All Episodes
Previous Next
March 10, 2021 - The Matt Walsh Show
46:40
Ep. 675 - Plunging The Depths Of Cultural Insanity
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Today on the Matt Wall Show, Disney decides that Peter Pan is not appropriate for young children due to its racism.
We seem to have developed some very strange ideas in our culture about what is and is not appropriate for kids, so we'll talk about that.
Also, five headlines, including Milo coming out as ex-gay.
The left says he's not allowed to do that, apparently.
And a New York Times journalist says online harassment has, quote, destroyed her life.
In our Daily Cancellation, we'll talk about the famous musician who apologized and stepped down from his band after committing the sin of reading a book.
All of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
[MUSIC]
When running a business, one of the things that can really kill you,
one of the issues that's gonna be the most difficult to deal with,
and business owners will tell you this, is HR issues.
HR issues can kill you.
Wrongful termination suits, minimum wage requirements, labor regulations.
An HR manager's salaries on top of it aren't cheap.
An average salary is about $70,000 a year.
It's a lot of money that you're dishing out.
As a business owner, BAMBEE, spelled B-A-M-B-E-E, was created specifically for small businesses.
You can get a dedicated HR manager, craft HR policy, maintain your compliance, all for just $99 a month.
With BAMBEE, you can change HR from your biggest liability to your biggest strength.
Your dedicated HR manager ...is available by phone, email, real-time chat.
They're there for you.
They can do what you need done.
From onboarding determinations, they customize your policies to fit your business.
This is not a cookie-cutter approach.
This is customized, and they're doing all this for just $99 a month.
Month-to-month, no hidden fees.
Cancel anytime.
So, go to BAMBEE.com slash Walsh right now to schedule your free HR audit.
That's BAMBEE.com slash Walsh.
Spelled B-A-M-B-E-E dot com slash Walsh.
It has, of course, been decided by the people who decide these things that the issue most urgently requiring our attention right now is that of offensive cartoons, even or especially cartoons that have been around for decades and never really offended anyone until right now.
We have now a new salvo in this newly launched war on animated characters.
KTLA.com has the story.
It says Disney Plus has removed several movies, including Dumbo, Peter Pan, The Aristocats, and Swiss Family Robinson.
From children's profiles on its service over negative depictions and stereotypes.
The Walt Disney Company had previously placed content warnings on the films for, quote, negative depictions and or mistreatment of people and cultures in October, but now it has removed access to the films by children under seven.
According to KTLA sister station, WTVO in Rockford, Illinois, adults with Disney Plus accounts can still access the films with the content warnings, which appear on screen for about 10 to 12 seconds before the unedited content.
That advisory reads, in part, this program includes negative depictions and or mistreatment of people or cultures.
These stereotypes were wrong then and are wrong now.
Rather than remove this content, we want to acknowledge its harmful impact, learn from it, and spark a conversation to create a more inclusive future together.
Okay, now, any confused users of the streaming service are sent to the Stories Matter page on their website to learn more about why Children Under 7 must be insulated from this objectionable content.
If you're curious, the explanation they give for Peter Pan is, this is what they say, The film portrays native people in a stereotypical manner that reflects neither the diversity of native peoples nor their authentic cultural traditions.
It shows them speaking in an unintelligible language and repeatedly refers to them as redskins, an offensive term.
Peter and the Lost Boys engage in dancing, wearing headdresses and other exaggerated tropes.
Peter Pan and the Lost Boys are culturally appropriating.
Those little bastards.
I mean, literally, they're bastards.
Anyway, this is a big problem, you know, you have to admit.
You don't want the movie about a magical boy who flies around with a fairy named Tinkerbell and fights a pirate whose hand was eaten by a crocodile with a clock in its belly to have any absurd or silly depictions of Native Americans.
I mean, well, the depiction of everyone in the movie is absurd and silly.
It's a cartoon.
That used to be, like, the whole point of a cartoon.
Everyone is a caricature.
Everyone is ridiculous.
All of the depictions are cartoonish.
Because, again, it's a cartoon.
Why are you looking for authenticity in an animated film made for kids in 1953?
But this is a reasonable question, and you cannot expect reasonable answers in an age of unreason.
By the way, it's worth noting the reason that's, um...
Swiss family Robinson had to be removed from the sight of children.
Disney says, The pirates who antagonize the Robinson family are portrayed as a stereotypical foreign menace.
Many appear in yellow face or brown face and are costumed in an exaggerated and inaccurate manner with top knot hairstyles, robes and overdone facial makeup and jewelry reinforcing their barbarism and otherness.
Inaccurate?
An inaccurate representation of whom, exactly?
From my memory of the movie, and it's been a long time, I admit, but these are just generic pirates with no specified cultural background.
And if the foreign pirates in Swiss Family Robinson represent a foreign menace, then why aren't we castigating Peter Pan because of Captain Hook representing a white menace?
Again, reasonable questions, unreasonable age.
Now, people who are determined to miss the point or distract from it will respond to all of this with a kind of a scoff and say, well, why do you care so much about these cartoons?
Why are you making such a big deal about it?
The answer, of course, is that I am not the one making a big deal about it.
I made nothing at all out of Peter Pan or Dr. Seuss or Pepe Le Pew or any of the rest of it.
These are innocent and harmless things that I enjoyed as a child and my children enjoy now.
That's the extent of the deal I made out of it.
I never thought, never gave Peter Pan a second thought.
I'm not the one doing that.
It is Disney and the media and the left generally that have decided to make an issue out of these things.
They're the ones who decided to find deep moral significance in all these different things.
But here the left again pulls its favorite maneuver, which I'm always pointing out.
They make a mountain out of a molehill and then accuse us of blowing everything out of proportion when we simply object to their blowing it out of proportion.
The other counterpoint will be that, that will be made about this latest development with Disney, is that the films can still be viewed.
You know, your child can still watch them.
They haven't been erased, right?
They're just not on the children's profiles.
They're being put behind kind of a parental filter.
Okay, well to that I respond in two ways.
Number one, for now.
For now, Peter Pan still exists, but anyone who's been paying the slightest bit of attention already knows where this is headed.
Give it another few months and these films will be taken out of circulation entirely.
I don't need to look into the future to know that.
Guaranteed, that will happen.
After all, Disney has itself said that the movies are hateful and racist.
Disney is saying that!
For now, they hope to have their woke cake and eat it too, labeling their own content racist, but still making money off of it.
But that's not going to last for long.
It can't last for long.
The precedent has already been set.
Number two.
And by the way, just backing up there for a minute, if I were to try to look in the future a little bit, I think what's going to happen is you're going to start having retail outlets that say, well, we're not going to carry Peter Pan, you know, merchandise anymore.
We're not going to sell the kid's book bag with the Peter Pan image on it because it's from a racist movie.
And, you know, someone's, some big retail outlet's going to say that, Target or somebody.
And then when that happens, then Disney is going to take all those movies away because then there's no reason for them to have them.
The way they make their money on something like Peter Pan is through the merchandise.
If they can't sell the merchandise anymore, then there's no reason.
And then they'll take their stand and say, you know what?
Actually, this stuff is totally hateful.
We're not going to let you watch it at all.
So that's the first point.
Second.
The main point, it's not that the movies aren't available.
The main point isn't even about these specific movies or Dr. Seuss or Looney Tunes.
There's a larger principle at work here, a number of larger principles that matter.
One of them is this.
As a culture, we are adopting a very backwards, inverted idea about the nature of childhood and what sort of things are appropriate for children.
As has been pointed out many times by myself and others, the very people who have panic over the objectionable content in innocent children's cartoons will defend with passionate intensity the sewage spewed into our kids' ears and minds by modern pop artists and modern pop culture generally.
They'll mock us for worrying that 12-year-old girls are listening to songs like WAP, while in the next breath insisting that great damage is being done to these same children by, like, a cartoon French skunk.
This reveals a deep confusion about what sorts of things children are equipped to handle, what kind of content they can process mentally, and what they can't.
And if I'm wrong about any of that, I'm only wrong in calling this the result of confusion, rather than a deliberate effort to subvert and corrupt our children.
And in fact, let me back up and say, I was wrong about that.
It's not confusion.
It is deliberate.
But it gets worse.
Consider that Disney is a full-on proponent and advocate for gender theory.
What this means is that the company believes, and many on the left believe, that a five-year-old is old enough to choose his own gender, but not old enough to watch Peter Pan.
A boy in kindergarten has the mental capacity to become a girl if he so chooses, but does not have the capacity to watch Swiss Family Robinson.
The goal here is to entirely alter our view of childhood innocence so that they can destroy childhood innocence without us noticing.
That's the point.
If they get us focusing on something else, if they get us focusing on protecting the innocence of our kids with regards to Peter Pan and Looney Tunes and all this kind of totally innocuous stuff, They can set out doing their, you know, corrupting our kids and we're not going to notice because we're going to feel like, well, you know, we're really manning the fort here and we're protecting our kids because we're making sure they don't watch Peter Pan.
If all goes to plan, and it is so far, they'll have a generation of children who are emotionally and psychologically destroyed, corrupted beyond recognition, and all of the adults will look at these kids and see what they've done and what they've allowed to happen and still feel proud because at least the kids were protected from Dr. Seuss and Peter Pan.
Let's get now to our five headlines.
Before we get to five headlines, you know, hiring as a business owner, finding a right
candidate, hiring someone, the person, finding the person you're looking for and hiring them
can be very complicated.
So what you have to do is take advantage of places that make it easier for you.
Take advantage of the services.
They're going to take some of that burden off your shoulders.
You've got enough to deal with already.
Finding great candidates to hire can be like trying to find a needle in a haystack.
Sure, you can post your job to some job board, but then all you could do is hope the right person comes along, which is why you should try ZipRecruiter for free at ziprecruiter.com.
ZipRecruiter does the work for you.
When you post a job on ZipRecruiter, it gets sent out to over 100 top job sites with one click.
Then ZipRecruiter's matching technology finds people with the right skills and experience for your job and actively invites them to apply.
You get qualified candidates fast.
You're not just putting it out there into the ether and hoping that someone finds it.
So while other services may overwhelm you with applications to sift through, ZipRecruiter finds you what you're looking for.
The needle in the haystack.
And right now, you can try ZipRecruiter for free at ZipRecruiter.com slash Walsh.
That's ZipRecruiter.com slash W-A-L-S-H.
Just go to ZipRecruiter.com slash Walsh.
ZipRecruiter, the smartest way to hire.
Number one, there's a crisis on the border.
Well, there's always been a crisis.
It's worse now.
A surge of illegals coming over, flooding the system, ending up in cages.
I mean, not cages.
What do we call them?
Detainment facilities.
It's almost like all of this could have been predicted.
Almost.
It always seems to happen with Democrats.
That's why maybe you could predict it, because this is the way it always goes.
If you send the message that you're weak on border security and immigration enforcement, you'll end up with a lot more illegal immigration to enforce or to not enforce, as the case may be.
So here's Jen Psaki dodging, I was going to say addressing the issue, but not so much addressing it as dodging it yesterday.
Let's watch.
There are reports out there that the number of unaccompanied migrants detained at the border has tripled in the last two weeks to 3,200 plus.
Is that number accurate?
I'm not going to confirm numbers from here.
Obviously, the Department of Homeland Security and others oversee the programs and the engagements that happen at the border.
I will say that there are a couple of reasons.
I know Amr asked about our kind of change in policy, but there are a couple of reasons why we think people are coming to the border.
Of course, individuals are fleeing countries where individuals and families are You know, they're fleeing prosecution, fleeing violence, fleeing economic hardships, and other things.
The region has also experienced two hurricanes in the fall, putting further stress on the conditions in these countries and the circumstances that are facing individuals.
And all of this is taking place during a global pandemic that has impacted other countries' economies, placing undue hardships on its people, just as it did in the United States.
So, there are also a range of factors that are leading individuals to come to the border.
Why won't you confirm that number?
That's a very important number.
We've been very clear that there is an increase, that there are more children coming across the border than we have facilities for at this point in time.
Those numbers are tracked by the Department of Homeland Security, so I'm certainly, I'm just suggesting that you talk to them about specifics.
Well, we've talked to them, Jen.
They won't confirm the numbers.
So she's not going to confirm.
If I didn't hear her wrong, I think what she said, unless I misheard, I think she said that the illegals are coming here to flee prosecution.
Is that what she said?
Now, I'm pretty sure she meant persecution, but prosecution was a little bit of a Freudian slip there because, in fact, as Donald Trump famously said, you know, when he was announcing his campaign back in 2015 or 16, many of them that are coming here are criminals.
So they are actually fleeing prosecution.
So if that's what you said, that was an example of accidentally telling the truth.
But when you think about this, you know, the main thing I always go back to with The situation on the border, what annoys me the most, and of course, we always get this from Democrats, where all of their policies, even though their policies often lead to, directly lead to, immense human suffering, they still will say, it's compassionate.
We're the compassionate ones.
We have the compassionate policies with immigration or the economy or anything else.
Looking over all of the, just the devastation wrought by those same policies.
No, this is not compassion.
Look what's happening at the border right now.
It's not compassion to allow that to happen, to set the stage for that.
And in fact, probably, I don't want to get splitting hairs too much, but probably we should move away from the word compassion when we're talking about policies in general.
Because really compassion, and this is a word that's been overused to the point of meaninglessness, like so many other words, but the word compassion actually means co-suffering.
That's what it means.
And so what compassion actually means, if you're really compassionate towards someone, it means that you're suffering alongside them.
You're taking on, in some sense, their suffering.
You're doing something for them.
And so supporting a policy, whatever the policy is, that's not an act of compassion on your part because you don't have to do anything.
It requires no sacrifice on your end.
Whatever your view is on immigration, most likely it's just a view that you have.
It's your opinion.
You're not actually, most of us, not actually doing anything one way or another.
So there's no compassion in supporting a policy.
That's the first thing.
So it's not really what policy is the most compassionate.
The question is, what policy is, we should be using words like, the most prudent.
What policy is the most wise?
What policy is most likely to minimize human suffering?
So we can start thinking in those terms.
And it's pretty clear that having a border, protecting that border, enforcing our laws, That is going to be the most prudent, the most wise thing to do, and it's, in the long run, going to most minimize human suffering.
All right, number two, CBS brought out a trans journalist to talk about the issue of trans people in sports and the Republican state legislatures that are trying to bar men from women's sports.
Those bigots, how dare they?
Actually, the CBS tweet where I found this video says, Republicans in at least 25 states have introduced over 60 bills targeting trans youth.
Limiting access to school sports and gender-affirming health care.
Now, that's totally wrong in every way.
Every part of that is wrong.
This is the way it's framed by the media, but we hear it's an anti-trans bill.
No, it's not.
If anything, it's a pro-woman bill, a pro-science bill, a pro-sanity bill.
But it's also in no way, there are no bills, so far as I'm aware, Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.
I don't think there are any bills in the works, in any state, anywhere, that would stop trans people from competing in sports.
No one is trying to do that.
I've never met any conservative who advocates for that.
I've never talked to a single conservative who says, you know what, I think trans people shouldn't be allowed to compete in sports, period.
No.
If you're a biological male, however you identify, We're throwing open the doors and saying you are welcome to try out and compete over here with other biological males.
You're welcome in the bathroom with other biological males.
We welcome all biological males.
It doesn't matter how you identify, so that's a very equitable policy, to use the popular buzzword.
So that's completely wrong, but speaking of being completely wrong in every way, here's what the reporter says about these policies.
So many of these bills, Orion, center around transgender student-athletes.
What's the argument for proponents of the bill which attempt to exclude trans youth from teams that align with their gender identity?
And what evidence do they have, if any, to support their claims?
I note that Governor Kristi Noem of South Dakota has just recently introduced a bill.
Yes, exactly.
Mississippi and South Dakota are the two states that look like they're going to pass these bills into law very soon.
Both governors, both Republican governors, have said that they plan to sign these bills.
And the argument that lawmakers are bringing to this is that transgender inclusion in sports
would harm women's equality, would harm equality for girls.
But I would note that as the Associated Press has reported, they talked to over 24 lawmakers,
and the majority of them failed to bring evidence to actually find examples within their state to say,
"This has been a problem."
We found students who say, "This has been a problem."
That's not to say there is zero evidence.
In the lawsuit that I mentioned earlier, those three Connecticut high school runners said they were denied scholarship opportunities based on trans inclusion in sports.
Right, so what the question was, what evidence do they have?
What evidence do they possibly have that says that quote-unquote trans girls shouldn't be competing In female sports.
What evidence could they bring to the table?
I don't know, a biology textbook?
That's all the evidence they really need.
I mean, I think they can still bring a biology textbook to the table.
Eventually, those books will go on the burn pile, too.
Actual biology textbooks.
But as far as I know, right now, kids are basically still taught human biology in school.
So that's it.
That's the evidence.
It's an obfuscation, what you heard there, that the Republicans in most of these states, they haven't been able to bring evidence of girls really being harmed by these policies.
Well, if there's been no evidence of that, and that's not the evidence we need, what the evidence we need again is simply the science of it.
To establish that girls are one thing, boys are another thing.
These are two categories of people.
Boys have an unfair biological advantage, in principle, in girl sports.
That's why they don't belong there.
That's all the evidence you need.
But in terms of evidence of girls being harmed by these policies, as was admitted, there is some really compelling evidence of that, like in states like Connecticut.
But in other states, if there are no examples of that yet, it's because it hasn't happened yet, and these laws are trying to stop it from happening.
The laws are looking to prevent this thing from happening.
The whole point is, we don't want to wait for the damage to be done.
We don't want to wait for a whole generation of girls to be deprived of athletic scholarships and all of that, and then we can circle back and say, see, I told you.
This is a foreseeable outcome, and so we're going to prevent that outcome with these laws.
That's the point.
Number three, from the New York Post, it says right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos has come out as ex-gay, announcing that he would, quote, would like to help rehabilitate with what the media calls conversion therapy over the next decade, according to the report.
The 36-year-old British political commentator declared himself no longer gay and, quote, sodomy-free.
In an interview with LifeSite News, Yiannopoulos told the outlet that he is now leading a daily consecration online to St.
Joseph.
There's been a lot of chatter about this online.
What I'll say is, first of all, the accusation is that this is all a giant troll on Milo's part.
That's all this is.
He's looking for attention.
I think that could be it.
I don't know.
How am I supposed to know?
But also, that's the point.
How are you supposed to know?
The internet has simply declared, this is what they have declared, when I say the internet, mostly the left.
Although not just the left, a lot of people on the right too, from what I've seen on social media.
What has been declared is that, no, Milo is not allowed to do this.
He's not allowed to not be gay anymore.
He can't make that choice.
And we, in the public, we know more about Milo's sexual orientation than he does.
That's the attitude from many in the public, and it's ridiculous.
It also, of course, it's like there's no point even making this observation anymore, but I will, the double standard here is quite apparent.
I thought what we've heard from the left for so long is, you know, someone's Private life is their private life.
The people they choose to be in a sexual relationship with, that's up to them.
Right?
Consenting adults.
So who are you to have any opinion at all about this?
If he says this is the lifestyle that he wants to lead now, we're supposed to accept that.
Who are you to have any opinion or to say, no, I don't really think, I don't think that's true.
I don't think he's right about his own orientation.
I mean, the arrogance.
Is pretty astounding.
Yeah, you can't see inside someone's heart and mind to know they're real, but that's true for Milo, that's true for anybody.
You can't see inside my heart and mind.
You don't know what my motivations are.
I don't know what your motivations are.
And that's precisely the point here.
Uh, number four, and of course it mixed in with, uh, with this reaction, this mixed into the reaction to the story about Milo.
There's also a lot of anti-Catholic stuff thrown into it because he says he's consecrating his life to St.
Joseph, which is a perfectly wonderful thing for anyone to do.
Uh, and so there's a lot of anti-Catholic bigotry being tossed into it as well.
All right.
Number four, Taylor Lorenz, a journalist for the New York times has gotten some attention recently for some claims that she's made about the ways that online harassment So she tweeted this on International Women's Day, which hopefully, as you know, is a couple days ago.
I hope that you commemorated and celebrated it as I did.
She said, for International Women's Day, please consider supporting women enduring online harassment.
It's not an exaggeration to say that the harassment and smear campaign I've had to endure over the past year has destroyed my life.
No one should have to go through this.
It's not an exaggeration.
Taylor, are you sure about that?
I think it is.
It sounds like an exaggeration to me.
She says, I'm slightly open about some of what I deal with, but the scope of attacks has been unimaginable.
There's no escape.
It's taken everything from me.
The only mild solace I found is with other women who have had their lives destroyed in the same way.
We've developed deep trauma bonds.
Deep trauma bonds.
Um, because by the way, the trauma bonds sounds like maybe like a, an indie band.
Anyway, I'll return to that later.
Trauma because of mean comments on the Internet.
And this is what you so often get from feminists, especially feminist journalists, where they really seem to believe this is not a put-on.
Much of what they're doing here, much of this is performative.
But the part that's not performative, I think she really believes that she is uniquely suffering this.
Or at least that women, and especially women journalists, uniquely suffer this kind of thing.
It doesn't happen to the rest of us.
Certainly doesn't happen to men.
Men never have to endure any of this.
No, men, anyone in the public eye.
I'm not saying it's a good thing.
I have no doubt that Taylor Lorenz gets a lot of really mean comments.
Really vile comments.
I have no doubt about that.
I'm sure she gets many messages that may be quite upsetting to her.
I have no doubt.
I have no doubt because I get that kind of stuff all the time myself.
Most of the time it's not upsetting to me because I don't allow myself to be upset.
And that's really what it comes down to.
It's a question of how are you going to respond to this?
What is your reaction going to be?
Because you're going to get it on the internet.
All you can decide is how you'll respond.
If it really has destroyed your life, I don't even know how that could be the case.
If it is the case that it's destroyed your life, then why don't you simply get off the internet and go do something else for a living?
Now, I wouldn't normally say that you should do something else for a living simply to avoid mean comments on the internet, but if you're saying it's destroyed your life and caused trauma, And you can't get over it, and it's unimaginable, and there's no escape.
Well, there is an escape.
You know what the escape is from comments on the internet?
The escape is this.
I'll show you.
Demonstration.
Here's the escape.
Watch.
I'll show you.
That's how you escape.
I'll show you again if you're watching.
So, to escape mean comments on the internet, you do this.
Put the phone down.
That's it.
And all of that stuff, it's happening here.
And I can put it down and live my life.
That's the great thing.
This has happened to me many times where people are attacking me on Twitter and all of this stuff and it's so great that I can just click off, put it down, go read a book to my kids.
Doesn't matter.
Let the internet freak out.
Doesn't matter to me.
So there is an escape.
But it happens to all of us.
If there's an impression that it doesn't happen to men as often, I think the reason is that we don't talk about it as much.
You know, that has to be the reason.
I don't go around talking about it all the time, and talking about how it's destroyed my life doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.
All right, fine.
Finally, number five, an Uber driver was assaulted by a group of women after he requested that one of them put on a face mask.
Now, I'm not a big fan of the mask thing, as you know, but I fully respect a guy's right to tell you the rules for riding in his car.
Fully respect that.
If you don't like it, get out of the car.
Really simple to me.
It's his car, he has every right to set the rules.
Don't like it, don't ride in the car.
She didn't like it, this woman, but she refused to get out of the car and instead she communicated her dislike for this policy by assaulting him.
Let's watch that video.
[VIDEO PLAYBACK]
[INAUDIBLE]
[COUGHING]
[BLEEP]
I got corona.
[SCREAMING]
[BLEEP]
[BLEEP]
Hey, hey.
What you gonna do?
What you gonna do?
You don't touch my property!
in the middle of the f***ing thing?
Are you stupid?
I don't really have to like do something.
Get out in the gas station.
I think you get the idea there.
These women...
These women are surely scholars.
So he asked her to put the mask on.
She didn't want to.
So she started coughing in his face, ripped his mask off, and tried to steal his phone.
Perfectly reasonable reaction, right?
And here she is now, she's not apologizing for that.
Here she is addressing this controversy and kind of explaining why she reacted the way that she did.
Let's listen.
My boyfriend taught me He taught me, don't let nobody play with you, smack the f**k out them.
That's what I was taught.
So if y'all boyfriends told y'all to let this Uber, let y'all get out the car and get robbed or whatever the f**k would've happened, and I saw y'all, what the hell no.
And he lucky as hell I ain't have nothing on me on mama's, cause if he would've played with me, bruh, it would've been a whole different story.
For real, you're not about to kick me out on the freeway.
Everybody I know, 75% of people I know would have smacked the shit out of him or done some crazy ass off-the-wall shit.
All I did was take his mask off and cough a little bit, but I ain't even have corona, so at the end of the day... Sorry, I get so wrapped up listening to her because she's so eloquent.
And I just enjoy listening to her express herself in that really poetic and profound way.
Two observations.
Well, number one, I guess it's nice anyway.
There's a little bit of chivalry going on here, a little bit of old-fashioned chivalry, talking about her boyfriend is teaching her the things that her boyfriend teaches her.
I think I'd prefer to hear the things that her father taught her.
It sounds like maybe there's a lack of that, which is how this happened in the first place.
Well, the other two things, number one, what you see here is female privilege.
Okay, she's walking around saying, I'll smack anyone, I don't care, I'll smack you.
Well, just about any man, any male over the age of like 12 could beat the hell out of her in a second if they wanted to.
But they're not going to, for the most part, and so she knows that she can walk around smacking whoever she wants.
I mean, we can be pretty sure that's not the first time she's done that.
And she smacked that guy who could easily take her in a boxing match, I'm sure, but he didn't respond physically, and he knew—this is female privilege, because he knew, even though he was the one being attacked, he knew that if he had responded physically, he'd be the one in jail.
And she knows that he knows that, and so that's why she's assaulting him.
Female privilege.
Number two, we need to talk a little bit about dumb person privilege, because what you just saw there, this is why I always go back to the need to weed out dumb people from voting.
That person right there probably votes.
And that's exactly what we need to address in this country.
There is no hope for the future, as long as people like that are helping to determine it.
Really simple.
Fifth grade level civics exam?
She's not gonna pass that.
Easily done.
Something to think about.
Alright, let's move on now to reading the YouTube comments.
First comment says, Matt is cynical, paranoid, unwilling to take responsibility, pessimistic, uncaring, overly cancel-happy, unfeeling, and completely awesome.
Well, thank you for that, but you also forgot that I am ill-tempered.
So make sure to put that in there.
Nick Miller says, I'm a Walshio sexual.
I'm in love with the Matt Walsh show.
I'll take that.
You know, if we're inventing sexualities, then that one, that one needs its own pride flag.
Lindsay Road says, Matt, do you think the creation of all those genders are an effort to regain some sort of individuality by these people?
The left is always trying to strip away individuality and lump everyone into broad categories.
Is it really surprising, then, that the people would grasp at the opportunity to distinguish themselves the only way that the left has deemed acceptable?
Totally crazy, yes, but not surprising to me.
Oh, you've put your finger on it.
I think that's exactly right.
That's what drives a lot of this.
The need, the desire to be an individual, which we all desire to be individuals and to differentiate ourselves from the crowd, to assert ourselves individually, and this is the way that they've been conditioned to do that.
And that's why we went through yesterday some of the newer invented sexualities, including allosexual, I think that's what it was?
Allosexual?
And that's a sexuality where if you're sexually attracted, period, if you have any sexual attraction at all to any individual person or any group of people, then you're an allosexual.
And I looked it up, there's even, I believe, an allosexual pride flag.
Demisexual, you know, that's someone who needs an emotional attachment, which again, that's women.
Okay, women need emotional attachment in order to really feel that attraction.
And so the reason that we're making up all these Sexualities is partly because there's real privilege and being included in the LG under the LGBT umbrella But also I think yeah, it makes people feel like they're more of an individual They're more interesting.
You know, it's too boring.
You don't want to say that you you're simply a quote cisgender straight person You want to be a more complicated and interesting person with more gray areas?
And obviously the irony is that in this rush to be an individual and to be so interesting, they end up just like everybody else.
Little Polly says, Matt, you're missing the most important point about BLM.
They aren't harassing random people on the street.
They're harassing random white people on the street.
It's a racist anti-white movement.
I agree.
I don't think I've missed that at all.
I think that's a point I've made many times, but certainly I agree.
William Ferrario says, isn't cow cuddling prohibited in Leviticus?
Somewhere toward the back or in a footnote, or did Moses just figure it wasn't worth mentioning?
Well, I don't know.
Cow cuddling certainly violates the spirit of many biblical laws, I would think.
It's an attack on nature, an attack on God, you might say.
I mean, God made cows big and fat and slow, and not so that you could cuddle with them, but so that they could more easily be slaughtered and turned into quarter pounders with cheese.
Amen.
One of those moments of panic that you might have in life that I know I've had too many times to count is when you're driving in a car or you're on a plane or somewhere and you start to get that motion sickness, you start to feel nauseous and you're thinking, oh my gosh, am I going to have to ask them to pull over the plane so I can hurl?
You don't want to deal with that.
And that's why I use Reliefband.
Reliefband is the number one FDA cleared anti-nausea wristband that's been clinically proven to quickly relieve and effectively present nausea and vomiting associated with motion sickness, anxiety, migraine, hangover, Morning sickness, chemotherapy, and so much more.
The product, the great thing is it's 100% drug-free, it's non-drowsy, provides all natural relief with zero side effects for as long as needed.
The technology was originally developed over 20 years ago in hospitals and now it's available to the public and you gotta try it.
Relief Band is the only over-the-counter wearable device that's been used in hospitals and oncology clinics to treat nausea and vomiting.
I use it, it works, I can testify to that.
This new year, ensure nausea is never the reason to miss out on life's important moments.
Right now, Relief Band has an exclusive offer just for Matt Walsh listeners.
If you go to reliefband.com and use promo code WALSH, you'll receive 20% off plus free shipping and no questions asked, 30-day money back return guarantee.
So head to r-e-l-i-e-f-b-a-n-d.com and use our promo code WALSH for 20% off.
And you know, on election night, we announced that Candace Owens would be joining The Daily Wire with a new show.
Now the wait is finally over.
The moment is here.
Candace's new show, appropriately titled Candace, will premiere next Friday, March 19th.
You may remember Candace from, well, many things, but we know Cardi B ranted about her criticizing WAP.
Harry Styles was upset when she had the audacity to suggest that maybe men shouldn't wear dresses.
All of that.
We know that Candace is always has interesting things to say, which is why you got to check out Candace.
It's going to be exclusive to Daily Wire members.
If you're not yet a member, go to dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Use code Candace to get 25% off.
Again, that's dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Use code Candace for 25% off.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Just when you think we've made it to the furthest reaches of cultural lunacy and of the cowardice that enables that lunacy, we find still deeper depths to plunge.
Winston Marshall plays, or did play, rather, the banjo and the lead guitar from Mumford & Sons, a group famous for being everyone's third favorite band in the summer of 2011.
And this past weekend, Marshall ignited controversy and accusations of bigotry and Nazism by publicly confessing to having read a book.
Yes.
The musician tweeted an endorsement of journalist Andy Ngo's Antifa expose, which is called, by the way, if you want to pick it up, Unmasked, Inside Antifa's Radical Plan to Destroy Democracy.
The tweet addressed to Ngo said, Finally had the time to read your important book.
You're a brave man.
That was it.
That was the tweet.
And it was enough to set the cancel wheels in motion.
Fans, the media, fellow musicians came out swinging, labeling him a racist, calling for him to be fired, so on and so on and so forth.
They made it clear that there is essentially no difference between reading and enjoying a book critical of Antifa and pledging allegiance to Hitler after reading Mein Kampf.
To hint at even the mildest disagreement with the most radical fringes of the far left is to profess far-right views, which is to be a bigot, which is to reveal yourself unworthy of inclusion in civilized society.
That's the formula, clear and simple and totally insane.
In fairness to the cancel mob, we should say, this is not Marshall's first infraction.
He has in the past showed other ominous signs of possessing a mind of his own.
An article in the Hollywood Reporter notes, quote, This is not the first time Marshall and Mumford & Sons have courted controversy for associating with notorious right-wing personalities.
Back in 2018, the band invited Canadian academic Jordan Peterson, who has been accused of transphobia, misogyny, and Islamophobia, to visit their London studios.
After pictures of Peterson and members of the band appeared on social media, Marshall told a Canadian radio station, There you have it.
One minute, Marshall is taking a picture with a famous psychologist.
Three years later, he's reading a book.
they say. Primarily I'm interested in his psychological stuff, which I find very interesting.
He might go out and misgender a potato head toy.
You never know what this guy will do.
There's no telling what sort of dastardly deeds this villain might get up to.
Fortunately, the cancel mob was able to reign him in then, without much trouble.
After deleting the offending tweet, and then apparently deleting all of his other tweets.
So he deleted that tweet, and then it seems, if you go to his page, he deleted all...
All of his tweets, along with it, Marshall then issued the standard order apology.
This is what he said in his statement.
First of all, you almost know exactly what he's going to say before you hear me say it.
But he said, over the past few days, I have come to better understand the pain caused by the book I endorsed.
I have offended not only a lot of people I don't know, but also those closest to me, including my bandmates.
And for that, I am truly sorry.
As a result of my actions, I am taking time away from the band to examine my blind spots.
For now, please know that I realize how my endorsements have the potential to be viewed as approvals of hateful, divisive behavior.
I apologize, as this was not at all my intention.
Now, if you thought you would live your whole life and never encounter the phrase, pain caused by the book I endorsed, you were sadly mistaken.
Indeed, I feel it must be emphasized, and really cannot be emphasized enough, that this man is begging for forgiveness and stepping down from his position because he read and recommended a book.
He has come to believe, or at least is pretending to believe, that his decision to read a book caused not only offense, but actual damage to other human beings.
Prior to this, the most pathetic and deranged bit of groveling we'd ever witnessed was The Bachelor host Chris Harrison's apology for advocating forgiveness.
Winston Marshall managed to show a level of stomach-churning obsequiousness that outdid even that.
And I have faith that some brave pioneer will come along in the very near future to debase themselves and surrender their dignity in such a way as to make Marshall look like Davy Crockett defending the Alamo by comparison.
It's all for naught, of course.
As always, the groveler gains nothing from his masochistic performance.
He is no less canceled at the end of it.
The emotional blackmailers who demanded an apology for something that did not affect them or harm them to begin with have no plans to actually accept that apology.
Like any schoolyard bully, they get off on the act of imposing their will on another person.
If you let yourself become a source of this perverse high, they're going to keep coming back for more hits.
You can't get them to stop taking your lunch money by giving them your lunch money.
Your only hope, then, is to stand up for yourself, stand your ground, refuse to play their game, and to send that message with a punch in the nose.
Now, admittedly, in the case of the cancel mob, this is much easier said than done.
There's certainly no guarantee that they'll leave you alone just because you have made it clear that you're not going to be an easy target.
It's quite possible that no matter how you respond, they will still come and take your job and your livelihood and your reputation away.
But the one thing they can't take is your dignity.
They can't take that.
That is something that a man must willfully forfeit.
If everything else is taken from you, you could take solace in knowing that no one can take that from you, ever.
You have to give it up.
You have to offer it.
You have to say, here you go, here it is.
Winston Marshall is not the first, and certainly won't be the last, to offer up his dignity on a silver platter and get nothing in return.
And for that, he's cancelled.
And he is doubly cancelled for being a disgrace to the banjo-playing community, which, as you know, I am going to take that especially personally.
So, cancelled again for that.
And we'll leave it there for today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review.
Also, 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, The Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Walsh Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring, our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling, our technical director is Austin Stevens, production manager Pavel Vodosky, the show is edited by Danny D'Amico, our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina, hair and makeup is done by Nika Geneva, and our production coordinator is McKenna Waters.
The Matt Walsh Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2021.
The White House stonewalls reporters on the record number of illegal alien kids being held in cages.
Right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos is now ex-gay.
And the Cuomo scandals get even worse.
▲
Export Selection