"Why are you going out of your way to be an asshole, Matt?"
Why are you going out of your way to be an asshole, Matt?”

So, I fully intended to write a scathing satirical piece on how progressives are falling all over themselves to tell a wealthy white woman how courageous she is for coming out as transgender. I was going to make snarky comments about how the possibility of being misgendered on Twitter is exactly like the discrimination and violence that other, less privileged trans people live with on a daily basis and follow them up with a snide remark about a certain Twitter bot. But now, thanks to Matt Walsh, that’s all out the window.

The “wealthy white woman referred to in the previous paragraph is, of course, Caitlyn Jenner. And, Walsh fucked up my satirical tour de force by writing an incredibly douchey post on The Blaze about her. Before we go any further, I want to say that, as the father of a transgender child, I have a certain degree of bias when it comes to this subject. So,  if it seems like I’m personally attacking Walsh at any point in this post, well, I probably am. I apologize for that in advance. But, honestly, it’s really more of a fauxpology, because any father who won’t go after a fucktard saying shitty things about his kid isn’t much of a father in my book. And, make no mistake, Walsh is saying shitty things about my kid (and any other trans person, for that matter); he’s just using Caitlyn Jenner as a proxy to do it.

The latest steaming pile of dog shit from Matt Walsh is titled “Calling Bruce Jenner a Woman Is an Insult to Women“. I really struggled with linking to it, but in the end, I decided that go ahead and do so, for two reasons:
1) However shitty it might be, Walsh’s work is his own and if I’m   going to use it, I need to honor that. I know I’d want the same thing
from him if the roles were reversed. Sort of “Golden Rule” thing, you know?
2) Hatred and bigotry need to be laid bare if we hope to do anything about it. And, nothing shows up the hate and bigotry this article is filled with better than Walsh’s own words. Do I feel like I need a shower right about now? Absolutely. But, feeling dirty on occasion comes with the territory when you’re a blogger. The trick is to feel dirty for the right reasons. And, exposing the douchiness of a jerk like Matt Walsh definitely qualifies as a “right reason”.

What’s so bad about Walsh’s latest spew? It’s just shitty, that’s what. Look, I’m not saying that I don’t have problems with this whole Caitlyn Jenner story. There’s that celebrity worship thing I mentioned in the leading paragraph. Or, that I so wish that the first person to come out as trans in such public way wasn’t intimately connected with “Keeping Up With Kardashians”. And, the idea that they’re making a reality show about Jenner’s transition gives me the heebie jeebies. But, purposely misgendering Jenner and saying ad nauseam that she is not a woman just so you can pick up a few bucks from an august journalistic institution(?) like The Blaze is pretty fucking shitty. Unfortunately, being “pretty fucking shitty” is Walsh’s stock in trade.

So, what, exactly, is so shitty about what Walsh says in this article? Well, first of all, there is gross misrepresentation of research. Early on, Walsh claims that “post-op ‘transgenders’ very often regret their decision, and in many cases attempt suicide”, citing a Guardian piece about a 2004 British study on gender-confirmation surgery. But, as Brynn Tannehill states, the study actually showed that patients benefited from the surgery, but the small sample size prevented any definitive conclusion. Then, there’s the way Walsh constantly and purposely misgenders Jenner, calling her “Bruce” and using male pronouns throughout the piece. And, there’s his  “Ode to Real Women” (stolen from my friend, Michael Woywood) which is “offensive, condescending, patriarchal” and “a masterful attempt at pandering” (ibid).

There are a few lighter moments in the article, however. Here are a few gems:

  • Trying to link Jenner’s attempt to live an authentic life to his version of cultural appropriation; which consists of suburban white kids listening to Nicki Minaj and wearing flat-brimmed hats Obviously, he has about as much understanding of cultural appropriation as he does of what it means to be transgender.
  • “After many years and at least a dozen viral Dove marketing campaigns, it seems that, for the sake of the gay agenda, we’ve utterly abandoned the whole “women shouldn’t be Photoshopped or plastered with makeup and silicone in order to reinforce a subjective standard of femininity” thing. Perhaps the one single thing liberals were actually right about has now been tossed into the garbage because it doesn’t serve the gay/”transgender” narrative.” Yes, Matt, women are photoshopped and plastered with silicone and make up all because of “the gay agenda”. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that sex sells, a fact established long before Caitlyn Jenner appeared on the cover of Vanity Fair.
  • “We’re talking about a sex change like it’s an Apple product. With this kind of language, we have not only made the self mutable, we’ve also commodified it and turned it into a spectacle that can be sold for profit”. Yes, beloved, the man who has commodified rage and turned into a spectacle that sold for profit just blasted others for doing that very thing. I don’t know if he’s really that clueless or just thinks his audience is stupid enough to actually fall for such bullshit. Either way, it’s not good.
  • “I wouldn’t want anyone to accuse me of being critical, so what I’d like to offer, on this glorious and unprecedented occasion of a reality TV star’s Photoshopped magazine spread, are just a few observations. I’m not interested in levying baseless insults…” said  Walsh after spending 9 paragraphs levying baseless insults (poorly disguised as loving concern for Jenner’s mental and emotional state). That  may be the funniest line in the entire piece.

The title of this piece is a play on the title of Walsh’s article.  Unlike Walsh, however, I’m not saying he isn’t a Christian, just that calling him one is an insult to the rest of us. But, I’m also reminded of something Hugh Hollowell once told me: That I don’t get to say whether I’m a Christian or not, the people around me do. And, they make that decision based on how I treat others. Based on what he writes, I cannot call Matt Walsh a Christian. Or, if he is, I can’t say he’s very good one.