Andrew Tate proves once again that he is the ultimate loser

It was a moment of pure, unadulterated, snort-Diet-Coke-from-your-nose joy. It was Twitter at its very best

It was the ultimate clash of good versus evil, like Gandalf against Saruman, or Obi-Wan battling Anakin, or the Avengers vs Thanos; like when Taylor Swift was proved right over Kanye West, or when Meghan Markle’s point was made by a Jeremy Clarkson own goal.

It was a moment of pure, unadulterated, snort-Diet-Coke-from-your-nose joy. It was Twitter at its very best.

Nineteen-year-old Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg, four times Nobel Peace Prize nominee and youngest ever Time person of the year, slapped down controversial influencer Andrew Tate in the most supremely careless and perfect way.

Tate – whose claims to fame include being kicked out of the 17th season of Big Brother for hitting a woman with a belt, admitting to scamming users through his adult webcam business and making violent and misogynistic statements that led to him being banned from numerous social media platforms – attempted to bait Thunberg. And it did not go well.

He tweeted her, very much in the style of a toddler pointing out a particularly horrendous nappy deposit, bragging about the emissions from his extensive luxury car collection, with an image of him filling up his Bugatti. He asked for her email address so he could “send a complete list of my car collection and their respective enormous emissions”.

It took a day for Thunberg to respond. She essentially left him on read, which as we all know, is the entitled man-child’s kryptonite. But when she replied, oh how she replied. “Yes, please do enlighten me. email me at smalldi**energy@getalife.com.” Mic drop.

At the time of writing, more than two million people have liked her tweet. It was a talking point in the pub last night, because there’s nothing sweeter, nothing more piquant than someone like Andrew Tate getting publicly owned after starting Twitter beef with an exceptional teenager who really does have bigger fish to fry – like the fiery demise of our planet and all life on earth.

Tate’s initial reply was “How dare you?!” because men who say that women “put themselves in a position to be raped” – and cite it being easier to get off on rape charges as “probably 40 per cent of the reason” to live in an Eastern European country – literally cannot deal with having the size of their member mocked.

Ten hours later, Tate was back with a predictably limp “I know you are but what am I” response, so beloved of 10-year-old boys the world over. He wrote: “Thank you for confirming via your email address that you have a small penis @GretaThunberg. The world was curious. And I do agree you should get a life.” This was accompanied by a video in which he ranted bizarrely about the “global matrix” and its “bot farm” making Thunberg’s reply go viral.

Tate has only recently been reinstated on the platform, thanks to tech billionaire Elon Musk, and you know what? It was almost worth it. For this moment. Thank you, Elon – words I never thought I’d say. Thank you global matrix and your bot farm!

We hear a great deal about “not feeding the trolls”, a bit of online wisdom that has been around since the internet became mired in the toxic soup of far-right conspiracy theories, hate speech and the sort of abusive behaviour that would leave you pretty much friendless and alone in real life. But throw that advice to the wind and let it scatter like ashes, because Thunberg has won Twitter.

The views that Tate has offered about women are deeply disturbing and violent. He has said that his misogynistic statements have “nothing to do with hate for women” and that he is playing an “online character”. Even if that’s true, the worst thing about it is that the former kickboxer is not an isolated bloke raging in below the line comments. His influence is extensive and particularly seductive to lost young men.

Is Tate deserving of our pity, or our contempt? Is mockery – throwing hilarious light at the darkness – the best way to handle him and his ilk? One thing is certain – there’s some really microscopic di** energy at play here.