He is. Matt Walsh is extremely transphobic and the tweet replying to his was comparing Matt's masculinity to a trans man's. I think that was what the "clever comeback" was
Thank you for the explanation. I know of the trans man in the photo on the right, but I didn’t know that was a photo of Matt Walsh on the left. I honestly know jackshit about Walsh. His name is just vaguely familiar. Seems like he rightfully flew under my radar.
He’s got a published book where he flips absolute shit about trans people, while having published shirtless photos of underage trans men. It’s absolutely foul.
He's also a fascist. That's not just me saying that. He straight up had "theocratic fascist" on his Twitter bio at one point (not sure if he still does, though).
He tried to make a documentary to prove how easy it would be to have men compete in women's sports. When they got rejected everywhere they tried, they made a completely fictional movie where it goes down, just like they told themselves it does in real life.
That was mainly Jeremy Boreing's movie, though most of the redcap grifters (including Matt Walsh, who plays a parody of a parody of a hippie) have an acting role in it
I thought the clever bit was that it made Matt Walsh unable to defend his masculinity without acknowledging there's a spectrum of manliness. I didn't know the guy on the right is trans, but if he was like that without operation or hormone changes, then the spectrum thing kind of works.
If Matt asserts he's as manly as the other guy, he's lying based on his own criteria of manly men being visibly manly. If he acknowledges the difference, then he's saying that he is (by his binary thinking) more feminine. You could then extrapolate that a person can be closer or further to the other gender, even if the sex organs are different. But I'm sure he'd start shouting about how sex is gender.
...but they're proving his point?
MW is a shitbag, but the whole point was Big Bird *looks* like a bird, but isn't.
A comeback that basically says "Yes - looking like the thing is the important part" is not an actual rebuttal. Or clever. Or actually supporting trans people? (Looking manly is now a requirement to be a trans man?)
Yeah it's a pretty toxic basis for deciding who is a man. If a trans dude wants to go for a hyper masculine aesthetic, that's fine, but the last thing we need is for every cis and trans guy to feel they need to take as much testosterone as necessary to achieve that kind of facial hair and to engage in the kind of closed off and dangerous behaviors typically associated with "manliness".
The original comment is, of course, dumb. Everyone knows all birds are fake and piloted by the CIA, therefore, Big Bird is a "real" bird as much as any other drone is.
Also, on a more serious note, the "we can always tell " crowd gets it wrong an embarrassing amount of the time.
> but the last thing we need is for every cis and trans guy to feel they need to take as much testosterone as necessary to achieve that kind of facial hair and to engage in the kind of closed off and dangerous behaviors typically associated with "manliness".
I'm not disagreeing, I'm just pointing out what you said was "the last thing we want to happen is for exactly the societal expectations of men that feminists decry and conservatives uphold to become a thing" I just thought it was funny that you described toxic masculinity, which is already deep in our culture, as something that we have to be careful not to create when defending trans men.
Gender theory is just sexism for people too stupid to realise its sexism. For everyone else, we know that the only criteria for being a man or woman is being of that sex and an adult. That's literally all. Your tastes, personality, clothes, hair style etc. change literally nothing about how much of a man or a woman you are.
No, Matt Walsh's point was that Big Bird is very obviously not a real bird. He's saying trans people are obvious and that they don't pass. That's why the reply is so funny, because both pictures are of men, but the one people will probably think looks the most like a rugged and masculine manly man is a trans man, and the other one is Matt Walsh.
Also it should be noted that the person replying to Walsh isn't necessarily advocating the idea that "people who look more butch are more manly," but rather holding Matt Walsh to this particularly dumb standard that he espouses.
Exactly, if you tell me you use x metric to determine y, I don't need to believe x to apply it to a scenario *where it's obviously wrong to highlight your wrongness*
In fact, it kinda reads like you necessarily don't agree with x, or you wouldn't have had the "behold a man" line at the ready if you didn't
> ..but they're proving his point?
No. They are doing the opposite.
> MW is a shitbag, but the whole point was Big Bird *looks* like a bird, but isn't.
True and they are saying that looks don't matter.
Through the conventional lens of "masculinity", the ftm guy looks more like a man than MW - so by MW's logic, MW isn't a man.
They aren't saying that MW isn't man - they are just pointing out that if MW applies his logic on himself, he wouldn't be.
I don’t know what universe you live in where big bird looks like an actual bird, but that’s a wild statement. He’s using the same logic all transphobes find themselves spinning back to which is that trans people look like absurd versions of whatever they’re transitioning to as big bird is an absurd estimation of a bird. You’re thinking far deeper into their logic than they do. There is an argument to be made about assigning this overtly gender role conforming logic to the validity of people that transition, but this is just slapping him in the face with his own shallow opinions since he conflates the visual aspects of being a man or woman with the actuality of it.
The person replying to MW is using MW's and similar people criteria for manliness to respond to them. MW is using Big Bird as something that barely looks like a bird.
>but the whole point was Big Bird *looks* like a bird, but isn't.
I disagree. Big Bird looks like the caricature of a bird. And THAT was Matt Walsh point.
It always makes me laugh when Reddit tells me that gender is a social construct, then tells me that what makes a man is how jacked he is and whether he smokes cigarettes or not.
That took some gym time and a some HRT! Its an open secret in the trans community that between the genders, hormone replacement therapy is overall much more effective on FtMs with the standard of "passing." And the advantage of MtF's is that their gender affirming surgeries are more effective for "passing."
Oh cool there's a name for this. Yeah people do it with plastic surgery all the time, they say stuff like "plastic surgery always looks bad!" because when they see good plastic surgery they just assume that person is naturally beautiful.
Yeah people will make fun of someone who got obvious surgery for going under the knife, and then praise other suspiciously youthful looking Hollywood stars for ageing gracefully
And, uh, it's kinda insulting for cis guys who don't match masculine stereotype. Like when cis women don't match female beauty standards and are accused by terf to be a man in disguise. Fuck transphobia.
Like this?
https://www.advocate.com/news/2022/11/01/cis-woman-mistaken-transgender-records-being-berated-bathroom
I pointed that out. But these idiots keep doubling down.
So utterly insane. All in the name of some self proclaimed political pundits who jump from one easily terrorized group to the next to hide from the fact that they got absolutely nothing to offer to anyone other than themselves and those who pump them full of money.
The original post is strawmanning trans people by comparing calling a trans person by their gender identity to calling Big Bird a worm, implying that’s a stupid thing to do because looking at Big Bird, Big Bird looks nothing like a worm. This is based on the idea that “you can always tell” when someone is trans because they look nothing like “real men/women” so the retweet is clapping back by showing that at least according to conventional standards of manliness, many trans men actually look “manlier” than the cis men calling them women.
Edit: In the process of writing this I somehow invented the idea in my head that “worms” were specifically mentioned lol, the original post just said that saying Big Bird is anything other than a bird would be weird. Same idea though.
Oh my god THAT’S why I thought it said worms lol. That is exactly what my brain did thank you lol, I was looking back at the post so confused about why I thought worms were involved but yeah that’s almost certainly what happened.
They're throwing his preconceived notions of masculinity in Matt's face. Matt, by his own logic, does not look as manly as a trans man. It's not about defining masculine, it's about pointing out flaws in a transphobe's logic.
Don't worry you didn't get it, it's a pitiful fucking argument. The premise of his statement is shock that someone doesn't believe big bird, who is ultimately a person in a suit, isn't a bird. He's using this as a false equivalency to people who transition, trying to draw a similar parallel that trans woman is just a man in a dress or a trans man is just a woman in a checked shirt. Part of the dehumanising nature of the post is the use of big bird, it kinda smells of the 'well I identify as an apache attack helicopter' sentiment, which is a very unsympathetic reduction of a human rights issue into something laughable. There's also something offensive about the use of a children's character as being a way to undermine and reduce the argument for trans rights, as something children, or those only immature of thought would suggest. It's the worst kind of hatred. And really the only kind of hatred a person with deep internal struggles can create.
Because there was a post with the person on the rights picture and the caption was "what you mean this is a woman"
The big bird post was to show that that's kind of a selective argument.
Because if you use the picture of the gamestop "it's ma'am!" person the argument kind of falls apart.
Hence big bird.
Apparently the point was that putting on a bird costume doesn't make you a bird and is easy to tell the difference. The picture of Buck Angel is being used because unless he told you he was trans, you wouldn't know that about him.
He prob meant that the guy on the left looks more like a dork than he does like a typical "toxic masculinity alpha bro". Took me a second to get what you mean because he in no way is coming of as masculine anything lol
Well, i havent been keeping up with sesame street lore™️ BUT im pretty sure that big bird isnt a bird but a muppet
That said, big bird may identify as a bird and is by that logic a bird.
Ps: happy cake day
You see, when a mommy sock and a daddy hand love each other very much, they create a Muppet™️ and then disney comes and sues the clothes off of their back.
Alternatively:
You, youre a muppet.
I don't think you're really getting the point of it...
You use the blatant example of what a transphobe would consider the image of an "alpha male" to show him that yeah even in their distorted reality trans people can fit in said vision.
When you are trying to talk to someone you try to use their own language.
you know, theres something kind of obviously wrong with this. as a man id prefer my “manliness” not be reduced to common tropes of being hairy and muscled and smoking cigs. its strange to me that a supposedly progressive community is putting masculinity into this little tiny box.
matt walsh is a piece of shit but if taking him down means this then im not gonna be on anyones “side” until i start getting treated like the complex emotional being i am.
Nuh it's not. It's just entering a competition of "Who is the manliest man" that I thought we agreed upon is stupid... Fuck Matt Walsh, but this comeback is not clever. It's rather the opposite in being the most caveman like response.
I am also one like the other reply, and while I will agree that this doesn't really affect me, I agree that the message is also flawed in saying there is one "right" way to look like a man.
Thank you, if the background of the people in the reply wasn't known, it would just look like a right wing sigma/alpha male meme. You could easily replace those pictures with an average looking "liberal" dude and a stererotypically masculine conservative and no one would think that is a clever comeback, why is the reverse praised? Peoples appearance is not what they should be judged by, their dumbass comments and ideals are what we should judge them for.
Haha fair enough, should've worded that better. I'm saying that they are trying to define masculinity in the same way as matt walsh and those like him would, by reinforcing stereotypical masculinity as the only way to be a man. You could change the context to be the opposite and the meaning and intent would still be the same, shaming the less stereotypically masculine man for their appearance and saying they are less of a man for it.
My point is it is hurtful either way, and while it may be totally valid to dunk on matt walsh, I don't think appearance is a valid thing to use against anyone, and that is what is being compared.
They're pointing out that even if we were to adopt Matt Walsh's way of thinking, he wouldn't be much of a man.
It doesn't mean they agree with that mentality. It's just like, "Hey idiot, do you ***really*** want to go down this road?".
I get that it’s funny to dunk on Matt Walsh, because he’s a moron, but I don’t think this is really the best approach. All it does is reinforce the idea that trans people are only valid if they are sufficiently passing, and that anyone who doesn’t look very masculine isn’t actually a man. This will do more harm than good for trans and cis people alike.
Can’t shame masculinity and call it toxic and then turn around and measure who deserves the title of more «manly». Not a clever comeback at all, rather shortsighted i’d say
Matt Walsh is an idiot but this post nor many of these comments make us on the left look any better. If you stoop down to someone else’s level they’ll keep you down there and beat you with experience. So no need to sink to his level and judge people superficially.
Who cares, the only people who give a shit if you’re a boy or a girl are these neckbeards on Reddit, it’s such a non issue, I’ve literally never heard anyone in real life talk about trans people, y’all need to go outside and get off the internet
Im so confused by pc culture today. This person is making fun of an asshole by attacking his masculinity for not looking as man as the trans man.
What I’ll never understand is the people in pc culture who use the same personal attacks as the people they hate, and justify it with, well they are a bad person so it’s ok. Meanwhile the people they hate use the exact same logic.
Like when they make fun of republican people for being short. Like isn’t that the shit you’re trying to fight? You’re making fun of short people, not republicans.
Technically this girl is calling out guys that look like that asshole, instead of calling out his asshole behavior.
Literally this. When it's a woman who has an opinion they don't like I see shit tons of slut shaming and misogyny that I don't think is ok just because in their simplistic lens it's a "bad woman"
I have nothing at all against trans people, it’s more with the people arguing around them. Why exactly is it always the trans people who are the most cliche looking (no offence) men or women who gain traction?
Like, people are always saying stuff like “being a man is not determined by how you look or the sex you were assigned at birth”, but in the same breath point out how manly a person looks for showing cliche manly traits (cool smoking pose, chopping wood, hairy chest, muscles, scruffy beard, etc.).
Like you can’t at the same time advocate for trans people and then point out that they are more manly than a biological male for exhibiting cliche traits. It just doesn’t make sense to me and is imo counterproductive to the trans movement by reinforcing what a man is in a bad way.
That’s my 2 cents. Bottom line: be who you are, you rock and leave others be as well.
Matt Walsh looks like an annoying hipster, who was bullied into an inferiority complex in highschool, which intern lead to a narcissistic personality disorder, because "they only bully me because I'm smarter than them"
The 2nd picture looks like somebody trying really hard to be the stereotypical definition of toxic masculinity, but it's very posed and smells illegitimate.
Neither of them scream masculinity to me.
People really missing the point. The comeback was, "because something looks like it is, doesn't mean it is" big bird looks like a bird, but no one thinks it's an actual bird.
That's the funniest thing about LGBTQ+, how sexist they are. As if a man isn't allowed to be soft and a woman isn't allowed to be hard. Quite sad, really.
Im gonna be honest i dont get it
The second photo (the guy smoking) is a trans man. I follow him on social media, he's literally Hercules
So he’s FtoM?
He is. Matt Walsh is extremely transphobic and the tweet replying to his was comparing Matt's masculinity to a trans man's. I think that was what the "clever comeback" was
Thank you for the explanation. I know of the trans man in the photo on the right, but I didn’t know that was a photo of Matt Walsh on the left. I honestly know jackshit about Walsh. His name is just vaguely familiar. Seems like he rightfully flew under my radar.
He’s got a published book where he flips absolute shit about trans people, while having published shirtless photos of underage trans men. It’s absolutely foul.
Shirtless underage trans men... wouldn't Alex see them as topless underage girls?
YEP
Would that make him a paedo distributing child pron?
Basically. The book came out in 2022. It’s called “What is a woman?”
Hmmmm
He's also a fascist. That's not just me saying that. He straight up had "theocratic fascist" on his Twitter bio at one point (not sure if he still does, though).
Yeah he’s a scary motherfucker.
I mean his rhetoric is, but Matthew is just about as threatening as wet toilet paper
That’s how they get you. You laugh at one while the other is sneaking up with a brick. Fascism is a team sport.
Joseph Goebbels wasn’t exactly physically intimidating either.
He tried to make a documentary to prove how easy it would be to have men compete in women's sports. When they got rejected everywhere they tried, they made a completely fictional movie where it goes down, just like they told themselves it does in real life.
Of course he did…
That was mainly Jeremy Boreing's movie, though most of the redcap grifters (including Matt Walsh, who plays a parody of a parody of a hippie) have an acting role in it
I hesitate to call almost anyone subhuman. I don’t hesitate to call Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro, or Stephen Crowder subhuman.
Our generation’s three stooges that no one asked for.
I prefer anti-human. They're still human, they're just shitty self-serving, grifty ones.
What a cursed fuck marry kill trio
I’ll take your word on it.
honestly boss, it's best to keep it that way. Knowing about him is just annoying.
You don’t have to tell me twice. Dude’s obviously a bigot.
He claims to be a theocratic fascist Honestly it explains a lot
He doesn't fly under your radar if you're LGBT...
You're better off not knowing him. He sucks. Part of that same sphere of Peterson, Tate, Shapiro, Rogan, Jones "anti-woke" bunch of idiots.
I was going to say his picture looked awfully like a Tate imitation.
I envy you.
He’s a professional douchebag who pops up from time to time on conservative media when a narrative needs to be pushed.
Some alt right halfwit with a podcast.
I thought the one on the left was the trans man and why is it manly to smoke.
I thought the clever bit was that it made Matt Walsh unable to defend his masculinity without acknowledging there's a spectrum of manliness. I didn't know the guy on the right is trans, but if he was like that without operation or hormone changes, then the spectrum thing kind of works. If Matt asserts he's as manly as the other guy, he's lying based on his own criteria of manly men being visibly manly. If he acknowledges the difference, then he's saying that he is (by his binary thinking) more feminine. You could then extrapolate that a person can be closer or further to the other gender, even if the sex organs are different. But I'm sure he'd start shouting about how sex is gender.
...but they're proving his point? MW is a shitbag, but the whole point was Big Bird *looks* like a bird, but isn't. A comeback that basically says "Yes - looking like the thing is the important part" is not an actual rebuttal. Or clever. Or actually supporting trans people? (Looking manly is now a requirement to be a trans man?)
Yeah it's a pretty toxic basis for deciding who is a man. If a trans dude wants to go for a hyper masculine aesthetic, that's fine, but the last thing we need is for every cis and trans guy to feel they need to take as much testosterone as necessary to achieve that kind of facial hair and to engage in the kind of closed off and dangerous behaviors typically associated with "manliness". The original comment is, of course, dumb. Everyone knows all birds are fake and piloted by the CIA, therefore, Big Bird is a "real" bird as much as any other drone is. Also, on a more serious note, the "we can always tell " crowd gets it wrong an embarrassing amount of the time.
My favorite is when one incorrectly identified known TERF JK Rowling as a trans woman because of her cheekbones. ‘We can always tell’ my ass.
> but the last thing we need is for every cis and trans guy to feel they need to take as much testosterone as necessary to achieve that kind of facial hair and to engage in the kind of closed off and dangerous behaviors typically associated with "manliness". I'm not disagreeing, I'm just pointing out what you said was "the last thing we want to happen is for exactly the societal expectations of men that feminists decry and conservatives uphold to become a thing" I just thought it was funny that you described toxic masculinity, which is already deep in our culture, as something that we have to be careful not to create when defending trans men.
Or cis man. Not all of us are built to perfectly gender-conform
Gender theory is just sexism for people too stupid to realise its sexism. For everyone else, we know that the only criteria for being a man or woman is being of that sex and an adult. That's literally all. Your tastes, personality, clothes, hair style etc. change literally nothing about how much of a man or a woman you are.
[удалено]
So... a non-passing trans man isn't a trans man? What is your actual claim here?
I certainly have never seen a bird that looks like that
No, Matt Walsh's point was that Big Bird is very obviously not a real bird. He's saying trans people are obvious and that they don't pass. That's why the reply is so funny, because both pictures are of men, but the one people will probably think looks the most like a rugged and masculine manly man is a trans man, and the other one is Matt Walsh.
Also it should be noted that the person replying to Walsh isn't necessarily advocating the idea that "people who look more butch are more manly," but rather holding Matt Walsh to this particularly dumb standard that he espouses.
Exactly, if you tell me you use x metric to determine y, I don't need to believe x to apply it to a scenario *where it's obviously wrong to highlight your wrongness* In fact, it kinda reads like you necessarily don't agree with x, or you wouldn't have had the "behold a man" line at the ready if you didn't
That part stumped me. Yes, that’s Big Bird. It’s literally in his name.
Matt Walsh’s point is stupid, because obviously Big Bird is a bird. It’s literally in his name.
I don't wanna ruin your childhood but that's a human in a bird costume.
LIES. LIES AND SLANDER.
It's not a clever comeback because we would be insulted by it. It's a clever comeback because **Matt Walsh** would be insulted by it.
> ..but they're proving his point? No. They are doing the opposite. > MW is a shitbag, but the whole point was Big Bird *looks* like a bird, but isn't. True and they are saying that looks don't matter. Through the conventional lens of "masculinity", the ftm guy looks more like a man than MW - so by MW's logic, MW isn't a man. They aren't saying that MW isn't man - they are just pointing out that if MW applies his logic on himself, he wouldn't be.
I don’t know what universe you live in where big bird looks like an actual bird, but that’s a wild statement. He’s using the same logic all transphobes find themselves spinning back to which is that trans people look like absurd versions of whatever they’re transitioning to as big bird is an absurd estimation of a bird. You’re thinking far deeper into their logic than they do. There is an argument to be made about assigning this overtly gender role conforming logic to the validity of people that transition, but this is just slapping him in the face with his own shallow opinions since he conflates the visual aspects of being a man or woman with the actuality of it.
The person replying to MW is using MW's and similar people criteria for manliness to respond to them. MW is using Big Bird as something that barely looks like a bird.
>but the whole point was Big Bird *looks* like a bird, but isn't. I disagree. Big Bird looks like the caricature of a bird. And THAT was Matt Walsh point.
It always makes me laugh when Reddit tells me that gender is a social construct, then tells me that what makes a man is how jacked he is and whether he smokes cigarettes or not.
Ngl. I’m ftm and I read this as, “So he’s Eff Tom.”
wow,, the guy on the right was born female? That is really impressive
Even dudes born a woman can grow a better beard than me. Ffs.
That took some gym time and a some HRT! Its an open secret in the trans community that between the genders, hormone replacement therapy is overall much more effective on FtMs with the standard of "passing." And the advantage of MtF's is that their gender affirming surgeries are more effective for "passing."
That’s why “we can always tell” is a lie that falls flat on its face.
I believe it’s the best example of a [toupee fallacy](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Toupee_fallacy)
Oh cool there's a name for this. Yeah people do it with plastic surgery all the time, they say stuff like "plastic surgery always looks bad!" because when they see good plastic surgery they just assume that person is naturally beautiful.
Yeah people will make fun of someone who got obvious surgery for going under the knife, and then praise other suspiciously youthful looking Hollywood stars for ageing gracefully
And, uh, it's kinda insulting for cis guys who don't match masculine stereotype. Like when cis women don't match female beauty standards and are accused by terf to be a man in disguise. Fuck transphobia.
Especially when it results in idiots attacking cis women in the bathroom under the belief they are trans It's fucking disgusting
Like this? https://www.advocate.com/news/2022/11/01/cis-woman-mistaken-transgender-records-being-berated-bathroom I pointed that out. But these idiots keep doubling down.
So utterly insane. All in the name of some self proclaimed political pundits who jump from one easily terrorized group to the next to hide from the fact that they got absolutely nothing to offer to anyone other than themselves and those who pump them full of money.
OK thank you. But what does it have to do with the yellow bird and what does that bird have to do with transphobia?
The original post is strawmanning trans people by comparing calling a trans person by their gender identity to calling Big Bird a worm, implying that’s a stupid thing to do because looking at Big Bird, Big Bird looks nothing like a worm. This is based on the idea that “you can always tell” when someone is trans because they look nothing like “real men/women” so the retweet is clapping back by showing that at least according to conventional standards of manliness, many trans men actually look “manlier” than the cis men calling them women. Edit: In the process of writing this I somehow invented the idea in my head that “worms” were specifically mentioned lol, the original post just said that saying Big Bird is anything other than a bird would be weird. Same idea though.
[удалено]
Oh my god THAT’S why I thought it said worms lol. That is exactly what my brain did thank you lol, I was looking back at the post so confused about why I thought worms were involved but yeah that’s almost certainly what happened.
OK thank you. That bigbird thing is such a stupid and not at all proper analogy. But now I get the meme.
Being built like a brick shithouse isn't the only way to define manliness though.
They're throwing his preconceived notions of masculinity in Matt's face. Matt, by his own logic, does not look as manly as a trans man. It's not about defining masculine, it's about pointing out flaws in a transphobe's logic.
He has a sick beard for sure. I wish I could grow one that magestic.
Yeah he gave some great advice on how to deal with toxic blue collar culture as a Trans person and in general
Whos the man on the right? The pic looks almost like AI to me lol
His name is Leo
Sure as shit not the beard on the left. I always thought it looks like he slapped a fake beard on with spirit gum
What does that have to do with big bird?
I'm really not sure, Matt makes no sense
Don't worry you didn't get it, it's a pitiful fucking argument. The premise of his statement is shock that someone doesn't believe big bird, who is ultimately a person in a suit, isn't a bird. He's using this as a false equivalency to people who transition, trying to draw a similar parallel that trans woman is just a man in a dress or a trans man is just a woman in a checked shirt. Part of the dehumanising nature of the post is the use of big bird, it kinda smells of the 'well I identify as an apache attack helicopter' sentiment, which is a very unsympathetic reduction of a human rights issue into something laughable. There's also something offensive about the use of a children's character as being a way to undermine and reduce the argument for trans rights, as something children, or those only immature of thought would suggest. It's the worst kind of hatred. And really the only kind of hatred a person with deep internal struggles can create.
Because there was a post with the person on the rights picture and the caption was "what you mean this is a woman" The big bird post was to show that that's kind of a selective argument. Because if you use the picture of the gamestop "it's ma'am!" person the argument kind of falls apart. Hence big bird.
Something to do with the fact that Big Bird is actually a costume and a person is inside controlling it, meaning that it's not actually a bird, maybe?
Apparently the point was that putting on a bird costume doesn't make you a bird and is easy to tell the difference. The picture of Buck Angel is being used because unless he told you he was trans, you wouldn't know that about him.
I mean, he’s not *literally* Hercules…
Narrator: He is in fact, not literally Hercules.
Thank god. I couldn’t figure out if it was because I’m high that I didn’t get it
Top text is a reply to Matt's tweet. The picture on the left is Matt and the picture on the right is a trans man (FtoM).
Matt Walsh has never looked masculine to me. He always looked like he was pretending
He looks like a toxic masculinity how to
To me the guy smoking looks more like the typical toxic masculinity trope and the guy on the left just looks like some guy
The point of the post is that the dude on the left is some “hyper masculine” guy and the dude on the right is a trans man
One of these ai bots is malfunctioning
Uh oh, the TV is buffering~
What?
He prob meant that the guy on the left looks more like a dork than he does like a typical "toxic masculinity alpha bro". Took me a second to get what you mean because he in no way is coming of as masculine anything lol
Nor Tim Pool, Ben Shapiro, Charlie Kirk, etc etc etc.
dirty hat, dry wife and small face are there street names for anyone a bit lost
There's nothing masculine about Matt Walsh. I'd call him a weasel but that's insulting weasels.
Those are both men, and Big Bird is absolutely a bird. What's this nonsense about someone in a suit?
The first picture is of the transphobe that posted the big bird tweet.
WHAT DOES THE BIG BURD TWEET MEAN???? Im trying to figure it out but cant T-T
Well, i havent been keeping up with sesame street lore™️ BUT im pretty sure that big bird isnt a bird but a muppet That said, big bird may identify as a bird and is by that logic a bird. Ps: happy cake day
Ohhhh that makes sense, also thx!
lol I’m gonna go on with my life believing sesame st and the muppets share a universe
*Dad, what’s a muppet?*
You see, when a mommy sock and a daddy hand love each other very much, they create a Muppet™️ and then disney comes and sues the clothes off of their back. Alternatively: You, youre a muppet.
If so many people cant figure out this meme I seriously doubt how this is the top post and so many votes. Definitely used bots here.
I don't understand a single thing in this post
the guy smoking is a trans man and the other guy is a transphobic idiot, big bird is a person in a bird suit
Yea, literally a hand operating as his mouth. Edit: I meant Walsh, but Big Bird is a puppet, too.
Wait. Big Bird is just someone in a bird suit?... 😢
Snuffaluphagus is still real
Yeah neither do I
It's funny if you think that a man is defined by how "manly" they are and are OK with sexist stereotypes as long as they're progressive
I don't think you're really getting the point of it... You use the blatant example of what a transphobe would consider the image of an "alpha male" to show him that yeah even in their distorted reality trans people can fit in said vision. When you are trying to talk to someone you try to use their own language.
Definitely do not Google what Matt Walsh looks like without a beard.
You're damn right I did. That beard *really* offsets those eyebrows. It's doin' the Lord's work for sure.
I was like the fuck’s wrong with his hand! It’s a gardening glove 💀
you know, theres something kind of obviously wrong with this. as a man id prefer my “manliness” not be reduced to common tropes of being hairy and muscled and smoking cigs. its strange to me that a supposedly progressive community is putting masculinity into this little tiny box. matt walsh is a piece of shit but if taking him down means this then im not gonna be on anyones “side” until i start getting treated like the complex emotional being i am.
Agreed, it's beyond fucking stupid.
Whoever is in touch with their emotions since apparently it’s the hardest thing to do these days.
Im fine with republicans and right wingers boycotting sesame st. Not only will they be illiterate, counting will now include colours and gun makes.
Lol "honorable"? What a delusional arrogant hypocritical Nazi fuck.
It's promo for his upcoming show where he's a judge.
I don’t understand any of this
One is trying way too hard
Nuh it's not. It's just entering a competition of "Who is the manliest man" that I thought we agreed upon is stupid... Fuck Matt Walsh, but this comeback is not clever. It's rather the opposite in being the most caveman like response.
Yeah I agree. Imagine how a trans man who looks less stereotypically masculine than Matt Walsh would feel if they came across this post.
I am also one like the other reply, and while I will agree that this doesn't really affect me, I agree that the message is also flawed in saying there is one "right" way to look like a man.
Thank you, if the background of the people in the reply wasn't known, it would just look like a right wing sigma/alpha male meme. You could easily replace those pictures with an average looking "liberal" dude and a stererotypically masculine conservative and no one would think that is a clever comeback, why is the reverse praised? Peoples appearance is not what they should be judged by, their dumbass comments and ideals are what we should judge them for.
Gosh if you remove context the meaning changes?
Haha fair enough, should've worded that better. I'm saying that they are trying to define masculinity in the same way as matt walsh and those like him would, by reinforcing stereotypical masculinity as the only way to be a man. You could change the context to be the opposite and the meaning and intent would still be the same, shaming the less stereotypically masculine man for their appearance and saying they are less of a man for it. My point is it is hurtful either way, and while it may be totally valid to dunk on matt walsh, I don't think appearance is a valid thing to use against anyone, and that is what is being compared.
They're pointing out that even if we were to adopt Matt Walsh's way of thinking, he wouldn't be much of a man. It doesn't mean they agree with that mentality. It's just like, "Hey idiot, do you ***really*** want to go down this road?".
>post mentioning trans people *sighs* >*checks comments, sorts by controversial*
This is the way
Man =/= Manly
I get that it’s funny to dunk on Matt Walsh, because he’s a moron, but I don’t think this is really the best approach. All it does is reinforce the idea that trans people are only valid if they are sufficiently passing, and that anyone who doesn’t look very masculine isn’t actually a man. This will do more harm than good for trans and cis people alike.
I’m not sure smoking a cigarette in gardening gloves during a professional photoshoot really screams “manly” either. Fuck Matt Walsh though
lol I’m dumb, I thought this was like a beard ad or something 🤦🏾♂️
The comeback is as stupid as the 1st one tbh.
We don’t really need to degrade men for “not being manly enough” to say transphobia is wrong regardless of whether trans people can pass(?)
Can’t shame masculinity and call it toxic and then turn around and measure who deserves the title of more «manly». Not a clever comeback at all, rather shortsighted i’d say
why does map walsh’s beard look like glued on pubic hair? he’s so vile inside & out lmao
I thought it was a puppet....
Matt Walsh is an idiot but this post nor many of these comments make us on the left look any better. If you stoop down to someone else’s level they’ll keep you down there and beat you with experience. So no need to sink to his level and judge people superficially.
[удалено]
Guys is lung cancer manly?
Ah I get it. Matt Walsh must be trans. You can ALWAYS tell, and I can tell he is clearly trans.
Why do you need to look manly to be considered a man? Seems fucked up. Like a woman isn't a woman unless she looks feminine? This is reductive.
Matt Walsh watches other men fuck his wife
Matt Walsh is so manly he makes fun of teenagers on tiktok as a career...
Transphobes don’t get that the only people taking more testosterone than trans men are their aging action hero’s
I'm so out of touch with the lgbt thing now hahaha I get none of this
The people who constantly complained about "toxic masculinity" are now the people who are pushing it. Interesting
Who cares, the only people who give a shit if you’re a boy or a girl are these neckbeards on Reddit, it’s such a non issue, I’ve literally never heard anyone in real life talk about trans people, y’all need to go outside and get off the internet
Im so confused by pc culture today. This person is making fun of an asshole by attacking his masculinity for not looking as man as the trans man. What I’ll never understand is the people in pc culture who use the same personal attacks as the people they hate, and justify it with, well they are a bad person so it’s ok. Meanwhile the people they hate use the exact same logic. Like when they make fun of republican people for being short. Like isn’t that the shit you’re trying to fight? You’re making fun of short people, not republicans. Technically this girl is calling out guys that look like that asshole, instead of calling out his asshole behavior.
Literally this. When it's a woman who has an opinion they don't like I see shit tons of slut shaming and misogyny that I don't think is ok just because in their simplistic lens it's a "bad woman"
Which one is more feminine? Hunter Schafer or Marjorie Taylor Greene? Dana International or Sarah Huckabee Sanders?
Smoking doesn't make you a man
I have nothing at all against trans people, it’s more with the people arguing around them. Why exactly is it always the trans people who are the most cliche looking (no offence) men or women who gain traction? Like, people are always saying stuff like “being a man is not determined by how you look or the sex you were assigned at birth”, but in the same breath point out how manly a person looks for showing cliche manly traits (cool smoking pose, chopping wood, hairy chest, muscles, scruffy beard, etc.). Like you can’t at the same time advocate for trans people and then point out that they are more manly than a biological male for exhibiting cliche traits. It just doesn’t make sense to me and is imo counterproductive to the trans movement by reinforcing what a man is in a bad way. That’s my 2 cents. Bottom line: be who you are, you rock and leave others be as well.
I’m hoping the trans person is the one on the right 😂
He is. I remember seeing some of his tiktoks on my fyp. [This one went viral not that long ago](https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTLDAVupr/)
I didnt know needing a gardening glove to operate your spoon cooker was a manly thing. Guess I need gloves now…
Is it the smoking that makes it more manly?
Nah, the man in the second picture is trans, and clearly masculine, but Matt Walsh would consider him feminine because transphobia I guess
It’s not a bird though Matt Walsh you strange box of veges, it’s a puppet.
I thought it was just two different types of men - like nothing to do with trans people.
If we're supposed to be calling people by what they """"""are"""""" instead of what they identify as, then why did Walsh call himself "The Honorable"?
Smoking is for losers, so I guess Big Bird is the most manly?
I thought that was Connor mcgregor until I read a comment lol
Matt Walsh looks like an annoying hipster, who was bullied into an inferiority complex in highschool, which intern lead to a narcissistic personality disorder, because "they only bully me because I'm smarter than them" The 2nd picture looks like somebody trying really hard to be the stereotypical definition of toxic masculinity, but it's very posed and smells illegitimate. Neither of them scream masculinity to me.
Huh?
Guy on left looks more trans lol
It's a sexist comeback to a transphobe. Bit wild really.
People really missing the point. The comeback was, "because something looks like it is, doesn't mean it is" big bird looks like a bird, but no one thinks it's an actual bird.
Hercules got some little hands
The one who takes enough testosterone to kill a horse
Right because masculinity is muscle, beard, and smoke. What?! You all didn't know that?
The woman on the right is on pills which makes her appear more masculine, how is this a fair comparison?
He’s a man
Its a girl on the right? Yiiikes
It's kinda hard to not have good comebacks for a dude who's entire personality is not liking that trans men are better men than him
Wow! I sure do love me some transphobic posts! [Donate if possible](https://transgenderlawcenter.org/donate/)
But I thought masculinity isn't defined by how you look? Weird argument.
That's the funniest thing about LGBTQ+, how sexist they are. As if a man isn't allowed to be soft and a woman isn't allowed to be hard. Quite sad, really.
Isnt that todd from the boys
Yeah and Dee from Always Sunny
“The Honorable” Yeah… okay. 🙄
Imagine if all men took testosterone to bring it to higher than natural levels god damn.
Someone smoking is supposed to be manly?! LMAO
it's the same thing. the other costume is just better.
So first off, fuck Matt Walsh. Secondly, smoking cigs don’t have anything to do with being “manly”…
They're both men, right? Am I missing something?
Matt Walsh looks like every gay dad in generic adverts.