Let me start this post with a disclaimer: I don’t like Matt Walsh and I’m not going to be kind to him here. Well, that’s not exactly true; I don’t know Matt Walsh, so I can’t really say if I like him personally or not. I guess it would be better to say “I don’t like what Matt Walsh writes”. I’m still not going to be kind to him, though. So, if you’re not a fan of snarky, sarcastic articles (and maybe even a personal attack or two), this post probably isn’t going to be your cup of tea.

Conservative blogger Matt Walsh wrote an article about Bruce Jenner’s recent coming out that appeared on The Blaze. Now, I haven’t seen much from Walsh and, to be honest, I was hoping he’d given up writing and moved on to a vocation more suited to his personality; like, witch hunter, for instance. Alas, that was not to be. On the other hand, it was nice to see that Walsh’s douchery continues unabated; the man is nothing if not consistent. While consistency may be the hobgoblin of small minds, it is comforting in its own twisted way.

For those of you unfamiliar with Walsh’s work, most of it makes about as much sense as the disclaimer “For external use only” might when found  in the instructions for an underwear patch that makes farts smell like mint (that’s a real thing, by the way).  For the record, I’m not linking to the piece in question in hopes that people won’t click on it and boost his numbers. If you want to read this fudge dragon disguised as journalism, you’ll have to find it yourself. I seriously considered not writing this post at all, but I can’t let this pass without addressing it. And, by “addressing it”, I mean “mocking it unmercifully”.

Saying that Walsh presents himself as a douchecanoe on-line is like saying Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight saga isn’t very good. Both are true, but fall massively short of conveying the full nature of their abject shittiness. While Meyer’s saga didn’t hurt anyone (although, it did inspire E. L. James’ “Fifty Shades of Grey”. So…), the same can’t be said of Walsh’s output, which regularly reduces important issues like same-sex marriage, gender equality, a living wage, etc, to “hot takes”, e.g. an opinion based on simplistic moralizing rather than actual thought. And, almost always, those “hot takes” are incredibly hurtful to the object of Walsh’s ire.

In his latest diatribe, Walsh informs us that he cannot accept Jenner as a woman because gender dysphoria is actually mental illness. He doesn’t use the term “gender dysphoria”, however. The least shitty phrases he employs are  “transgender agenda” and “transgenderism”. To Walsh, the desire to live your life in a way that’s in agreement with your identity is a terrible thing.

Of course, truth, accuracy or understanding the basics of his topic seem to be foreign concepts to Walsh. Multiple times, he reduces gender and sexuality to whether you have indoor or outdoor plumbing. Like this humdinger: “He (Jenner) can ‘feel’ like a woman, but shockingly, those feelings will never manifest in a uterus or ovaries.” Right, because women are nothing more than womb and a set of ovaries. This idea, along with the statement, “…if our DNA, anatomy, reproductive systems, hormones, and chromosomes indicate “man,” we are men. End of discussion. That’s all there is.” suggests that we know all there is to know about gender and sexuality. But, we don’t. Not even close.

Of course, no “conservative” argument against LGBT issues is complete without invoking the divine and Walsh’s screed is no exception. In an impressively agonizing set of mental gymnastics (I almost sprained my brain trying to follow his reasoning), Walsh claims that being transgender is impossible because God would never allow someone to be born with an imperfect body; physical deformities excepted, of course. Right.

But, there’s a problem with this “reasoning”: in stating that if God is both omnipotent and infallible, it is impossible for God to accidentally put a soul in the “wrong” body” and then stating that that people are born with birth defects because “We are mortal beings in a fallen world in which sickness, death, and deformity are a temporary feature”, Walsh seems to believe that God creates everything perfect… except when God doesn’t. It’s like saying “God is infallible until God being infallible doesn’t fit the narrative I’m constructing.”

In closing, Walsh says “I don’t accept Bruce Jenner as a woman. I don’t accept “transgender” as an actual state of human existence.” Nobody’s asking you to accept anything, Matt. If you do, great. But, honestly, we’d be all happy if you’d just stop being a douchebag.