Ep. 928 - Separation Of The Leftist Church And State
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, what is the Left’s real problem with the anti-groomer efforts? It’s that we’re trying to get their religion out of the school system. A separation of the leftist church and state. Also, the Biden Administration is claiming that inflation is “Putin’s price hike.” We’ll take a look at the data and see if that claim holds up. Plus, DeSantis puts policies in place to support fatherhood in Florida, which has some leftists upset. And a male prisoner first identified as a woman and now identifies as a baby. And of course that self-identity is being respected by prison staff. In our Daily Cancellation, a libertarian magazine laments the lack of porn online. Apparently there isn’t enough of the stuff. We’ll talk about that and much more today on the Matt Walsh Show.
Join Ben’s Third Thursday Book Club now to get his notes for The Once and Future King by T.H. White and be a part of this month’s Q&A: https://utm.io/uejl1
What is a Woman? Matt Walsh tracks down the answer in his new book. Preorder your copy now at whatisawoman.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, what is the left's real problem with the anti-Groomer efforts in Florida and across the country?
It's that we're trying to get their religion out of the school system.
A separation of the leftist church and state, you might say.
Also, the Biden administration is claiming that inflation is Putin's price hike.
We'll take a look at the data and see if that claim holds up.
Obviously, it doesn't.
Plus, DeSantis puts policies in place to support fatherhood in Florida, which has some leftists upset, and a male prisoner, first identified as a woman and now identifies as a baby.
And of course, that self-identity is being respected by prison staff.
In our Daily Cancellation, a libertarian magazine laments the lack of porn online.
Apparently, there isn't enough of this stuff on the internet.
We'll talk about that and much more today on The Matt Wall Show.
Unfortunately, there's no end currently in sight, especially with Biden in the White House.
And one area where we see inflation more than ever is in the grocery store.
Prices for beef are only going to get higher as summer approaches and your favorite cuts will be harder to find.
You can lock in your price and supply with Good Ranchers right now.
That's the good news.
Once you subscribe, your price never goes up, making Good Ranchers the best way to inflation-proof your meals.
Shop Good Ranchers for all of your beef, chicken, and seafood needs.
Good Ranchers only sells 100% American meat from local farms and ranches.
They have signature steak burgers.
They have pre-trimmed and pre-marinated chicken breasts, which are absolutely delicious and really easy to repair.
And the great thing about the chicken breasts I'm always telling you about is that it doesn't matter what you do, they're not dry or anything.
They're just great.
Plus, their packaging makes it easy to cook what you want and save the rest, which keeps you from wasting anything.
Get your $30 discount on prime steaks and better-than-organic chicken today.
Go to GoodRanchers.com slash Walsh to save on the quality that you've been looking for.
Good Ranchers takes the guesswork out of the grocery store by sourcing everything from local farms and shipping it to your door.
Use my code WALSH and enjoy your box of 100% American meat and your $30 savings.
Order now to combat inflation with Good Ranchers American Meat Delivered.
You know, it's not often that I say this, but a rather brilliant tweet from a trans activist went viral yesterday.
It was brilliant, of course, for none of the reasons that the activist intended, yet in an entirely unintentional way.
I think it raised a number of important points worth considering in greater depth.
The post, which has been liked nearly 100,000 times or so, says this in reference to the Florida anti-groomer bill.
I wonder how these conservatives would feel if we passed a law making it illegal to teach your kids about religion until they were adults.
And then the follow-up suggests a name for this legislation, which would be the Don't Say Bible Bill.
Now, the problem here, right off the bat, is that it is already illegal for a Christian teacher at a public school to teach their religion to the students.
A teacher cannot stand in front of the class and announce that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior and all students must affirm this fact on their next exam or else receive a failing grade.
Now, any teacher who did such a thing, and no teacher would do that or is doing anything like that, but would be promptly fired and most likely sued, if not worse.
If the Christian religion is acknowledged at all in schools today, it is in the older grades as part of world history.
The Bible may be taught as literature, which makes sense given that it's the most influential book in the history of the world.
It's impossible to fully understand and appreciate much of classic literature if you don't know anything about the Bible, because so many of the themes and references and everything come from the Bible.
But even that is rarely done in modern schools now.
The fact is that the Christian religion, even as a simple fact of history and culture, has been all but erased from modern curricula.
I don't say this because I think it ought to be that way.
I don't.
I'm simply saying that it is that way, which negates the point made in the tweet.
But, as noted, the argument does raise a couple of crucial points, inadvertently.
Especially because this is certainly not the first time that someone on the left has drawn this sort of comparison.
And it's an enlightening comparison because it, again, totally by accident, correctly situates LGBT ideology in its place as a religion in its own right.
It's a religion with its own sacred texts, its own priests and priestesses, its own traditions, its own holy days of obligation, its own saints and martyrs, its own sacred symbols, its own notions of sin and virtue, its own story of redemption.
It has its own God, too, which is the God of the self.
And it has its own sense of the supernatural.
Souls who get trapped in the wrong body and so forth.
A very supernatural, spiritual kind of concept.
In fact, you can't even begin... You can't understand gender ideology at all because it's incoherent, but you can't even begin to understand it.
You can't get close to the proximity of understanding what they're trying to say unless...
You first understand that this is a spiritual claim that they're making, that this is a spiritual belief system.
And then you kind of get in the door, and then you're confused, because it all starts to break down.
But that's the kind of thing we're dealing with.
Now, the difference is that the leftist religion, except in Florida now, It is taught in public school.
Even in Florida, it can still be taught outside of the earliest grades.
And even in the earliest grades, it can still basically be taught.
It's taught not just as a cultural reality, but as an actual fact.
The children in school are required to affirm the tenets of this religion.
Now, I wouldn't have a problem, actually, with the kids learning at an appropriate age about the LGBT religion as a cultural reality.
Like being made to understand that the dominant religion in the culture you live is this, and here's what it teaches.
At a certain point, you do have to introduce your kids to that fact, not when they're in kindergarten.
But they are entering into a culture that is run according to this religion.
For their own sake, they should understand a few things about it.
That's not what's happening in schools.
The tenets of the religion are to be affirmed by the kids.
They're made to adopt its language, observe its traditions, pay reverence to its holy figures.
They're indoctrinated into the faith.
They're taught to worship its God, which is the self.
Or more accurately, the God they're made to worship is their idea of the self.
Because in the leftist cult, you don't so much worship your actual self as your deluded perception of yourself.
You kind of worship what you want yourself to be.
Self-worship, in the traditional sense, is bad enough.
But it's not even as bad as the sort of self-worship that you find in the LGBT religion.
Because the latter is a self-worship completely severed from reality.
From anything stabilizing or real.
The adherent of this faith worships a self that hardly even exists.
Psychologically and spiritually, they're floating in an abyss.
Untethered.
Disoriented.
In despair.
Which is why there's so much despair, especially among kids.
I was just reading an article about how the number of kids who report that they have persistent feelings of hopelessness and sadness.
And if you look at a chart which measures this kind of thing, you're going to see that number, that line going up and up and up year after year after year.
With all the recency bias that we have, these days people are going to look at that and see all the kids that are reporting that they're feeling sad and hopeless and everything.
And we're going to be told that some of it's because of the pandemic, and certainly the lockdowns didn't help.
That was a factor which only made the situation worse.
But this is a trend that goes much farther back than that.
It's not normal, at least it shouldn't be.
It is normal these days.
To have so many kids that are feeling hopeless and sad all the time, but it should not be normal.
That is not actually normal, especially for kids.
Why are they feeling that way?
Because these are kids who have no sense of direction, no sense of purpose.
They're in that abyss.
No sense even of themselves.
This is the kind of religious observance that the left is desperately trying to protect in schools.
The schools have long since become leftist religious institutions, like a bunch of bizarre, perverse Sunday schools, basically, where the public schools are now.
And that brings us to the second crucial point, which was incidentally made by this enlightening argument.
The left took over the school system and turned them into their own parochial institutions at a time when conservatives were busy telling themselves, ourselves, A story about this fanciful, entirely fictional thing called an unbiased education.
We tried to guard the neutrality of the education system, a neutrality that never existed and can't exist, while the left was busy using the system to impart their own value system.
Now we're finally awake enough to be playing defense, trying to purge some of this leftist lunacy from the system, which is good, but it is just defense.
We will really be awake when we realize that there is no such thing as a neutral education.
We should not be trying to go back to the unbiased education that never existed and can't exist.
Instead, we should be educating our children into our own value system, our own principles, our own, in this case, correct moral code.
There is no such thing as education divorced from values.
Even an education imparted by robots couldn't achieve that, because robots have to be programmed by human beings.
And as long as humans are involved, there will not be true neutrality.
In the case of the education system, there shouldn't be.
The ultimate purpose of education, after all, is not simply to impart information.
Computers can do that.
The purpose is, at the most fundamental level, moral formation.
It is to shape and guide our children.
The left wants to shape them into something deformed, shape them into something shapeless, and guide them into that abyss.
It's our job, and we use education to do this, to point them in the right direction.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[MUSIC]
Well, talking about recency bias, here's a great example of it.
The Biden administration has settled on a name for inflation, and what they're calling it is, well, it's not inflation, it's the Putin price hike.
This is what they're going with, and they've market-tested it, they've focus-grouped it, and they've decided this is what it is.
It's all Putin's fault.
It's the Putin price hike.
Here's Jen Psaki blaming all of the inflation we're experiencing right now on Putin.
Listen.
So because of the actions we've taken to address the Putin price hike, we are in a better place than we were last month.
But we expect March CPI headline inflation to be extraordinarily elevated due to Putin's price hike.
And we expect a large difference between core and headline inflation reflecting the global disruptions in energy and food markets.
Core inflation doesn't include energy and food prices.
Headline inflation does.
And, of course, we know that core inflation --
you know, energy -- the impact of energy, of course, on oil prices, gas prices --
we expect that to continue to reflect what we've seen the increases be over the course of this invasion.
And just as an example, since President Putin's military buildup accelerated in
January, average gas prices are up more than 80 cents.
Most of the increase occurred in the month of March, and at times, gas prices were more than a dollar
above pre-invasion level.
so that roughly 25% increase in gas.
gas prices will drive tomorrow's inflation reading.
And certainly, it's not a surprise to us, but we certainly think it will be reflected.
So Putin's price hike is what drives inflation, we're being told.
And when Putin launched this current invasion, which was back, what day, early March.
So really a few weeks ago.
That's how I remember it anyway.
And I admit my memory is a little bit foggy these days.
But here's the interesting thing.
I found a chart yesterday.
We'll put this up on the screen.
Here's a chart tracking inflation over the last decade, going back to 2011.
Memories foggy.
I'm also, I'm not an economist.
You know, that's why I don't spend a lot of time talking about issues like inflation.
I leave that to people who know a little bit more about these issues.
But even so, I mean, maybe help me out here.
Did, so you can see the line, you can see kind of inflation data, and this is from the Labor Department, this is, you know, they're the ones who comprise all this, compile all this data, and you can kind of see, I mean, the line, when the lines go up, that's bad, right?
That means inflation is, that means that's inflation rising.
Am I right about that?
Do I know that much at least?
Even without a, you know, a degree in economics?
So, reading the graph, you can start to see That upward trajectory really kick off and actually take off like a rocket ship right at like the beginning of 2021.
Is that when Putin began his current invasion of Ukraine?
In the beginning?
Was it like a year ago?
That's not my memory.
What happened?
I'm trying to think back.
Huh.
Look at that chart.
So what happened at the beginning of 2021?
It wasn't Putin invading Ukraine from my memory, but something else happened right around that time when you see that rocket ship take off to the moon.
And was that, oh yeah, that was right when Biden took office.
That's what the data tells us.
You could see You can see it really began right at that exact moment, it almost seems like.
That's when inflation begins.
On the chart, anyway.
And they want us to believe that this is Putin's fault.
In fact, here's an article from Bloomberg in January this year.
So this was a couple months before the invasion began.
It says, U.S.
consumer prices soared last year by the most in nearly four decades.
So speaking of last year, 2021.
Sapping the purchasing power of American families and setting the stage for the Federal Reserve to begin hiking interest rates as soon as March, the consumer price index climbed 7% in 2021, the largest 12-month gain since June 1982.
According to Labor Department data released Wednesday, the widely followed inflation gauge rose 0.5% from November, exceeding forecasts.
So this is from the beginning of January.
They're saying the year before consumer prices were soaring.
And so this rise had already begun.
And you see an almost, when I say rise, it's like a vertical, it's pointed vertically all the way up.
And that had begun a year before, more than a year before Putin's invasion began.
And they're hoping, the Biden administration thinks that we're all a bunch of morons.
And they're hoping that we just forget about everything that happened before this past March.
They just forget about the fact that we were... Even if you don't follow the economy that closely, we were talking about inflation and problems with inflation and gas prices rising before that.
People were noticing it and feeling it before that.
They're hoping that we just forget about it.
And the problem is that Um, their hopes will not be entirely in vain for a lot of people.
And it's not because people are dumb.
I mean, there are plenty of dumb people out there, especially the ones that happen to vote Democrat.
But also, we just, we have the memories of fruit flies.
Because we're so distracted and we have so many informational inputs coming in all the time, and so you're overwhelmed by information every single day, and that's how we quickly forget things that happened even a few days ago.
And so it's never been easier for them to pull a trick like this.
To take this phenomenon, which had begun before, and to blame it on something that just happened.
And by the way, now I know that I said when you look at the chart, that's just looking at the chart, looking at the graph, you can see inflation, which really seems to have the current spike that we're in the middle of right now seems to have started around the time when Biden took office.
That's what the graphs tell us.
Does that mean that Biden taking office caused inflation?
No, no.
Biden, Biden administration's policies have not helped.
They've only made it worse.
But this also is not because of Joe Biden that we're having inflation right now.
Um, you know, the Fed has been printing money, money hand over fist for years.
And then you could go back to when the lockdowns began.
You know, when the lockdown started, they shut down the economy.
And then they started printing even more money and handing out checks to people whether they needed it or not.
And when they started doing that two years ago, many of us, because this is another thing that you didn't need to have a degree in economics to understand.
You shut down the economy, you start printing money, you start handing money out to people, you're going to have to pay the price for that, in a very literal sense.
Those chickens are going to come home to roost eventually.
And I think a lot of people thought that, well, they did all of this and then the economy kind of opened back up again.
And at first it seemed all right.
And so I think people just thought, well, I guess we got away with that one.
No, there's a little bit of lag time.
And right now the shutdown, the COVID shutdown and the COVID stimulus chickens are coming home to roost.
And that's a big part of what we're experiencing right now.
That was entirely foreseeable.
Which means it's not just Biden's fault, it's also his fault, and it's also the Democrat Party's fault, but plenty of Republicans were on board with this as well.
Alright, let's see.
We also have this.
I thought this was interesting.
So, over in Saudi Arabia, they apparently have their own Comedy sketch shows and that sort of thing.
So this went viral yesterday.
Here's some sort of comedy sketch show in Saudi Arabia making fun of Joe Biden.
This is how you know that we're really being respected on the world stage.
Remember when they told us that we got to get rid of Trump, we got to get Biden in there so that we can be respected on the world stage again.
We're very worried about how we're perceived on the world stage.
At least some people seem to be.
The media thinks that we should be concerned about that.
Personally, I don't really care that much.
I don't wake up every day worried about how other countries see us.
It doesn't really bother me.
I don't care, actually.
But that was one of the arguments that we were given for putting Biden in there, is that we will be respected on the world stage again.
So you watch this and tell me, does it seem that we are being respected?
Is this what respect on the world stage looks like?
Let's watch.
Thank you very much.
Today, we're going to talk about the Christ in Spain.
Yeah, we're going to talk about the Christ in Africa.
Yeah, Russia.
Yeah, Russia.
And I want to talk about the president of Russia, Putin.
Yeah, Putin.
Putin, listen to me.
I have very important message to you.
The message is And the president of China... Oh, you didn't finish Russian?
No, sir.
Thank you to correct me, first lady.
Thank you very much.
God bless you.
And God bless... Thank you all!
Hallelujah!
Clap to your president!
Clap to your president right now!
It's pretty good.
It's better than SNL at least.
That's a better Biden impersonation than we get on SNL.
And I gotta say, their Kamala is a dead ringer.
Their Kamala impersonator is, I'm pretty sure, a man.
But he's also a dead ringer for Kamala Harris.
So that's how we are seen on the world stage, if you're worried about that.
That's how we're being perceived right now.
And although I said that I don't really care how the world perceives us, I guess I should amend that slightly.
It's not so much that I care about being respected by other countries, whatever that would even mean.
But the perception does matter just in the sense that if they perceive, if other countries perceive that we are being run by a dementia patient, if they perceive correctly that we're being run by a dementia patient who is totally oblivious and has no idea what's going on, well, that perception On the world stage, especially by our enemies, is a national security crisis.
So, as it relates to our national security, I guess I do care about that.
I do care about the fact that our enemies can look and see that this is who's driving the car right now.
All right, this is from the Daily Wire.
It says, Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill on Monday to provide more than $70 million to support fatherhood in his state.
DeSantis penned the recently passed bill during a livestream video on Monday morning.
House Bill 7065 passed in the state Senate in March, unanimously following a 117 to 0 unanimous vote in the House.
The bill will require, quote, the Department of Children and Families, Department of Juvenile Justice to identify and meet the needs of duly involved children within a specified timeframe Requiring prenatal and infant health care delivery programs to include certain father engagement activities.
Requiring the Department of Children and Families to contract for the development and implementation of the Responsible Fatherhood Initiative and to provide grants to community-based, not-for-profit organizations to offer certain mentorship programs.
And designated the month of June as Responsible Fatherhood Month.
Well, the month of June is already, I believe, Gay Pride Month.
So, but we, you know, now it's going to be designated Responsible Fatherhood Month.
Maybe a little bit of an irony there.
I don't know.
We won't get too deeply into it.
But I much prefer that.
I think Responsible Fatherhood Month, you know, how about a whole year dedicated to that?
And this is an important thing that they're doing down in Florida.
I mean, it's one important thing after another.
Kind of batting a thousand right now at the moment with some of these policies and laws that are going into effect.
And yeah, you're not going to solve the fatherhood crisis in America with With 70 million dollars, you're not going to solve it with any amount of money whatsoever.
Because at its base, the fatherhood crisis, the fatherless home crisis, which is affecting all communities and it's a problem that's not getting any better.
Fundamentally, that's a problem of men having kids and choosing not to stay home and raise their kids.
And it's not just men responsible for that either.
It's also, in many cases, women who decide that their kids don't really need a father around.
They don't need no man, and so on.
So this is a joint effort between men and women to create fatherless homes and children who are growing up in broken homes.
I think what's important about what they're doing in Florida and other states is at least it's just directing some of the attention to where it should go.
And yeah, there's some money too, and the money's fine.
But the main thing, I think, even more than the money, is attention.
It's focusing people's attention on this problem.
Because we aren't going to solve anything.
We're not going to have any cultural, societal improvements until we start at the home.
And the fact is we've got millions of kids being raised right now in homes without fathers.
And it turns out that kids actually need their fathers, just like they need their mothers.
Parents, you know, we're not interchangeable parts.
The family unit is not like Mr. Potato Head doll, which is not even a Mr. Potato Head doll anymore, I guess it's just a potato head doll, where you could just change out the parts and everything and it's all, and it'll all be fine.
The family is structured a certain way.
By nature?
By God?
And if you get outside of that structure, there are serious consequences.
So it's good that we are focusing on that at least, or to the extent that we can redirect our attention to that problem, I think is a very good thing.
You know, Tony Dungy, by the way, he's a former NFL coach.
He was on hand for the signing because he's been outspoken about this issue, about the problem of fatherless homes, which is really important.
And you need men at that level with some kind of cultural credibility.
He's a guy coming from the NFL and everything.
Talking about this problem.
So he was on hand for the signing just kind of supporting the bill and the left noticed that and they were not happy about it.
So a lot of big accounts on Twitter were attacking Tony Dungy.
The Palmer Report, for example, says Tony Dungy revealed his true self a few years ago when he said he wouldn't want an openly gay player on his team.
So, of course, he's appearing alongside anti-LGBT extremist Ron DeSantis.
When people tell you who they are, believe them the first time.
David Dennis Jr.
said, Tony Dungy, exactly who we thought he was.
Of course, Keith Olbermann was very upset.
Spoiler alert, I worked with him.
Tony Dungy's reputation is not spotless and his Michael Sam comments disqualified him from being considered an example of loving fatherhood.
And a lot of other tweets like that.
Upset at Tony Dungy because he's associating himself with Ron DeSantis.
And why is he associating himself with Ron DeSantis?
Well, just because there is a, actually in Florida, a bipartisan effort, it seems, to support fathers.
But you can't do that, especially if you're going to associate with Ron DeSantis at the same time.
I want to play this for you.
So this was interesting.
This is another contribution from Libs of TikTok.
Well, Libs of TikTok didn't contribute this, but at least found this and showed this to us.
So here's a viral video of someone explaining why you should use Her pronouns.
But I think the reason that we get is kind of interesting.
Listen.
You got so close to the point and then ran away from it as soon as my boyfriend tried to explain it to you.
So I'll try and explain more now, I guess?
The point is we want people to put in the emotional effort to see us as we actually are.
Because what you've described is a situation where somebody is memorizing pronouns rather than actually trying to see the person in a new light with the new information.
I don't want you to see me as a woman and then remember to use he him pronouns.
I want you to see me as a dude, you know?
And when it's a situation like I described in this last video, I see it as you seeing them as a cis person and just taking the any pronouns as a cop-out to any of the emotional work.
The point is empathy.
Do the emotional work.
So that's really important, because this is always the case with the left that we have to, at a certain point, come to understand, is that it always starts with this.
So we've seen this same pattern over and over again, and now we're seeing it with the pronoun thing, which, yeah, it begins with the first thing that they ask.
Initially, they do pretend that they're just asking.
Where they say, will you respect the way that I want to be identified and it doesn't mean I'm not encroaching on you, I'm not imposing anything on you, but just respect me when you're talking about me.
What is it to you?
What's the big deal?
I have a certain word that I prefer and why can't you just use that word?
No big deal, right?
And they start that way.
They start by asking.
And then we graduate very quickly to telling.
No, I'm not asking anymore.
I'm demanding it.
And if you don't do as I say, then, you know, if you're in Canada, for example, you might go to jail for it.
So we're going to put laws in place, and they're advocating for laws like that in the United States, anti-conversion therapy laws, because now to misgender someone by using a biologically correct pronoun, that's conversion therapy.
So, you know, there'll be legal penalties for that.
And if there aren't legal penalties, then we're going to kick you off of social media platforms and all the rest of it.
So you go from asking to telling, but then you get to the point where, okay, even if you're doing exactly as you're told, and you're being obedient, and you're cooperating, that is still not enough.
Because now, yeah, you have the verbal assent that they are demanding.
But now they're gonna peer inside your heart and soul, and they want to know that you actually believe Don't just say what they want you to say.
Believe what they want you to believe.
It's your requirement to actually believe it.
So they're going to try to get inside your mind and tinker with it to change the way that you actually perceive reality.
How quickly we went from, ah, well it's a big deal, it's not a big deal, just say a word, doesn't matter, that's all.
Just be polite.
Quickly we go from that to, you must adjust your perception of reality for my sake.
And as things perpetually speed up in our culture, we graduate from just asking to telling to even that's not enough.
You know, you must actually believe and celebrate.
We go, it used to take a few years to travel that path and now it's like a few months.
And all of it is entirely foreseeable.
On a similar subject here, this is from the Post Millennial.
It says, a biological male inmate imprisoned for life for strangling a cellmate to death in 2004 and previously identified as a transgender woman is now demanding to be treated like a baby by prison staff and wants to be given diapers and baby food.
According to the Daily Record, 36-year-old convicted killer Sophie Eastwood, formerly known as Daniel, was sentenced to prison for life back in 2004 after strangling cellmate Paul Alge with shoelaces.
Eastwood has been jailed at Dumfries Young Offenders Institution at 18 for dangerous driving and then strangled and killed.
So now he's in jail for life.
In 2016, Eastwood then claimed to be a woman.
Originally he said he's a gay man, and then he said, well, okay, it turns out I'm actually a woman.
And this was in a psychologist session in prison.
And so I guess the psychologist, I mean, you've got a guy who's in prison for murdering somebody, and he says, oh, I'm actually a woman.
And then the highly trained psychologist says, oh, well, I guess you are.
You couldn't possibly be wrong about who you are.
You certainly couldn't tell any lies.
You're just a convicted murderer is all.
And so Eastwood has been jailed in a women's prison since 2018 and takes a testosterone-blocking drug.
Again, follow the trajectory there.
It makes a lot of sense, right?
You've got a convicted murderer, obviously a dangerous person, says, I'm a woman, and then immediately it's, well, you couldn't possibly be wrong, you couldn't be deluded, you couldn't be lying, and why not just put you in a women's prison?
It's not like you've demonstrated yourself to be a violent, dangerous person.
And so he got exactly what he wants every step of the way, of course, and now he identifies, rather than a woman, more specifically, he identifies as a baby and demands diapers and baby food from the prison staff.
I guess there's a question about Whether he identifies as a female baby, I'm not exactly sure.
But he identifies as a baby and he's being given, that's how he's being treated by prison staff.
There's no end to it.
Once you remove yourself from reality and you start to, you declare that we have to affirm someone's alleged self-perception, No matter how far that self-perception is from reality, of course there's no end to it.
I mean, why not just release him from prison?
I guess if he's a baby, then who puts babies in prison?
This is a human rights violation.
I mean, can you imagine?
But he identifies as a one-year-old.
What kind of backwards society would put a one-year-old in prison, for God's sake?
So, just release him from prison entirely.
Why not?
All right, I want to play this for you, too.
Cam Newton is a free agent quarterback in the NFL, and he was trending yesterday for some comments he made in an interview that have upset a lot of people.
Let's listen to those.
I had a perfect, a perfect example of what a man was in my life by my father.
My parents have been together for 36, 37 years now, and it's a beautiful thing.
I grew up in a three-parent household, my mom, my father, and my grandmother.
And I knew what a woman was, not a bad b****.
Okay, what's the difference?
A woman.
Okay.
A bad b**** is a person who's just, you know, girl, I'm a bad b****, you know, I'm doing this, I'm doing that, I looked apart, but I don't act apart.
Okay.
You know, and it's a lot of women who are bad b****, and I say b**** in a way not to degrade a woman, But just to go off the aesthetic of what they deem is a boss chick.
Now, a woman for me is handling your own, but knowing how to cater to A man's needs, right?
And I think a lot of times when you get that aesthetic of like, I'm a boss, like I'm a diss, I'm a dad.
No, baby, like, but you can't cook.
Okay.
You don't know, you don't know when to be quiet.
You don't know how to allow a man to lead.
Hmm.
Can't say those things these days.
That is, uh, highly offensive.
I mean, even though he's, he's saying something that, you know, almost every, Man in history can relate to, to a certain extent.
Well, you can't say those things.
Now, you have to keep in mind that Cam Newton, he says that he learned how to be a man and all that kind of thing.
I don't think he's exactly the role model for a good father and a good man.
I think he has, you know, he's got kids by several different women and all that kind of stuff.
So, not exactly.
Not a lot of room to talk.
Not exactly himself a role model for men.
But, of course, what he's talking about is, well, you know, you want a woman who understands a man's needs just like a man should understand a woman's needs.
In fact, if you go further into that clip, there's another clip that cuts off right there.
He continues talking.
He talks about how men should be catering to the needs of women.
And so there should be this kind of, what he's trying to get to, you have to decipher it a little bit, but he's trying to get to is the complementary nature of the man-woman relationship.
And he wants a woman as some of those kind of feminine characteristics, God forbid.
But you just can't talk about that anymore.
And so you've got a lot of people who are, you know,
confused, and they want certain things out of relationships.
We talk a lot about the situation that single people are in, especially younger single people, and how horrendous the dating scene is right now.
And one of the many things that makes it so difficult is that you've got men and women who sort of naturally want certain things out of relationships, but they can't even talk about what those things are.
Because they're told that it's shameful.
So if you're a man and you want a feminine woman, God forbid you'd like a woman who can cook or something, you can't talk about that.
It's a shameful thing, you're told.
So you're not supposed to want that.
Then what are you supposed to want exactly?
Well, the culture doesn't provide any answers there.
So you're just sort of stuck in neutral.
Speaking of bad marriages, I've had this clip that, before we get to the comment section, I think we'll just play very quickly.
I think I did promise we would not return to the Will Smith slapgate, and we're not going all the way back to slapgate, but I did, the last week as we got to the end of the slapgate discourse, I did make the point that, you know, I think the real villain in that whole thing, Will Smith is responsible for his actions, which were insane, but the real villain, I think, is Jada Pinkett Smith, his wife, and just kind of I think reinforcing that point, here's a video that Resurface, I don't know when it's from, it's from a few years ago I think, of Will Smith and his wife, and just watch this, you can kind of see what their marriage is all about.
You know Estelle Perrault is coming to the table, she's going to be at the red table.
Would you say she has been instrumental in you and I redefining our relationship?
I would say don't just start filming me without asking me if you could film me.
I'm still dealing with foolishness.
Would you say that she helped us heal the hurts that we caused between one another?
My social media presence is my bread and butter.
Okay?
So you can't just use me for social media and not, you know, don't just start rolling.
I'm standing in my house.
Don't just start rolling.
Please watch a stare at the red table because she's helped us a lot.
Can't you tell?
That's actually hard to watch.
I actually feel a little sorry for the guy.
I gotta say.
I mean, you gotta stand up for yourself as a man in your relationship, and he clearly has not done that.
But, you can relate, like, I think every man is in this position where, you know, the woman pulls out the phone, wants to take a picture, whatever.
And I know, me, it's like I never, I'm never in a position where I actually want to take a picture and it's like, that's the bane of my wife's existence.
Because if it were up to me, there'd be no, except for this show, and what I do for, there'd be no footage of me anywhere.
So there is a little bit of this, you know, this push and pull in a relationship.
But when your husband clearly says, I don't want to be on camera, and you keep shoving it in his face, I think that kind of shows where that relationship is.
But he needs to...
This is, not that I can give, it's probably too late to give marriage advice anyway, but at a certain point, you have to stand up for yourself a little bit in your relationship, which I don't think he's ever done, pretty clearly.
Well, you heard the big announcement a couple weeks ago.
Two announcements, actually.
What is a woman?
The movie.
And what is a woman?
A book.
The book, which are both coming very soon.
The movie's coming in May.
The book is coming in June.
There's still so much that we cannot tell you about these projects.
We really can't tell you almost anything about them, except what you get from the title and the teaser, which you can find at whatisawoman.com.
You can pre-order the book.
A lot more on both these projects coming very, very soon.
But go to whatisawoman.com, pre-order the book, watch the teaser.
More on the way.
And we also have this coming, which is just tomorrow.
Over a year into Joe Biden's presidency, and it's been nothing short of a disaster, from gas prices to the war in Ukraine.
Safe to say the leader of the free world is not up to the challenge.
Not only that, but massive corporations like Disney are showing us what they really have in mind for our future generations, which is complete leftist indoctrination.
That's why you should tune in to catch an all-new episode of us discussing what's happening and how we're actively fighting it on Backstage tomorrow with myself, Ben Shapiro, Jeremy Boren, Michael Knowles, and Andrew Klavan.
It streams tomorrow at 7 o'clock.
Eastern 6 p.m.
Central on dailywire.com and on our YouTube channel, Daily Wire.
Don't want to miss it.
If you're not a member yet, head to dailywire.com slash subscribe and use code BUILDTHEFUTURE for enormous 45% off your membership today.
Let's get now to the comment section.
Do you know that name?
They're the sweet baby gang.
This is from Colson Duggins, says, Matt, your destruction of the smug libertarians was quite good.
However, I don't think you fully refuted the last points.
I'm curious to hear you articulate your position better.
Her description of her pervasive obsessive anxiety was definitely abnormal and irrational.
My wife suffers from the same things.
I've heard it.
I've seen it firsthand.
I do agree that we shouldn't just jump to drugs to address the problem, but I would definitely say it is a disorder.
It is most certainly not normal.
I have quite literally never experienced the kind of anxiety that my wife experiences because my fears lack the obsessive component that she has.
I can also see a noticeable difference in my wife.
When she gets her serotonin levels up, while I agree that general fears are not a disorder, and I think you've pretty much convinced me about ADHD as well, this kind of anxiety that she describes is a disorder, it's just been misclassified as generalized anxiety disorder, rather than what it is, a subset of obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Interested to hear your thoughts.
Well, the last thing that you said, I could... We'll have to think more about it, but I could maybe go along with that.
I have said this before when we talk about some of these mental illnesses that I don't think actually are mental illnesses like ADHD for example.
I do think that what's going on is many times you have normal behaviors, normal emotions and so on personality traits that are just medicalized and categorized as a As a mental condition when they're not, but I think that explains a huge portion of these cases.
And then what about the smaller portion that cannot be explained that way?
I think some of them probably have been miscategorized.
I'm not taking the position that mental illnesses don't exist at all.
I just think that we need to recalibrate how we view mental illnesses and maybe start from a real basic level of defining what exactly they are.
Which I don't think we've done.
And once we have that conversation, then I think we're still going to be left with some mental illnesses, not 300 like they have in the DSM right now, but some.
I mean, so you take, for example, like an obvious one, I think, would be a schizophrenic or someone who's hallucinating and that kind of thing.
But clearly, this is someone who's, for lack of a better term, crazy, right?
What we used to just call crazy, how we say mental illness.
So that category exists.
I'm not saying your wife is schizophrenic, but you have that sort of category.
And I think that's a pretty small category in comparison to the 300 mental illnesses that we have right now.
And so you say some of these cases are just miscategorized.
I don't necessarily disagree with you.
It sounds like you don't really disagree with me because I am skeptical of the diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder.
And if you're saying that you've seen a disorder characterized this way, That clearly is a disorder, but you think it should be categorized, should be put in a different category, then I don't think there's much of a disagreement there.
The thing with anxiety is, going back to anxiety, and not OCD, it is, as I argued yesterday, a basic fact of the human condition.
You know?
Schizophrenia, hallucinations, Hearing voices in your head, those sorts of things, that's not a basic fact of the human condition.
That is very clearly, inarguably, abnormal.
That's outside of what is, you know, normal.
But anxiety is part of the human condition.
And I say that all anxiety is pervasive in the sense that, like, I don't think there's anyone walking around on Earth who's just entirely free of anxiety.
I don't think that exists.
And so if you have something that's fundamental to human nature, and that is pervasive in the sense that everyone experiences it, to some degree, kind of all the time, it's always there, at least bubbling under the surface.
You have your anxieties, whatever they are, that you carry around with you.
You might not obsess over them, but you have them.
And to take that and to try to medicalize it, Kind of by degree, and say, well, okay, here's where anxieties normally are, but then if you get above this arbitrary line, now it's a medical condition.
I'm very skeptical of that.
And the problem is that because the line is so arbitrary, when you do that, you're going to end up with a whole bunch of people who get diagnosed with mental illnesses who should not be.
Which is what we're seeing right now.
Let's see.
Brandon says, I honestly don't know many doctors who guess and keep their license for too long.
Yeah, we heard yesterday that the doctors look at babies and just, they don't even assign sex anymore.
Now the new language is they just guess about whether the baby's a boy or a girl.
And I thought about that after the show yesterday, when we had this first grade teacher telling students that that's the way it works when babies are born.
That they just, the doctors just guess, that's all.
But then the teacher admits that most of the time the guess is right.
It's only a minority of occasions when the guess is wrong.
Well, I'd like to hear that person explain why exactly the guess is usually right.
Is it because the quote-unquote guess is being based on some kind of physical reality, some significant physical reality?
Could that be the case?
We'll see.
Let's see.
And Alicia says, I can't wait for the episode where Matt reacts to the Libertarians reacting to him reacting to them reacting to him.
Pure gold.
This is just an inception now of reactions and it will continue.
You can be sure of that.
Speaking of which, let's get to the Daily Cancellation.
Yesterday for this segment of the show, we spent approximately four and a half hours responding to a couple of obscure libertarian YouTubers.
May have seemed like overkill, but then again, if you listen frequently, you know that I could easily do an entire show on one TikTok video that annoyed me, so it's all par for the course.
Today for our daily cancellation, we're going to...
We're going somewhere slightly less obscure but still libertarian.
I hadn't planned to dump on the libertarians so much this week but that's the way it's working out and I think I find libertarians so especially annoying because we have a few significant things in common and yet ultimately they're still so wrong when it comes down to it and that's where the frustration comes from for me.
The Libertarians are singing my tune when they talk about abolishing the income tax or massively decreasing the size of the federal government.
They tend to be skeptical of the government education system, which is good, and protective of gun rights.
They are generally pretty consistent constitutionalists.
All of these things are good.
They may take it a bit too far sometimes.
Like, not all taxation is theft, for example.
Just most of it is.
But still, we line up pretty closely on those issues.
Things fall apart when we move from economic and strictly constitutional issues over to cultural and moral concerns.
Here, libertarianism begins to quickly break apart, and the libertarian is left out in the cold and the dark, confused, not sure which way to go.
His ideology is not robust enough to account for the full scope of the human experience.
He was mostly right about those economic and constitutional issues, but he was right for, if not the wrong reasons, then at least incomplete reasons.
He wants to pay fewer taxes and keep his guns and so on because of liberty, and by liberty he simply means his own personal ability to do whatever he wants because he wants to do it.
There are fuller and sturdier reasons to be in favor of gun rights and against overtaxation, but those generally are not his reasons.
And so, when he encounters the deeper issues, the moral issues, he has only his kind of libertine, do-what-you-want mentality to fall back on.
This is when he starts shouting slogans like, let people enjoy things and the government shouldn't legislate morality.
Except that literally all legislation legislates morality.
All laws, by definition, are rooted in a moral code.
They may be wrongly rooted or rooted in the wrong moral code, but completely amoral laws would be laws passed without concern at all for whether they're actually right or wrong.
Legislation that doesn't attempt to legislate morality would be, by definition, arbitrary.
The libertarian doesn't seem to fully understand this fact.
And as for letting people enjoy things, the fact is that enjoyment is not, in and of itself, enough to justify any act.
If we're determining whether an act should be legal, or even simply whether it's good, aside from the legal question, we need to ask more than just, do people enjoy it?
And when it comes to that enjoyment, we also need to reflect on the nature of the act and consider the sort of pleasure that's being derived from it.
Take almost any self-destructive and harmful act and you'll find people who enjoy it.
That is, they take pleasure, however twisted, from it.
Should we simply leave people to their self-destructive pleasures even if the pursuit of that pleasure is actually making them miserable and causing despair in the long run?
These are all questions that libertarianism cannot answer and refuses to even consider.
And that long preamble brings us to an article in the Libertarian Reason magazine written by writer Elizabeth Nolan Brown titled, The New Campaign for a Sex-Free Internet.
It's a lengthy article that can't be fully analyzed in this segment, but the basic gist is that Brown is upset about the fact that due to rule changes over at sites like Pornhub, fewer amateur wannabe porn stars are able to whore themselves and their bodies out for a quick buck.
Brown is deeply concerned that there is now a tragic scarcity of whoring on the internet.
So, reading now, it says, For more than a decade, both amateurs and professionals shared their sometimes sweet, sometimes weird, and often graphic sexual activity on Pornhub.
Launched in 2007, not long after YouTube, and with a similar free-for-all spirit, the site represented a new wave of adult entertainment in which anyone with an internet connection could partake and anyone with a digital camera could become a star.
Now, quick sidebar here.
We have already started on a precarious note with the writer's claim that the graphic sexual content on Pornhub is sometimes sweet.
I would have thought that sweet would be something like, I don't know, bringing flowers home for your wife just because.
I wouldn't think of it as like humping somebody on camera and posting it to the internet for profit.
Maybe I just have an old-fashioned sense of romance.
Probably so.
Continuing.
Dubbed tube sites, Pornhub and its various peers began to dominate web traffic generally and porn consumption specifically.
These sites trod on porn's established business model, but for savvy sex workers, the tube site network could provide a way to break into the business or reach audiences directly without the porn industry's usual middlemen.
To monetize one's presence in the early days took some creativity, but tube sites would eventually offer content partnerships that allowed people to get paid directly for their videos.
Their competitors, such as cam sites and clip stores, made the process of charging money and getting paid even smoother.
Yes, just kind of reflecting nostalgically on the good old days.
Brown here speaks wistfully and longingly about the time when many thousands or even millions of people who would have otherwise been shut out of the porn industry were able to break into it with the help of the internet, monetizing their sexual activity and auctioning their bodies off to the highest bidder or the lowest bidder or just any bidder at all.
In previous generations, you know, some of those people, unable to become porn stars, You may have ended up getting an education instead, or training somewhere, taking up a trade, becoming entrepreneurs, entering some other more productive profession.
But Pornhub saved them from that dark path.
For the first time, people with a truly diverse array of body types, looks, races, ethnicity, sexualities, gender identities, and kinks had direct access to the tools of porn production and distribution.
In the past, porn had catered to a much more narrow range of tastes with predictable results.
Now audiences could access all sorts of content That defied conventional notions of who and what was deserving of lust.
On sites like Pornhub and the micro-blogging platform Tumblr, outside the mainstream content thrived.
Now, we'll return to that passage in just a moment.
But first, let's continue on a little farther as we get to the tragic moment where everything fell apart.
And this is the moment that Brown so deeply laments.
It says, quote, and then one day it was gone.
In December 2020, without warning, Pornhub removed all videos posted by unverified users, a massive cache of content encompassing anything not posted by formal content partners or members of the platform's official model program.
More than 10 million videos were suspended and unverified users were banned from uploading or downloading new videos.
It was more than a disruption to the site.
I almost feel like we need sad piano music in the background here.
The unannounced disappearing of so many videos was a huge cultural loss, says Ashley, a transgender sex worker and civil rights activist with a robust presence on social media and in offline organizing.
The Pornhub purge came about two years after Tumblr's ban on any content depicting sex acts and preceded a similar announcement in summer 2021 from OnlyFans.
Then, in September 2021, the first user-uploaded porn site, Xtube, founded in 2006 and now owned by the same parent company, shut down entirely.
Tragedy.
Now, there are still billions of smut videos online, but it's, I mean, literally billions of them, but it's a huge cultural loss that we're missing a few of them now, she says.
She mourns over the fact that prior to all of these amateur cyber prostitutes being kicked out of the club, porn was on its way to being truly equitable with a diverse array of body types, looks, races, ethnicities, sexualities, etc., etc., all represented by porn.
Now, what's of course lost in this is any sense of what is actually good.
The writer, being a dedicated libertarian, doesn't concern herself with such questions.
Instead, she simply declares that if people are doing a certain thing, and if they seem to be deriving any pleasure from it, then it's best if everyone is able to do it equally and equitably.
The fact that whoring yourself on the internet brings despair and hopelessness, and leads so often to substance abuse and suicide, is irrelevant to her.
If a group of people are marching off of a cliff, and they seem to have smiles on their faces while they're doing it, she just wants to make sure that the group is demographically representative of the overall population.
Again, the concept of the good, what is good, is lost.
And that is always lost by libertarians and generally by the culture.
And of course, one of their rejoinders here, one of their responses is, well, who defines good?
What is good?
How can you define that?
Yeah, we do have to talk about what the good means.
But are you saying that a word like liberty or freedom or human rights, is that any clearer to you than good?
Run into the same problem.
How do you define that?
It's not like there's some sort of unanimous agreement on what any of those words mean.
In fact, the fact that we cannot agree on what those words means is like tearing our culture apart right now.
But, and so instead they just, rather than talking about what good means and concerning themselves with it, they just discard it entirely.
Let's not even worry about what's actually good.
And that brings us to the most revealing phrase of all that we get in that article, which is deserving of lust.
Deserving of lust.
Now, I can see why people would want to be deserving of love.
Love is fulfilling, it's edifying.
There is joy in love.
In fact, there isn't joy anywhere but in love.
There's no joy outside of love.
But lust, by itself, Is the reduction of a person to the level of an object.
That's what lust is.
Especially the lust that you find with pornography on the internet.
The person who is doing the lusting, they don't recognize the image on the screen.
They don't see that person as a person.
It's just an object that is there to gratify them.
That is lust down to its basest level.
It's objectification.
Treating a person like an object.
If you're an object of lust, apart from love, then you're being coveted the way that a person might covet a consumer good, like a car or a new pair of shoes.
Should this actually be anyone's goal?
The fact that certain people are being deprived of the opportunity to be objectified by strangers on the internet, to be treated like an object, absent of their personhood, Is this something that we should be striving for?
Is it a tragedy that people are being deprived of it?
Do we have a right to it?
Well, this is the kind of nonsense that libertarianism so often descends into.
And that is ultimately why the writer of this article, whose name I've already forgotten, last name Brown, is today cancelled.
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 Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, production manager Pavel Vodovsky, The U.S.
