Trans person shows up to Matt Walsh event, watch what happens

Student: Everything that you have said on gender identity, gender expression, John Money, pronoun usage. . .

What else. . .

sex-gender distinction. You are a hundred percent correct. You are a hundred percent correct.

I don't know if you've ever heard that from a trans person before. Student: So I'd like to say that I'm actually a part of that organization that was going to come and try and derail you tonight. I didn't hear a single thing though that constituted an attack on queer or trans lives or an attack on me personally.

So, I don't know what they were on about there. Moreover, everything that you have said on gender identity, gender expression, John Money, pronoun usage. .

. What else. .

. sex-gender distinction. You are a hundred percent correct.

You are a hundred percent correct. I don't know if you've ever heard that from a trans person before. I identify as a trans woman.

You are a hundred percent correct on that. It is an absolute travesty that the trans community bases everything on such vacuous concepts. My thing is though, is I don't agree with your conclusion.

I don't agree with it. But more so the reason why I don't is less a matter of argumentation and more so a matter of method. You've stated time and time again that your approach to this is to try and keep things simple and uncomplicated.

As in, you don't try and engage with the nuance of the position of trans people, but that's exactly how my org treats you. They don't think your arguments are worth looking at because they cast you as a transphobe. I did otherwise, I looked I'm like, yeah, no this guy's absolutely correct on all these things.

Walsh: So wait, which conclusion are you. . .

You said you disagree with my conclusions. Student: Well it's the conclusion of the model that you're postulating of gender. You have man women, they're biologically contingent.

My question is do you think that defaulting to simplicity, if this is the most dire issue of the age, which is something else that I agree with you on, do you really think that a method of simply re-coursing to the most simplistic matter of approach is what we should be doing here? Walsh: Yes. Student: Really?

Walsh: Yeah, I do. I appreciate, I appreciate everything that you said and I appreciate your attitude. I very rarely encounter your attitude from that side of the of the ideological aisle.

So I appreciate, I appreciate that, but yeah. I do think that making it simple is the right approach because to my view, it is a very simple question. Now, if you want to get into the personal experiences of each individual and, you know, someone who is experiencing gender dysphoria and what do we do to treat that problem?

Sure. There's all kinds of personal subjective nuances and things like that. And if my child came to me and said that they were confused about their identity I wouldn't just say, ah, get out of my face, I would want to sit down and talk to them.

And that's when that becomes a sort of an interpersonal exchange. And so you get into some of those personal nuances and everything, and that's fine. But the underlying fact, the underlying reality is simple, that there are only males and females in the human race.

There are no other categories. There is no third sex. It doesn't exist.

Even though we hear about intersex people, an actual intersex person would be someone who has the reproductive capacities of both men and women, males and females, such a person has never existed ever. So what I see here is a binary system and in that way, it's very simple. And I think that has to be our message.

Student: I would still even say respective to that that even if from your standpoint, there's only this binary, there's two, there's complexities and nuances even within social navigation that still might be worth you looking into. I would also say that a lot of your facts also are off respective to, for instance the first sexual reassignment surgery actually happened in 1920s. So that's before John Money.

Walsh: Well, I didn't say his was the first. Student: What? Walsh: I didn't say his was the first, it was probably the first one done on a two-year-old but, I said he was the one who invented.

We started by saying, you started by saying, you agree with everything I said, and now we're going back and you. . .

I'm a little confused now. Student: My point is that if you have it to where you can get to a different conclusion from the same arguments, it means that there might be something deeper going on here. That people who are actually philosophers not rhetoricians need to be dealing with.

Walsh: Okay, let me, I'll just, we got to move to the next question but let me just ask you this so we can clarify where we are. Student: Yeah. Walsh: Do you agree that there are only males and females in the human race?

Student: No. Walsh: Okay, so you definitely don't agree with my conclusion then at all, we actually are totally on opposite sides of this question, it turns out. So what are the other categories if not male and female?

Student: We are going to be here all night if I have to do that, you know? Walsh: We're not because there's none that you can list. So it's actually very short conversation.

Student: All right well, you're wanting to say that you have these other social categories, right? It's a question of. .

. you're saying "are," right? So the question here for me would be one of ontology in so far as we're trying to posit that there is some kind of specificity, right?

And you would look at something like intersex and say that this is like some kind of weird border case? That's a question of the kind of continuum that would allow for one to come into an embodiment that you would cast as male or female. But, something that's really interesting is you said that something like age makes more sense to identify as.

You at one point had female genitalia when you were in utero. So you've passed through that. And what happens to intersex people is that there's just some kind of different development that occurs there.

So respective to us talking about these categories, it's not a case that there being this hard line thing. The reason why we also are not going to get anywhere here is because I actually would agree with you that something like woman is what would, in a technical sense be called a floating signifier, so it doesn't have this particular designated meeting to it. Walsh: All right.

Student: So that's why we're not going to go anywhere to talk about that. Walsh: That's pretty clear, but I appreciate it. Thank you for, thanks for the question.

Student: Thank you. Walsh: There's just two quick quick follow ups on that. One thing I think, this is a tactic that you encounter on the left all the time when it comes to gender, which is to try to obscure it and make it sound complicated and to throw a lot of these sort of abstract ideas into it, and from what I've discovered and this conversation didn't change my view at all on that is that that's the only tactic they have, right?

It's just try to make it seem complicated. But yet, while also not offering any alternative answers at all. And the final thing on intersex, because maybe someone else will bring this up.

Just so we could get that question out of the way, because it always comes up. Number one, intersex. .

. that category has nothing to do with trans, right? Trans woman is a biological male who identifies as a female.

So even if I were to agree that intersex people are some sort of exception, that would do nothing to vindicate the trans man because that's a different category. But as it turns out, intersex people are not an exception. These are people who suffer from a deformity from a condition.

Just like someone might be born with one arm rather than two, that does not negate or undermine the fact that human beings have two arms. But if someone is born with only one, then you know that something went wrong along the way. They ought to have had two but they didn't because something went wrong.

So a deformity or a sickness doesn't undermine the principle that we're dealing with.