Ep. 542 - Attacker In Macy's Assault May Only Get Probation
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, there is an update to the story of the black man who assaulted a white Macy’s employee, and it’s outrageous. Also Five Headlines including the cancer stricken 2-year-old who was stranded at a cancer treatment center while it was attacked by rioters in Chicago. And in our Daily Cancellation, we’ll talk about the feminists who claim that normal human interactions are sexist “micro-aggressions."
If you like The Matt Walsh Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: WALSH and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at https://www.dailywire.com/walsh
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, there's an update to the story of the black man who assaulted a white Macy's employee, and it's outrageous, so stick around for that.
Also, five headlines, including the cancer-stricken two-year-old who was stranded at a cancer center while it was being attacked by rioters in Chicago.
And in our daily cancellation, we'll talk about the feminists who claim that normal human interactions are sexist microaggressions.
So we've got to discuss all of that on the way and more.
There's actually a lot to cover today, so bear with me.
But we'll start with this.
If you are in the unfortunate habit of relying on the national media for your news and information, You probably didn't hear about the brutal assault of a white Macy's employee by a black man in June.
The attack happened at the Genesee Valley Mall in Michigan on June 15th.
Here it is, if you haven't seen it.
Watch this.
Boy.
Oh, boy.
What are you doing?
Don't touch me.
Don't touch me.
I didn't touch you.
Don't touch me.
I didn't touch you.
Quit touching me.
I'm sorry.
Stop moving.
I'm sorry.
Don't touch me.
The assailant there is an 18-year-old man named Demir Palmer.
His brother filmed the attack, reported it to the media, which happily ran with the story, uncritical as always, reported that the employee had used a racial slur.
At the time, the brother, an alleged rapper who goes by the name FT Quay, said that they were innocently shopping for a new shirt when the employee, in full hearing of the two brothers, referred to them using the N-word.
This is what the brother told the New York Post.
Quoting now from him, he said, I just want people to know the real story
of what really happened and what's in the description of me and my brother just walking into Macy's,
just minding our own business.
And yes, we made a petty joke and asked the guy, was the shirt too little?
When he could have asked me, he was just being funny.
And just the fact of the remark that he said that we all heard and just what else were we supposed to do
in this age and time?
He didn't know what else to do.
That was just his instinct.
Of course, it shouldn't matter if the employee said a bad word or not.
That would in no way justify felony assault.
But it was obvious to anybody with two brain cells rubbed together that the story from the brothers was bogus.
And I said as much right away, right after this happened.
I said this, I guarantee you, the word was not actually said.
And indeed, what do you know?
It was bogus.
It was made up.
It was a lie.
He never said the N-word.
But I'm getting ahead of myself a little bit.
We'll get back to that in a second.
All right?
Let's back up again.
Remember, this happened on June 15th.
The local prosecutor, David Leighton, did not file charges against Amir Palmer until June 26th.
That's over 10 days later.
It took 10 days to decide that pummeling a man while he's crawling on the ground begging for mercy is, in fact, illegal.
Here's Leighton on June 26th announcing the charges.
Listen to him.
He shook up and he's emotionally upset as well as physically upset, but he's emotionally upset to think that, you know, anybody would think he said the alleged vile racial provoking slur because he says he didn't say it and his history suggests he didn't say it.
We're charging DeMeyer, Connell, Palmer with A count of assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder.
It's a felony assault charge punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
This was an unprovoked attack.
The internal video from Macy's shows the suspect approaching from behind.
The victim, the store manager, appears unaware that he's even there.
The suspect then sucker punches him from behind, knocks him to the floor,
continues to punch him while he's on the floor.
There is no evidence of provocation whatsoever.
Even if there were verbal provocation, which we have no evidence of,
violent retaliation is not permitted by the law.
vile, racial, provoking slurs.
That's what Leighton is focused on.
You see how, in the context of announcing charges against a man who committed a barbarous assault against another human, he feels the need to begin by denouncing a word that there's no reason to think anyone even used.
By the way, no charges were filed against the brother who filmed it.
Okay, so fast forward two months.
That was about two months ago.
Two months forward, and the obvious has now been confirmed.
The racial slur was not said.
It was a lie.
It was a hoax, yet again.
But Demir Palmer blames his brother.
So, no honor among thieves, or in this case, among people who randomly assault retail employees.
Palmer said that his brother told him the n-word was used, and that's what led to the assault.
Now, here's where we get to the inevitable and yet no less outrageous part.
Palmer's brother still has not been charged with any crime, and Palmer himself is looking at quite possibly getting off with probation.
Probation.
And not only probation, but he won't have a criminal record in this scenario.
This will be expunged from his record, like it never happened.
Palmer pleaded guilty to assault with intent to do great bodily harm, but the assistant prosecutor, Patrick McCombs, says that he'll be sentenced under something called the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act.
The Holmes Youthful Trainee Act.
Now, I had to Google that, and it took me to a website of Tanis and Schultz, Michigan-based lawyers.
Here's what they tell us about the Holmes Youthful Training Act.
It says, the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act, more commonly known as HYTA, provides individuals between the ages of 17 and 24 with a second chance.
Under the act, an individual charged with a crime may petition the court for status as a youthful trainee.
The Holmes Youthful Trainee Act states, if an individual pleads guilty to a criminal offense, Committed on or after the individual's 17th birthday, but before his 24th birthday, the court of record, having jurisdiction of the criminal offense, may, without entering a judgment of conviction and with the consent of that individual, consider and assign that individual to the status of youthful trainee.
If the court grants the individual status under the Holmes Youthful Training Act, he or she will be placed on a probationary term.
If he or she successfully completes the probationary term, the criminal conviction will not be entered into his or her record.
The court will dismiss all charges and his or her criminal record will remain clean.
Okay.
Dismiss all charges.
That's where this is very likely headed.
Official sentencing is not until September.
Technically, Palmer could still get 10 years in prison, and at the conclusion of that sentence, then his record is wiped clean, but I think we all know that's not gonna happen.
The sentence can be anything from probation to 10 years, and all signs are pointing to probation here, or something much closer to that end of the spectrum.
And then, clean slate, like magic, like it never happened.
Until it happens again.
Which it will, because men who pummel other men for fun don't just wake up one day as decent human beings.
That doesn't happen.
Except maybe in fairy tales.
Now, according to the ABC12 report, a local affiliate in the town, Much of the court hearing over this case had to do with the issue of the phantom N-word and how upset that made poor Demir Palmer.
Reading from the AP report, it says, after pleading guilty to the 10-year felony against him, assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder, Palmer shared with the judge what led to the assault inside the Genesee Valley Mall on June 15, 2020.
And then this is Palmer now.
He says, I asked him a question about some clothes, Palmer said.
I asked him about the jacket type that I was about to get.
Palmer said the man answered him.
They laughed.
And then his brother told him the store manager had called him the N-word.
He admitted that he since learned his brother lied to him.
Big shocker there.
Now we continue.
The assistant prosecutor questioning the brother says, why would your brother do that?
And he says, I wouldn't know.
I honestly wouldn't, Palmer replied.
The assistant prosecutor, okay, now listen to this part.
The assistant prosecutor told Palmer he understands the anger that would fuel the assault, but he said the store manager has asked that the charge does not stay with Palmer forever.
Okay.
He understands.
He understands how a person might be so mad about a bad word that he would beat another person senseless in the middle of a Macy's.
He understands.
And yes, the victim in this case apparently has expressed his consent to the lenient sentence, and that's the human shield that the prosecutors are hiding behind here by saying, well, it's what the victim wants.
But the fact that the victim, who'd already been attacked once, didn't want to come out and demand a harsher sentence, is completely irrelevant here.
We can think of many reasons why he might express that point of view, even if it's not how he really feels.
Alright, so a lot needs to be covered here.
First of all, once again, who gives the slightest damn whether he said the bad word or not?
It is, in fact, not understandable for an adult to commit felony assault in response to a word.
Not understandable at all.
The implication from the way this sentencing is working out is that felony assault is legal, or at least not very illegal, if a black man even so much as believes a racial slur was said.
I mean, what if the slur had been said?
What then?
Would they have simply let him walk, no questions asked, not even probation?
Second, and I'm sounding like a broken record here, but we have another incident in this case, that if the races were reversed.
Would be headline news.
The assailant will be looking at hard time behind bars on federal charges.
Hate crime charges.
Now, I don't think that the hate crime designation should exist at all.
I think the whole category as a matter of law is absurd.
But if we're gonna have it, then it ought to be evenly applied.
And this is a hate crime.
In fact, Demir Palmer admits as much.
He told on himself in his excuse.
He admits That it's racially motivated.
Think about it.
He assaulted the store clerk because he thought that the clerk had said a word.
Now, side note, I don't actually believe him about this.
I don't think that he thought that the word was used.
I think that this was something both brothers decided to do for fun and for viral fame.
That's my theory.
But in any event, going based on his testimony, he assaulted the Macy's guy because he thought that the Macy's guy had said a word.
We can assume that Demir Palmer would not have assaulted a black man for saying that.
In fact, we know he wouldn't because he himself uses the word he's supposedly mad about the employee allegedly using while he's assaulting the employee for using the word, which he didn't actually use.
If you're following me.
In other words, he assaults the employee because the employee is a white man who he thought used a certain word.
He assaulted him for being a white man using a certain word.
This is not an argument that the word is the same when used by white people as by black people.
That's not my point.
It's an argument that this assault was undeniably motivated by the combination of the alleged word and the race of the person who said it.
That is by definition a racially motivated attack, a hate crime.
He should be going to federal prison for this.
But we know that everything is in two tiers in this society.
The media puts black-on-white assaults and murder on one tier, a low tier, white-on-black on another, and the justice system does the same.
Third point, speaking of the justice system.
We see here the actual type of reform that is necessary.
Put aside all the racial stuff and the double standard, all of that.
Think about this youthful trainee nonsense.
The justice system in Michigan, home to Detroit, one of the most violent cities in America, considers adult violent criminals to be trainees and will release them back into society without even any indication that they are actually violent and dangerous.
There's no justice here because there's no punishment.
And they're failing to protect society on two levels.
First, by releasing violent criminals back into communities, and then by refusing to tell the communities that these are violent criminals.
So a law like this fails in every conceivable way to ensure that the justice system does what it's supposed to do.
We don't have a large-scale problem in this country of the justice system coming down too hard on the bad guys.
There are some examples of that, sure, but there are many, many, many more examples of the justice system putting on its kid gloves and slapping violent, dangerous people on the wrist.
And then patting them on the head and sending them on their way.
Practically inviting them to continue committing crimes until they've finally done something so heinous that even the most lenient and henpecked prosecutor has no choice but to take the book and throw it at them.
Rather than doing what they normally do, which is to take the book and throw it out, allowing criminals to continue along in their criminal ways.
The streets of our cities are overrun by dangerous, violent people who are known to the system, known to be dangerous and violent, and yet are permitted to stay out on the street, free, unencumbered.
And the story often has a predictable, infuriating, and tragic ending.
And something tells me that the story of Demir Palmer very may have the same sort of ending.
Let's go to five headlines.
You know, there are a lot of occasions where you might need a nice watch.
Whether you're going on a date, you're going out for an interview, you're going for a wedding, a night out, whatever it is, that's an occasion where you might want to class it up and actually have a nice watch.
sale alert from our favorite sponsors.
You already know how I feel about Vincero watches.
I've been telling you about them for months, a long time, long time sponsor on the show.
Seriously, watches that are stunning and well under $200, okay?
It's incredible how much these timepieces stand out and just how good you feel when you wear them.
Vincero watches is dedicated to the craft.
They put the time and effort into crafting timepieces so you can wear them day after day.
Extremely durable as well.
Like I said, I've had these watches for a long time.
I can tell you, they're durable also.
Right now, Vincero is running a site-wide sale to celebrate their sixth anniversary.
This will not only be the biggest sale of the year, but the biggest sale in Vincero history.
Up to 30% off, site-wide, no code required.
Your discount will be automatically applied at checkout when you visit vincerowatches.com slash Walsh.
30% off site-wide, okay?
Everything on site is on sale.
No exclusions, including all four of their all-new collections.
All of that is available.
Now, with Vincero watches, there's no brand name market.
You know, markup, that is.
No big-time price tags.
They're promised to you.
It's very simple.
Solid, well-made products.
Uh, that you will enjoy wearing.
These guys know just how important it is to shop from brands you can trust.
Go shop their anniversary sale right now.
Vincero watches.
You know, I've been wearing my Vincero watch for a long time.
Um, I love the watch.
Makes me feel classy when I wear it, which I need a lot of help with the classy.
I mean, as you can tell from the way that I normally dress.
Uh, flannels and everything.
Usually dress like a lumberjack.
But, but, uh, which of course nothing wrong with that.
But then I put the watch on, feel a little bit more classy.
And you know what else I like?
When someone asks me the time, I can do this, rather than having to pull my, my phone out.
I just enjoy that.
It feels very old school.
So continue supporting this brand as they continue to support the Matt Walsh Show.
Go to Shop Vincero 6th Anniversary Sale.
The deal is really too good to pass up.
Go to vincerowatches.com forward slash Walsh.
Vincero watches forward slash Walsh.
All right.
Let me tell you about two-year-old Owen Buell.
And you can see him right there.
Owen has cancer, stage four, neuroblastoma.
Owen, along with his family, has been staying at the Ronald McDonald House near Lurie Children's Hospital in Chicago.
Ronald McDonald House was targeted by looters and rioters during the riots a few days ago.
Yes, a place with cancer-stricken children was attacked.
The glass was shattered, door was shattered.
To make matters worse, Owen was supposed to go home to have his birthday party.
And he just turned two.
This little guy has earned his birthday party more than certainly I've ever earned a birthday party.
And he apparently is a big fan of llamas.
Who isn't?
I'm a big fan of llamas too.
And so his mom had a big three foot tall stuffed llama shipped to the house as part of the birthday celebration.
She was looking forward to bringing him home so you could see that.
But the party had to be cancelled because of the riots.
They couldn't discharge any children in the middle of this.
So Owen missed his birthday party.
Meanwhile, as Owen's mother describes it, they could hear... I mean, just imagine these children.
They could hear the noises.
They could hear the sirens and the gunshots and everything and all the chaos.
And while they're trapped at this place, imagine the fear and the terror for these kids who are already going through something that no kid should have to endure.
So, if you need another reason to despise the rioters and BLM, here it is.
Just reprehensible, awful, self-obsessed people who don't give the slightest damn about anyone but themselves.
Remember something.
Remember we played this yesterday.
The BLM activists in Chicago justifying looting by saying that they should be able to take whatever they want because they're entitled to it.
Let's play that again.
I don't care if somebody decides to loot a Gucci or a Macy's or a Nike because that makes sure that that person eats.
That makes sure that that person has clothes.
That makes sure that that person can make some kind of money because this city obviously doesn't care about them.
Not only that, that's reparations.
That is reparations.
Anything they want to take, take it because these businesses have insurance.
They're going to get their money back.
My people aren't getting anything.
So BLM is taking whatever they want because they're entitled to it, while cancer-stricken toddlers are deprived of their birthday parties.
Because—this is a direct correlation—because BLM had to take what it is owed, apparently, that meant that cancer-stricken toddlers out of luck.
By the way, positive note here, if you go to my Twitter right now, I've got a link up to the GoFundMe for Owen.
It's a GoFundMe for his medical expenses and whatever else the family needs the money for.
So you can go there, and if you're able to donate, then do that.
Someone sent me the GoFundMe page yesterday.
It had raised $20,000.
When they sent it to me of since February and then I put it up and we all kind of rallied together and overnight We doubled it to and for another 20,000.
So Go to go to my Twitter if you can and donate there All right the man the manager of a bakery in Chinatown was trying to talk to Mayor Bill de Blasio about how the shutdowns and the kovat policies are have affected it have destroyed his business and he's getting quite emotional in this clip understandably, but let's look at de Blasio's response to him watch We've been taking a hit since January.
We lost our Chinese New Year, our busiest day of our community.
The most festive holiday that we have.
Then COVID happened.
Now we're all part of the show.
What we need is more confidence in ourselves.
I know Margaret Chen doesn't...
Yes, but we need help.
We need more confidence.
Our merchants need more confidence.
Everybody please step aside.
Yeah, he just doesn't care at all.
Speaking of self-obsessed, not giving the slightest damn about anybody but yourself, there's de Blasio.
I mean, de Blasio, the Rioters, BLM, Antifa, these are all matches made in, well, not heaven, but in the other direction anyway.
They're all sort of peas in a pod, very similar in that way.
He doesn't care at all.
This guy, you know, this business owner, Life, business destroyed, de Blasio couldn't possibly care less, just walks away from him.
Number three, an article in the LA Times, here's the headline, says, want more diversity in camping?
Start with the gear.
And then the article goes into detail, talking about how fewer black people go camping, and this, you guessed it, is due to historical injustice and racism.
You know, all those laws on the books forbidding black people from camping.
Well, you have to admit, those laws would be pretty bad if they existed.
Now, I am, and let me say, I am totally against those non-existent laws.
Those laws don't exist, and I say they should continue not existing.
Now, as for the question in the headline, I just thought, I know it's a rhetorical question, I thought I'd answer it anyway.
Want more diversity in camping?
Allow me to answer that question.
No, I don't, actually.
I don't want more diversity in camping.
I also don't want, I don't not want more diversity in camping.
I don't want more, I don't not want more.
I just have no feeling at all about the racial makeup of the camping community.
Doesn't matter to me at all.
Shouldn't matter to anyone.
People will camp if they want to.
If they don't want to camp, they won't.
If more white people than black people want to go camping, okay.
Why would that matter?
Why does every single facet of society need to have a certain predetermined, fill a certain quota, a racial diversity quota?
Who cares?
Something like camping, as with so many other things in society, it really comes down to, do people want to do it or not?
It's like that with the sexism claims, and we'll talk more about this in a second.
But we look at certain industries and we say, well, there's not enough women doing this job.
Have you ever thought that maybe there's not more women doing the job because women don't want to do that job?
There's not a lot of gender diversity in the roofing industry, okay?
Most roofers on a hot roof in July Almost all of them men.
In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a female roofer.
Maybe a few of them exist.
Is that because females are excluded from roofing?
No, it's just because they don't want to do it.
And so they don't.
I suspect there's something similar going on with camping.
All right, number four, huge news here.
Finally, we get to something important.
Farmers in Botswana have come up with an incredible innovation.
They figured out that you can prevent predators, lions, leopards, et cetera, from attacking your cows if you draw eyes on the cow's butt.
And you can see right here, eyes on the butt.
They don't have to be very realistic eyes either, apparently.
Even these lackadaisical eyes will work.
Why do they work?
Well, they've done a whole study to figure out why this works.
I can tell you why it works.
Would you want to eat a hamburger with eyes on it?
If you picked up your hamburger at Applebee's and there are eyes staring at you, would you eat it?
I mean, I still would because I'm hungry, but it would freak me out, no question.
All I can say is that this, so far though, is a massive missed opportunity.
If these farmers are drawing eyes, I know you probably thought the same thing as me, right?
We're putting eyes on the cow's butt.
Okay, I'm with you there.
Sounds good.
Why aren't we putting googly eyes?
Go to Joanne Fabrics, if they have that in Botswana, get the googly eyes, put that on the butt of the cow.
More realistic?
A lot funnier.
Let's go to number five, finally.
A new study says that a certain mind-controlling fungus can infect cicadas and turn them into zombies.
And to be honest with you, I'm really just mentioning this story as an excuse to transition into a story about my kids.
That's the only reason.
So we're putting that to the side.
Enough about the cicadas.
I thought this was pretty great, and I don't have anywhere else to put it in the show, so I'm just going to tell you here.
Yesterday, while I was out of the house, our three-year-old Son got mad at his brother because he wouldn't play with toys with him.
So our three-year-old took one of the toys, plastic shark, threw it at his older brother, hit him in the eye, actually ended up giving him a nice little cut beneath the eye, like right here.
And I guess my younger son's logic was, listen, if you don't want to play with the toys with me, then I will beat you with them.
That was his logic.
Now, he got punished for that, of course, but when I got home, I decided that I should have a talk with him about it.
And I was talking to him about it, and I asked him why he did it.
Even though I knew the answer.
But I asked him anyway.
And he told me, this was his excuse, alright?
He told me that he was worried that his older brother might be a zombie.
So he threw the toy at him.
That's what he said.
And you know, I didn't expect his excuse to be persuasive.
I knew he'd have some excuse.
I didn't expect it to be so persuasive.
But I heard that and I thought, alright.
Fair.
I mean, who can... What do you want him to do?
He thought his brother was a zombie.
Or not even that.
See, what I liked about it was, he didn't come out and outright accuse his brother of being a zombie.
He said, might be.
So, so it was, it was more of like a plausible theory that he couldn't rule out without further investigation and the investigation involved throwing a plastic shark at his eye.
I don't totally understand the connection there to be honest with you, but I don't have any experience battling zombies.
Do you?
So, uh, I don't think that we can really pass any judgment there.
And I thought that was, uh, that was good.
Kids will always, kids always coming up with the, it's one of the great joys of being a parent is listening to all the, excuses from your kids. I use the word joy. There are other
descriptions you could probably use, but I'm going with joy for right now. All right, we're
going to get to our daily cancellation in just one second, but I want to tell you about our most
exclusive membership tier over at DailyWire, which is All Access. All Access members get to join All
Access Live, which is our exclusive live stream Q&As hosted every night by each of the hosts,
including myself.
All Access memberships also include exclusive access to live online discussions with our hosts, writers, and special guests.
You also get not one, but two Leftist Tears tumblers with your membership, as well as early and sometimes exclusive access to new Daily Wire products.
Today for our daily cancellation, I will be cancelling women.
Not all women, don't worry.
In fact, if you are a woman, I hope that you do not fall into the category of being cancelled this afternoon.
Those were gone in 48 hours.
So you want to get signed up dailywire.com slash Walsh right now to get 20% off all access
with coupon code access.
That's dailywire.com slash Walsh coupon code access to get 20% off your membership.
Today for our daily cancellation, I will be canceling women, not all women.
Don't worry.
In fact, if you are a woman, I hope that you do not fall into the category of being canceled
this afternoon.
I am canceling women who have a tendency to claim that relatively normal yet uncomfortable
or irritating social interactions are sexist.
Now, I suppose I could simplify by saying I'm cancelling feminists, but I think that there may be some women who don't identify as feminists and yet still fall into this trap.
So now, look, I'm not talking here about things, words, behaviors that are actually abusive or degrading to women.
In fact, just this week, we discussed the latest Cardi B song, which is intensely degrading and dehumanizing to women.
Yes, it was a woman who produced it, but even so, it amounts to an attack on the dignity of women, and there's plenty of this sort of thing in the culture, and if you're a woman who has spoken out about that, God bless you.
To you, I say, girl power.
I will join you at the protest march for that.
That's not what I'm talking about.
What I'm referring to here are, as I said, the more ordinary, everyday, social interaction based sexism claims.
If you want examples of this kind of thing, just go to Google and type in sexist microaggressions or everyday sexism or similar keywords.
You'll be greeted with volumes and volumes just like this one random example from Yahoo Finance.
This is just one article that popped up, of many.
And the headline, why sexist microaggressions are holding women back at work.
So just reading a little bit of this, it says, around 64% of women are supposed to be exposed to this kind of discrimination, according to the report, with black and lesbian women facing an even greater variety of microaggressions in the workplace.
And then it continues, so what are examples of microaggressions experienced by women?
That's a very good question.
According to the Women in the Workplace report, the most common issue is women having to provide more evidence of their competence than men, and they are more likely to have their judgment questioned, even on things that they're an expert in.
And then the article goes into anecdotes from various women.
Here's one, it says, one Asian woman who had worked four years at a company
told the report authors of her experience of a microaggression.
She said, I was in an elevator and I pressed the button for the executive office.
Someone said to me, um, no, honey, that's for the executive offices.
The interns are going to this floor.
That's not funny, but I, another Middle Eastern woman, the vice president of a company added,
I walked into a meeting where I was the only woman in a very large room of men.
And when I sat down, an older white man from another company turned to me out of nowhere and said, could you take notes for the meeting?
Which was a little bit odd because I was the lawyer in the room, the one doing the negotiating.
Okay, and then it goes into other anecdotes and so on and so forth.
And then it stipulates, importantly, microaggressions can be hard to pinpoint.
They might be brief comments or small actions, such as interrupting or talking over someone in a meeting.
No matter what form they come in, microaggressions can have a serious impact and create a toxic working environment that might seem innocuous, but over time, these incidents and comments can lead to low self-esteem, feelings of alienation, and impact on mental health.
So a few classic examples there of alleged micro-sexism that you find.
There are other classics that you've no doubt heard.
Being told to smile is one.
Women will sometimes complain that others remark on their lack of smiling and they'll chalk that up to sexism.
Of course, there's the old favorite, mansplaining, and mansplaining is any time a man explains something in a condescending or patronizing way.
I'm doing mansplaining right now, in fact.
Unwelcome advice, a cousin of mansplaining is another example.
So, questioning of judgment, interrupting, talking over, telling a woman to smile, explaining things, doling out advice, unwelcome touching, unwelcome flirting, all of these are commonly Considered sexism.
And they're used to promote this narrative of a patriarchal and male-privileged society.
But, it's all bogus.
Almost entirely bogus.
Might there be some occasions where a man interrupts or explains or says, you should smile more because he has a low opinion of women?
Sure, I suppose so.
I can't see inside anybody's mind, I don't know.
What I do know is this, that all of these things, all that I just listed, all of these supposed sexist, anti-woman aggressions, however micro they may be, happen to men all the time.
All.
The.
Time.
None of this is unique to women, nor is there any credible reason to assume that they're experienced more often by women.
All we know, and save yourself the trouble of sending me links to studies.
Look at the studies!
The studies say!
The studies have declared!
All we know is that women more often report and remember these incidents and interpret them as sexism.
What we do not know is that women actually experience these events more often.
And I submit that there's no good reason to assume they do.
Now, this is all anecdotal, of course, but the claims from feminists are anecdotal.
It's all anecdotal, so let me add my own anecdote, okay?
I am told to smile all the time.
I have just never cared enough to make note of it or of any specific incident and to store it away in my head as a traumatic sex experience, sexist experience, because ultimately I don't care what other people think of my demeanor or my personality.
A lot of people hate me and hate my demeanor and personality.
Fine.
Doesn't matter to me.
Your opinion of me is irrelevant.
I don't care.
What about being talked over?
What about being interrupted, condescended to?
Men experience that all the time.
All of that.
Though men who learn to assert themselves will experience it less, but that's true for women too.
The point is that if you have a more submissive personality, you're more likely to be ignored or overridden, especially in a work environment, in a competitive environment.
That's not an anti-woman thing.
That's a human society thing, like it or not.
What about unwelcome advice?
Are you kidding me?
I would wager here that 95% of all the unwelcome advice given in a day across the world, cumulatively, is supplied by women.
Now this is partly a positive reflection of women though.
Women give advice, nag we used to call it, for the same reason that they gossip.
It's the downside of the more positive attributes more common in women, of sensitivity and empathy.
Women are more likely to care what other people are doing, thinking, saying, and feeling.
Yes, this can lead them to gossip, it can lead them to nag, but it can also lead them to be wonderfully caring and invested in other people and very empathetic.
Now men, we're less likely to care all that much about what other people do.
The plus side is that we don't nag very often, we're less prone to gossip.
The negative side is that we can sometimes lack sensitivity, we can lack empathy, we can perhaps err on the side of indifference more often than we should.
This is a difference between the sexes and one of the reasons why our differences are complementary and one of the reasons why it's so great to have a mom and dad in the home, to balance each other out.
You need sort of both sides of this.
The point here is simply that because of the masculine and feminine tendencies just described, some of this everyday sexism is far more likely to come from women.
So why does it seem like women experience these things more?
How could it be possible that Somehow, men have become known in modern society as the nagging busybodies, while women are suddenly the aggrieved and frustrated victims of this behavior.
It's absurd.
Well, I think it has a lot to do with another difference between men and women.
Men only articulate about 10% of their emotions and experience.
For women, the number is closer to 225%.
These are not scientific figures, I admit, but the point is that men don't talk as much about what they're feeling and going through, and are especially unlikely to go home and tell their wives elaborate stories about, you know, being interrupted at a meeting or being told to smile and how upset it made them.
Not because it doesn't happen, but because, for one thing, a man might feel embarrassed that he was emasculated and therefore be more likely, if anything, to tell a story about some other incident in the day when he was assertive and in control, just to assuage his bruised ego.
Also, he won't bring it up because men are more practical.
Even about emotional matters, and admittedly to a fault sometimes.
So a man will calculate in his mind whether the story about his day is actually useful or relevant to anyone, and if he decides that it isn't, he won't say it.
Women don't perform those calculations as often, for better or worse.
Now, that's where the confusion comes from.
It is, like so much of the confusion between the sexes, a matter of miscommunication, or lack of communication.
And now I'm starting to sound like my wife, who, for the record, has never in her life said the phrase microaggression, or even sexism, unironically.
I don't think I've ever heard her call anything sexist, ever.
Which is awesome.
And so, this time, she is not the one being cancelled, but a bunch of other women are, I'm afraid, being cancelled.
Which I'm sure they will hasten to say is sexist, on my part.
So be it.
The cancellation stands.
And we'll leave it there.
Thanks for watching, everybody.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe.
And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review.
Tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts, we're there.
Also be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro Show,
Michael Knowles Show, and the Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Our technical producer is Austin Stevens, edited by Danny D'Amico, and our audio is mixed by Robin Fenderson.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020.
If you prefer facts over feelings, aren't offended by the brutal truth, and you can still laugh at the insanity filling our national news cycle, well, tune in to The Ben Shapiro Show, where you'll get a whole lot of that and much more.
