer because I think it would be fun to take them."

That's a good point, and it's made even more complicated that even among trannies they can't universally agree on what transness actually is (but they do all agree you're definitely valid no matter what).

Some think you need a diagnosis before you can even consider treatment, others think you should doctor shop til you find one willing to give you the diagnosis you want; some think AGPs don't count as trans, others think euphoria boners are proof you must be trans; some think kids should wait til they're older just in case, others think if kids don't immediately get what they've been told they want they'll neckrope.

In a sane world, all this should be good reason to pump the brakes at least until we can really codify a definition the way cancer is either cancer or it isn't, but instead they want to put pedal to the metal and butcher as many people as they can as fast as possible.

 

[AssignedEva]

(Incidentally, anyone see this, from Leor Sapir:

That paper is shocking (but enlightening) and I had been perusing it this week, actually. I note it came out on December 24th - a Christmas Eve letter to Father Christmas? The authors are seemingly associated with the Centre of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria, located within the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam's research hospital and the originators of the Dutch Protocol - who've been criticised for their lack of scientific rigour in the past. They are:

• Ezra Oosthoek (MA Gender Studies, PhD candidate)
• Skye Stanwich (B.A. Psychology, Certificate in Gender and Women’s Studies from UoWisconsin, MA Sociology, PhD candidate)
• Karl Gerritse (MD in Liaison Psychiatry, Postdoctoral Researcher)
• David Matthew Doyle (Assistant Professor in Medical Psychology, Senior Lecturer in social psychology)
• Annelou L.C. de Vries (child and adolescent psychiatrist)

Spoiler

So some people with chops are assisting. They explore 16/24 papers cited in the Standards of Care Version 8 from WPATH around adolescent treatment, which were being provided as an evidence base for the efficacy of treatment. The assumptions they question are

• Children/adolescents must be experiencing severe distress before transitioning, and delaying treatment will only increase suffering
• Successful treatment can be measured by the linear progress to a stable, clearly defined gender identity and presentation that fits into a gender binary (and then passing)
• The treatment leads to an improvement in overall wellbeing
• The patient does not regret transition

They do actually acknowledge quite a few different things that frequently get brought up. For example, a diagnosis of gender dysphoria with distress is often a pre-requisite for treatment, but distress can be hard to quantify as it presents differently in different people, some patients may be experiencing distress unrelated to gender dysphoria, don't experience distress around gender dysphoria, or indeed don't actually have gender dysphoria (they just want to change their body to match their self identified gender - SOC8 recommends "gender incongruence" over "gender dysphoria" or distress)... and multiple cited sources actually mention there's a lack of evidence that early intervention specifically improves distress. They also note that adolescence can be a period of identity development and argue that people can change their minds over gender. Regret can indeed be an outcome, but patients can regret lots of things. Also the narratives around distress and improvement may encourage patients to lie and pretend they're going to kill themselves if they don't get treatment, and then lie and pretend they have no regret (or drop out of post-intervention studies), so you can't necessarily trust some of these patients are actually showing improvement.

Hil Malatino argues “transitioning doesn’t have to be wholly curative, or even minimally happy-making, in order for it to be imperative”, echoed by Avgi Saketopoulou and Ann Pellegrini. Kadji Amin raises that assuming that gender affirming care actually provides clinical benefits could be weaponised to restrict access to care if it's proven that it doesn't. These aren't clinical research texts, by the way, they're a professor of gender studies, a psychoanalyst specialising in queerness, a professor of performance studies and another professor of gender studies, but they're cited in this paper (because it's multidisciplinary). Basically the main argument here is that the clinical approach shouldn't be about helping kids with distress to do better, but letting kids transition - and if they regret it and want to detransition after mangling their bodies, help them understand that being sad about things is part of life (this is legitimately something that gets argued). Essentially instead of trying to fix kids who have something wrong with them, just let them have bodily autonomy. The comparison one paper by Florence Ashley (a law professor) draws is to abortion and birth control (quotes are from that cited paper rather than this one):

Birth control, abortion, and adolescent medical transition are analogous insofar as they intervene on healthy physiological states such as puberty, sexual traits, fertility, and pregnancy, by reason of the person’s fundamental self-conception and desired life. Scientific evidence of mental health benefits associated with birth control and abortion is also of relatively low quality under the standards of evidence-based medicine. However, birth control and abortion remain commonly understood as ethical and allowed on account of their effectiveness at preventing or terminating pregnancy. Tacitly acknowledging the importance of autonomy, debates on abortion and birth control’s relationship to mental health have focused not on whether they are beneficial to mental health but on whether they cause substantial psychological harm—with leading professional bodies agreeing that they do not (Academy of Medical Royal Colleges 2011). Given the analogy of purpose between adolescent medical transition and reproductive health interventions and given their comparable evidentiary standing both in terms of mental health benefits and adverse effects, adolescent medical transition should be also considered effective and ethically justified. The limited evidence base surrounding the mental health benefits of adolescent medical transition does not make it unethical.

If adolescent medical transition is analogous to reproductive healthcare, requiring evidence of mental health benefits for only one of them would be a double standard. Because of autonomy, evidence of mental health benefits are not required of birth control and abortion and it is unclear whether such evidence could be mustered—as discussed in the section on scientific evidence below. Autonomy outweighs concerns regarding beneficence and non-maleficence surrounding reproductive health. By demonstrating a double standard, I circumvent potential disputes around how to best balance autonomy against other bioethical principles. If a balance is acceptable for reproductive health, so should it be for adolescent medical transition.

Decisions regarding gender and the family fall within individuals’ sphere of autonomy. Within the spectrum of autonomy, decisions regarding core aspects of personal identity deserve the utmost respect, going to the heart of how we live in and relate to the world. To deny people’s autonomy over such matters is to deny their ability to define who they are and live out this self-understanding. In addition to undermining sovereignty over oneself, refusing to give uptake to someone’s self-understanding at these critical junctures risks impairing their self-respect and self-trust. Few routine medical decisions have such weighty implications for the patient.

I'm spoilering it as Ollie didn't cite it specifically, but it's aligned with a lot of his arguments (which have been growing in scope since the 2000s - the advent of queer theory really started shifting how clinicians discuss transgender treatment) and he's probably read some of the source texts. Basically the outcome of gender affirming care isn't based on it improving a mental health state, but in obtaining a specified desired physiological state - and the comparison to be drawn is to abortion, which is justified as being about a girl wanting an abortion, rather than because giving her an abortion will measurably improve her mental wellbeing compared to pre-abortion baseline. In fact, gender affirming treatment could make patients considerably less happy, but being unhappy (negative affect) is part of life, and so whether or not children are experiencing distress, would show improvement with treatment or would regret it are all incredibly irrelevant because you should just let them have the surgery. A lot of these arguments are covered in the (cited) 2018 article "My New Vagina Won’t Make Me Happy. And It Shouldn’t Have To." by Andrea Long Chu.
The abortion comparison is particularly galling given current contexts, but I'll leave any further analysis here for now.

He was wearing this in the patron pics.

Thread tax since I just rambled - I'm pretty sure his Mum is buying him bits of Holland Cooper outfits in an effort to make him dress less insane. The brand is not really found in cities, but there's a stockist in Heddon-On-The-Wall which is about a 10 minute drive from the Choob parental home. I'm willing to wager it was one of his Christmas presents because Mrs (Dr) Lennard didn't want to try and negotiate women's sizing on Ollie's enormous frame.

 

[Traummaschine]

I assume the review here refers to draculas ex girlfriend, where Olly was wearing goth fetish wear but wants the audience to pretend that it's authentic femininity.

@kazuhiro already posted the review, it was from The Prince:

Thorn, who highlights Hotspur’s attempts to be aggressively masculine, even while flaunting a black eyeshadow fetish (the problem with trying to visually represent gender is that you immediately run into stereotype), knows her Shakespeare: in 2019 she performed the complete works in five days, livestreamed for charity

The reviewers point about the excessive eyeshadow is clearly that Ollie isn't able to represent masculinity and femininity in anything but stereotypical ways. So to show that his character is actually feminine he puts on loads of eye shadow.

Whether he understood the criticism or not, I assume he's mostly mad about the review not being very positive. Better just call it transphobic and be done with it.

Ollie narrating an episode of The Alt-Right Playbook is somehow not a crossover I expected. This one's about trans healthcare, but also the abuse of scientific studies more generally. Be warned -- it's a doozy.

What a truly horrible video. As already pointed out, it's pretty ironic that studies about trans issues now can be wrong, biased and misrepresented. But he also presents this criticism completely one sided by being both unspecific and specific. His criticism of presenting studies is unspecific and can be applied to absolutely all studies, yet he still only talks about this specific situation with studies that have negative results in regards to gender transition. That way he can throw all their studies under the bus without ever actually having to specifically going into any of them. Of course, you have to want it to be true to actually fall for this very transparent sleigh of hand.

Still, it's apparently useless to debunk all these bad studies anyway, so you have to fall back to this completely new tactic that the SJWs have never used before: Appealing to people's moral sensibilities instead. According to Ollie the debate bros will tremble in their pants when having to justify why people shouldn't be able to do what they want with their own bodies. Now this is something almost everyone believes in if asked, but it's also, quite ironically, a very libertarian argument to not protect people at all against themselves. When that is said, very few people are against someone choosing to medically transition. The example given is about banning medical transition on minors, which is something completely different. Besides kids, people's main problem has to do with issues that negatively impacts other people, like taking time and money from the public health care system, making a joke out of women's sports etc.

Also, these lefties obsession with making retarded pejoratively coded new words to describe things so they can use that instead of actual arguments is the worst. What is "doublewrong" supposed to even mean? He doesn't even try to explain that. But you know.. it's wrong..even doubly wrong.

This thing exposes more about the lazy and bad tactics lefties use than the "alt right".

 

[ghjoigcbn]

His argument is so on the nose it almost seems lifted from discourse around vaccine mandates. People against mandates were saying, instead of arguing that the studies/ data are wrong, because you cant convince the other side (possibly because it’s a fake reason) you should use a bodily autonomy argument. Basically I dont think I should be forced to take a medical treatment against my will. The distinction, in my opinion, is there is a huge difference between the government forcing treatment on someone verses an institution saying hey, we aren’t going to offer you this treatment, because even if you consent to it, we have reason to believe it could cause a great deal of harm.

Like how you could be against state mandated institutionalization or shock treatment but you could still think it was fine that doctors decided to stop doing lobotomies on people because it’s unethical, even if a patient requested it. Being against vaccine mandates and against gender transition surgery could seem sort of contradictory on the surface but when you think about it, it really isn’t.

Olly and his ilk just think they know better than everyone else and should wield the power whichever way they see fit.

 

[scathefire]

It's why I get so unbelievably MATI when dishonest troons talk about how kids already get prescribed hormone blockers so it's not even a big deal, but never actually explain why they are prescribed them (spoiler: it's to stop them starting puberty early, not so they can nerf their entire adolescent development).

Not to mention that even the women given the blockers for precocious puberty suffered the same horrific side effects, like osteoporosis at a young age. I don’t know what a good solution to precocious puberty would be, but even puberty blockers are not an ideal one.

 

[Trianon]

This is why breast augmentations outside of reconstructive surgery post mastectomy, or finasteride for male pattern baldness (but the same medication is given for other conditions) are not provided on the NHS because in both of those cases you can learn to live with your flaws and just giving you cosmetic treatments doesn't help you. In that regard the "government" (NHS clinicians) "own your body and force you to do things you don't want" (decline treatment because you don't actually need it).

And in reality, the government will own their body forever once they start giving cosmetic treatments without first treating that underlying insecurity. Because if you have a right to gender-affirming surgery, you really have a right to being 100% satisfied with the outcome, a right to all the tweaks you need in order to create the vision of yourself in your head. You are entirely dependent on the skill of a surgeon and their willingness to lie to you about the limits of nature. Denying you any of that is the utmost cruelty when you believe that impossibilities are achievable. You can't hear "no" without feeling it as a wound.

 

[Aquarius]

I think it's just him thinking that he looks more female with his mouth agape. You see the same thing with people like Hontra.

Radical feminist and anti-pornography advocate Gail Dines once said that women in porn have a “fuck me face”. In her lectures, she would often joke with the audience by asking the women to do the “fuck me face”, and then asking if the men present also had such a look. Said expression would involve half-parted lips and lidded eyes. After the debacle that was “make my chinny all red”, I have zero faith in this being anything but pornography.

Anyway, it’s funny you should mention Hontra. I always assumed he did that stupid mouthbreather look because his FFS got botched and now his chin is a crumpled mess. Maybe you’re right and he’s just badly copying womanhood this cover of Lolita:

Spoiler: What they think they look like

Which is funny because Nabokov hated this shit specifically because he knew perverts like Nicholas William Parrott would beat off to it.

I want pure colors, melting clouds, accurately drawn details, a sunburst above a receding road with the light reflected in furrows and ruts, after rain. And no girls.

Emphasis my own.

Back when he was supporting Ricky Gervais, he used to do a bit about getting back at high school bullies by getting a sex change, sleeping with them and then revealing yourself.

That’s literally a standard tranny fantasy. It also betrays their male perspective. No woman feels better when men who bullied and frightened her admit they want to have sex with her. If anything, that scares her more because now it’s a sex pest thing and not a “asshole at school or work” thing. Being a man, he seems to think that being fucked gives him power, probably because he resents the power sexy women have over him and others. So much of this is bullied boys growing up physically but not emotionally, and ruminating upon their perceived wrongs.

Spoiler: Seriously, he’s just doing this comic:

And here’s what actually happens:

Spoiler: YWNBAW

Because Mr. Chaser’s stupid fantasy would never work IRL ever.

Anyway, I looked this Robin Ince dude up. Was not surprised that a bloated man with yellowed teeth hates women and wants to fuck effete men in the ass.

Spoiler: TW: Bri’ish Male

[Heavy breathing.] “Hello, Ms. Abigail, you’re the most beautiful woman I ever laid eyes upon… of course I see you as a real woman and not a catamite! Now, can you suck my dick? Maybe let me suck yours? Can you give me tips on tucking? We should lez out together… babes.”

Here’s a fight he had with Lineham that he was so proud of that he screenshotted and reposted to his Instagram:

Spoiler: Men yapping about women

Archive.

What Mr. Tranny Chaser fails to understand is that, when you’re a woman, most of your leaders will be rapists and sex pests, but you still have to issue some sort of vote because of the political consequences at hand. No one forgot that Trump went on the Lolita Express, it’s just that Kamala locked women up in cages with male sex offenders. This dude is trying to moralize to women that he cares more about them because he refuses to vote for a rapist… while shilling an accomplice to rape. A complete lack of perspective. Moralizing, hypocritical freak. I think I ship him and Olly. They can clang their giant heads together.

 

[2SLGBQTIA+ 2 Furious]

Of all the horrific trannies documented on this website, some of whom are literal serial killers, the majority of them would not come across as serial-killery as Oliver did on University Challenge.

Just dipping into the oldest video on his Philosophy Tube Live channel and he's well spoken with a fairly subtle northeast accent, but easily hams it up to sound like a propa Geordie like to voice different characters... but he seems to have instantly dropped his own accent upon trooning and his acting range now oscillates between wooden and psychopath.

 

[AfghanBlue]

Jesus fucking Christ. He must be skin walking his teenage posh lass peers because who the fuck is wearing this in 2024?
Did it transpire that he'd moved to West London, actually? Maybe he's obsessively 'walking one of his neighbours in his apartment block. Perhaps the cookies neighbourino girlfriend.

It's hideous, anyway.


Edit - oh, I forgot his ma was buying him these. From heddon on the wall - claim to fame, starting the foot and mouth outbreak which older rural kiwis may fondly remeber decimating the country at one point!

He must like them plenty enough to wear them though.
Posh horsey girls are often fucking massive framed too, so the sizing is probably more favourable. This proximity might be why he thought he had a shot at it actually. Seeing enough girls who look like Prince Edward.

 

[Stupid Sexy Flanders]

View attachment 6826449
Jesus fucking Christ. He must be skin walking his teenage posh lass peers because who the fuck is wearing this in 2024?
Did it transpire that he'd moved to West London, actually? Maybe he's obsessively 'walking one of his neighbours in his apartment block. Perhaps the cookies neighbourino girlfriend.

It's hideous, anyway.

I can almost promise you that there's a girl that Olly knew in school that he wanked off to and is now obsessively skin-walking. Remember: AGPs try to model themselves after what they consider to be the perfect woman (only better, ofc). There's some poor woman out there that he's likely trying to skin walk. I hope for her sake that she doesn't put it together because it must be horrifying to realise that Choob choo-choo-choosed them.

 

[AfghanBlue]

I can almost promise you that there's a girl that Olly knew in school that he wanked off to and is now obsessively skin-walking. Remember: AGPs try to model themselves after what they consider to be the perfect woman (only better, ofc). There's some poor woman out there that he's likely trying to skin walk. I hope for her sake that she doesn't put it together because it must be horrifying to realise that Choob choo-choo-choosed them.

The weird thing is, I always thought of RGS as a boys school. The girls equivalent was Sacred Hearts (sacred tarts).
But when I see the adverts for it on the metro, there's girls now too.

-Just looked it up and the 6th form allowed girls in '01, with the whole thing becoming fully co ed in '08.
Umm. I think that fits Olly in.. Yeah it does.

At least a comfortable few years of psychosexual obsession to really set.
But I think for a certain good amount of his time, firls wouldn't have been there. Which probably lent them a more taboo and mysterious air. Time and again single sex schooling ends up in neurotic adults.

 

[The Jackal]

oh, I forgot his ma was buying him these.

Possibly she was, but it's the kind of thing he'd get for himself anyway. He seems to vacillate between two extremes - either (a) he gets his makeup and hair done professionally and he's wearing (what he thinks is) a glamorous dress or a fetish outfit, or (b) he doesn't bother with makeup/hair/anything remotely feminine and slouches around in this kind of thing. He doesn't do what I think women tend to do when in public but not doing anything worth dressing up for and strike a balance between making an effort and not looking like you just got out of bed. Example of (a) Olly, at the wedding in Montana:



and (b) Olly, at the airport afterwards:

 

[Chris Konon]

Olly and his ilk just think they know better than everyone else and should wield the power whichever way they see fit.

Yeah troons just know the best what should be the treatment (or it shouldn’t be called that, as this is "pathologisation" or something) for their troonery, and they base that on what exactly? The oldtroon knowledge passed on discords and subreddits. It doesn’t matter that HRT wreaks havoc on their bodies, SRS mutilates their genitalia with lifelong consequences, they just know that this is what they should do, period. No questions asked, bigot.

It doesn’t even matter that they are not happy:

A lot of these arguments are covered in the (cited) 2018 article "My New Vagina Won’t Make Me Happy. And It Shouldn’t Have To." by Andrea Long Chu.

And that they don’t really become true women neither are socially perceived as women. It’s never ending cycle of delusions, self harm, and lashing out at the reality and people who doesn’t want to indulge them in their fantasy.

So what is the point of medical transition? It doesn’t make any sense, and it is not helping these people with their condition.

Is there any other group of patients that just knows how to treat themselves and lashes out when someone actually wants to research if they are right?

 

[Oliver Onions]

and (b) Olly, at the airport afterwards:

Olly rocking that late-90s John Cusack drip.

 

[AssignedEva]

Is there any other group of patients that just knows how to treat themselves and lashes out when someone actually wants to research if they are right?

You can draw a through line from Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed (oppressed people must play a key role in their own liberation, teachers should not see students as passive receptacles of their knowledge but instead have dialogue with them) to Robert Alford, Mike Oliver and the Union of the Physically Impaired against Segregation's work creating an emancipatory model of disability (disability is not the same as impairment; disabled people should be understood as a class oppressed by a society rather than just people suffering a medical condition; disability is a social construction) and then a turn via ACT UP and the Treatment Action Group targeting the FDA, NIH and companies like Burroughs Wellcome to try and speed up AIDS medication approvals.

Queer theory syncretised with 1960s enthnomethodology (basically how do people know "common sense things") and specifically the enthnomethodology around gender in the context of intersex patients (why "should" an intersex person fit inside a binary, if they're happy the way they are - and thus why should trans people, c.f. Gender: An Ethnomethodological Approach, Kessler and McKenna 1978 ), which creates more of an idea of gender identity vs specific medical problems (and the shift away from the transvestite vs transsexual distinction). By the 90s is when you see them mirroring the tactics of militant HIV activism, in part because there were trans people involved in that, and so directly targeting the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association (latterly WPATH). Jamison Green starts getting involved around the same time that the "International Bill of Gender Rights" gets written (~1995(, which includes:

• The right to define gender identity
• The right of free expression of gender identity
• The right of access to gendered space and participation in gendered identity
• The right to control and change one's own body
• The right to competent medical and professional medical care
• The right to freedom from psychiatric diagnosis or treatment

Or in other words, the sort of things Ollie talks about ("I should have any surgery I want no questions asked). By the 2000s you see the discreditation of John Money's claims about David Reimer and the negative reactions to people like Blanchard and Bailey (fun fact, the pioneer of puberty blockers, Peggy Cohen-Kettenis, is cancelled because she thinks AGPs are real but that they should be allowed to transition anyway) so there's further pushes away from classification/pathologisation to affirmation. And then everything catches fire in the 2010s.

So basically you do see a change from "doctor treats patient" to "patient advocates for the treatment that suits them" in a few areas, but I don't think anything ever got quite as turbo-boosted as transgender advocacy because it blended with a few different things. There's also probably a massive overlap with the neurodiversity movement (like with disability - they don't have a pathology, they are oppressed) but I'm less familiar with that aspect. That's probably the closest comparison - autistic people shouldn't mask, you shouldn't split hairs over asperger's vs autism, there's nothing wrong with autism it's just that neurotypicals create a system that excludes them etc. etc.