Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the media has found a new virus to fear-monger over: Monkeypox. But the “public health” messaging around this disease has been quite a bit different from what we heard for COVID. I’ll explain why. Also, Nancy Pelosi is finally told that she has to stop receiving communion at church on account of her advocacy for baby butchery. A newly engaged AOC gives her thoughts on the life question, and her thoughts are as stupid as you’ve come to expect. A gender-affirming psychotherapist says that sex education in kindergarten is too late. It should really start at birth. And in our Daily Cancellation, a trans activist reacts to my What Is A Woman trailer, and is not too pleased.
I am a beloved LGBTQ+ and children’s author. Reserve your copy of Johnny The Walrus here: https://utm.io/uevUc.
NBA star Jonathan Isaac has withstood immense pressure to conform to popular social issues. He wrote a book about his experience and it is available now: https://utm.io/ud96e
Join Matt and the Daily Wire crew for Backstage Live At The Ryman on June 29th. Get your tickets now: https://utm.io/uezFr
—
Today’s Sponsors:
Helix Mattresses are made to match your unique sleep preferences. Go to HelixSleep.com/WALSH and get up to $200 OFF + 2 FREE pillows with all mattress orders!
Try X-Chair RISK FREE for 30 days. Save $100 OFF your X-Chair at xchairWALSH.com.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, the media has found a new virus to fearmonger over, monkeypox, but the public health messaging around this disease has been quite a bit different from what we heard for COVID.
I'll explain why.
Also, Nancy Pelosi is finally told that she has to stop receiving communion at church on account of her advocacy for baby butchery.
A newly engaged AOC gives her thoughts on the life question, and her thoughts are as stupid as you've come to expect.
A gender-affirming psychotherapist Says that sex education in kindergarten is too late.
It should really start at birth, she says.
And in our daily cancellation, a trans activist reacts to my What Is A Woman trailer and is not too pleased, I can tell you.
We'll talk about all that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
Why would you buy a mattress made for somebody else?
With Helix, you're getting a mattress that you know will be perfect for the way you sleep.
Everybody's unique, and Helix knows that, so they have several different mattress models to choose from.
They have soft, medium, and firm mattresses.
Mattress is great for cooling you down if you sleep hot.
Mattress is great for spinal alignment to prevent morning aches and pains.
And even a Helix Plus mattress for plus-sized sleepers.
Or as I call them, just a fat guy in a mattress.
So if you're looking for a mattress, you take the quiz, you order the mattress that you're matched to, and the mattress comes right to your door, shipped for free.
You don't ever need to go to a mattress store ever again.
Just go to helixsleep.com slash Walsh, take their two-minute sleep quiz, and they'll match you to a customized mattress that'll give you the best sleep of your life.
They have a 10-year warranty, and you get to try it out for 100 nights risk-free.
They'll even pick it up for you if you don't love it, but I guarantee you will.
Helix even has financing options and flexible payments plans, so a great night's sleep is never far away.
For a limited time, Helix is offering up to $350 off all mattress orders and two free pillows for our listeners.
This is their best offer yet, so hurry over to helixsleep.com slash Walsh.
There are something like 200 viruses circulating in the human population at any given time, many of them potentially fatal.
And that doesn't include all of the other causes of contagious disease, like bacterial infections and the other ailments that are not contagious but still deadly, like cancers.
So if for some reason you're looking for a reason to be paralyzed with fear and anxiety on a Monday, you could pick any of these illnesses at random and just obsess over them if you want to.
Or you could wait for the media to select it for you.
And if that's your strategy, then you have no doubt already updated your scary disease rankings, and you've taken COVID down a notch, and you've put monkeypox at the top.
Monkeypox, by the way, got its name because it was first detected in a few monkeys back in the 70s, but monkeys are not a major carrier of the virus, according to Scientific American, and they didn't first jump into the human population from monkeys.
Actually, rodents are probably the natural reservoir for the disease, which means, by all rights, it should be called rat pox, which makes it sound even scarier, so it's kind of a missed opportunity.
I think rodent pox or rat pox.
But in any case, rat pox, a.k.a.
monkey pox, has become the disease du jour as the media attempts to stoke panic over the fact that a few dozen people in the world have been diagnosed with it in the last few days, and potentially as many as three.
Three, dear God, in the United States have been diagnosed with the disease or potentially have the disease.
If you're wondering whether you have monkeypox right now, you should know that it first presents with flu-like symptoms, which is also how you know how COVID presents.
So if you have a cough right now or a runny nose, just relax.
It's probably not monkeypox.
It's probably just COVID.
Or, you know, any of the diseases of—any of the dozens of other illnesses that cause these exact symptoms.
Could be any of those.
After about a week, the monkeypox victim will break out into rashes and lesions.
And that's when—I think when that happens, like if you've had the cough for a week and then you have the lesions, then you can have your official, oh crap, this might be monkeypox moment.
The good news is that the disease is not easily transmitted, which is why there was a, quote, outbreak in this country in 2003, and only 70 people were infected.
Nobody died.
Now, the media is telling us that the disease has a 10% mortality rate, which means that there should have been several deaths during the last outbreak, but what they forget to mention is that the mortality rate is based mostly on cases in Africa, where people die of all kinds of diseases that kill almost nobody in the developed world.
You may be wondering why you never heard of the great monkeypox outbreak of 2003.
Probably because that was before social media, and also before the news media decided that every scary-sounding viral infection contracted by anyone anywhere in the world needs to be headline news.
But does the fact that this virus is not very contagious, and is not widely spread, And it's not nearly as lethal as they're making it sound.
Does that all mean that we should just ignore monkeypox and go about our lives?
I mean, yes, it does mean that.
That's actually basically what it means.
Over the weekend, Joe Biden told Americans that they should be concerned about monkeypox.
And that's this administration's only sales pitch.
Their only message about anything.
They're just constantly telling us new things to be terrified of.
Monkeypox, COVID, white supremacists, climate change, the great MAGA king Donald Trump, etc.
and so forth.
Biden promised us a winter of death, you know, last winter because of COVID, which went into our spring of sorrow, and now we'll have our summer of suffering, to be followed by the fall of fear.
This is all they want.
They just want you to be twisting around endlessly in a spiral of fear.
And you should not give them what they want.
And yet, there is still something worth noticing, maybe.
Not about monkeypox itself, but about the monkeypox discourse, we'll call it.
One of the reasons why, in fact, I'm not personally worried about this virus is that, for this round of it anyway, it appears to be primarily spread through sexual contact.
As the Sydney Morning Herald reports in their headline, sexual form of monkeypox blamed for global spread of virus.
I'm not personally worried about any STDs at all because I'm in a faithful and loving marriage with my wife.
So, score another point for faithful and loving marriages.
It's not like the number one reason to get married, but it's a nice perk.
All these diseases people are worried about, you don't have to worry about it.
You're fine.
This one in particular falls outside of my own lived experience because it seems to be primarily infecting gay men.
The World Health Organization said as much in a statement on the virus.
They said, based on currently available information, cases have mainly but not exclusively been identified amongst men who have sex with men.
MSM is what they're calling them, which is also The acronym for mainstream media, so do with that what you will.
With men having sex with men seeking care and primary care in sexual health clinics.
That's from the World Health Organization.
Health officials have determined that the likely super spreader event in this case was a gay pride festival in Spain earlier in the month.
And the gay news site Pink News describes the gay pride event as actually a fetish festival.
That's how they describe it.
The article also notes that more cases are linked to a gay bathhouse in Spain, or a sauna, as it's euphemistically dubbed.
So there's still plenty that's not known about this current outbreak, if we can call it an outbreak, but the link to gay sexual activity has been established well enough that organizations like WHO are reporting it.
In fact, as GB News reports this morning, gay men in the UK may be offered a monkeypox vaccine first in a, quote, targeted rollout.
Because of this connection that people are noticing.
Apparently nine Brits have been diagnosed so far, and all but three of them are gay.
And this is certainly not the first time that viruses and other diseases have circulated through fetish festivals and bathhouses.
A bathhouse is, after all, essentially a petri dish for disease.
I mean, there really isn't any healthy or safe way to have sex with random strangers, as the STD epidemic in the U.S.
clearly attests.
Now, the good news is that there is a simple solution here, which would tamp down the monkeypox situation and also have the immense added benefit of preventing the spread of all kinds of other diseases, many of them much worse than monkeypox, and that is to refrain from having sex with strangers at a bathhouse or anywhere else.
And to forego trips to fetish festivals or any other event where large groups of naked or semi-naked people are swapping bodily fluids.
Again, it would be best to avoid this kind of behavior in general, even if monkeypox didn't exist.
So, you would think that our public health authorities Especially because they're so apparently worried about monkeypox.
You'd think they would spread this message far and wide.
They would say, you know, don't, don't do these kinds of things.
Don't participate in these kinds of activities.
But they're not.
Instead, rather than recommending that people make healthy choices to avoid spreading disease, our so-called public health authorities are more concerned with the spread of stigma, in this case.
It's stigma.
Stigma is the real disease.
So the joint United Nations program on HIV and AIDS has been releasing statements decrying the stigmatizing language related to monkeypox.
And they're worried about reporting that might, quote, reinforce homophobic and racist stereotypes and exacerbate stigma.
Andrew Lee, professor of public health at the University of Sheffield, just published an article cautioning against germ panic, okay?
Cautioning against germ panic, as he calls it, and warning that the real risk faced by gay men is unfair stigma.
Then there's a professor who researches epidemiology at Yale, Greg Gonzalez, and he was more explicit in his messaging.
He posted a lengthy thread to Twitter saying, I'm going to read it here.
He says, I'm not an expert on the pathogen, but right now many of the cases are in gay men.
And I know something about infectious diseases among men who have sex with men.
First, it is not a gay disease.
If you are saying it is, you are perpetuating stigma and ignorance, damaging the public health response to this and endangering lives.
The disease spreads by close physical contact, and this is the setting in which most cases have been found in this global set of outbreaks, most likely disseminated via large social events.
The answer isn't shut down all these parties, tell gay men to stop having sex at them, or dancing in close proximity to each other.
It won't work.
It hasn't worked for HIV or other kinds of infectious disease outbreaks among gay men.
Ah, okay.
Now, it should come as no surprise that Greg here was an outspoken advocate of COVID lockdowns and highly critical of anybody who protested them.
So, according to Greg and many of his fellow public health experts, it would be onerous and unfair and unrealistic and oppressive and stigmatizing to tell gay men to refrain from having orgies at fetish festivals and bathhouses in order to avoid monkeypox and other diseases.
Yet, it was perfectly reasonable to tell the entire world to shut down, and to lock our kids in our homes for a year, and to drastically alter every aspect of our lives for years in order to avoid COVID.
Kids were never at any serious risk from COVID, nor were they ever very likely to transmit it, and we always knew that.
And yet, we were told that it was good and necessary to put their lives on hold for this disease.
Like, for our sake.
But for gay men, we can't even tell them to put their fetish festivals on hold?
It appears the only way to shut down the fetish festival is to shut down everything else in the world along with it.
It's the only way you're doing it.
And even then, as we've seen, that still isn't necessarily enough to cancel events that protected classes of people want to attend, which is why, you know, as we know, the BLM riots were happening with the approval of all the public health experts at the height of COVID.
So, really think about this for a second.
Close the schools, don't close the bathhouses.
That's the motto here.
And I can think of no better summary of our approach to public health and everything else in society.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
(upbeat music)
Many of us spend more time every day in our office chairs than in our cars or our beds, unfortunately,
but you gotta make the best of it.
That's why it's so important to invest in the right chair to spend those hours with the right level of support and comfort to get the most productivity out of your day.
xChair is what you need.
It's made my time at my desk not only more productive, but it's honestly my favorite place to sit for any reason.
Sounds kind of sad, but okay.
Not only does Xchair's patented Dynamic Variable Lumbar offer the ultimate customized support, but my Xchair can even give me a massage.
It can heat up or cool down.
And now, thanks to Xchair's new armrests, I can even adjust my armrest to the perfect position.
All these unique Xchair features help the hours at my desk fly by in complete comfort.
That's why I love my Xchair.
Go to xchairwalsh.com Right now, that's the letter X chair walsh.com or call 1-844-4XCHAIR for $100 off your order.
X Chair has a 30-day guarantee of complete comfort and you can finance your purchase for as little as 30 bucks a month.
Again, xchairwalsh.com.
All right, so we'll start with this from the Daily Wire.
Here's some good news.
A little bit of good news here.
Daily Wire says the Archbishop of San Francisco has informed Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that she is not to receive Holy Communion at Mass over her repeated support of abortion.
He says in a statement, in light of my responsibilities as the Archbishop of San Francisco, I am hereby notifying you that you are not to present yourself for Holy Communion, and should you do so, you are not to be admitted to Holy Communion until such time as you publicly repudiate your advocacy for the legitimacy of abortion and confess and receive absolution of this grave sin in the sacrament of penance.
Pelosi still, as far as I know, has not, she didn't respond to the Daily Wire with a comment, obviously, but I don't think she's spoken about this publicly at all.
Because it puts her in a very difficult position, thankfully.
And it's not that the Archbishop put her in a difficult position, she's put herself in this position by at once claiming she's a devout Catholic, but then also supporting abortion.
So, she's been in this position for decades, And it just took someone in the church in a position of authority to call her out on it, and finally somebody has.
Continuing with the statement says, this fundamental moral truth has consequences, the fundamental truth about the dignity of life in the womb.
This fundamental moral truth has consequences for Catholics and how they say they live their lives, especially those entrusted with promoting and protecting the public good of society.
Pope St.
John Paul II was also quite consistent in upholding this constant teaching of the Church and frequently reminded us that those who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a grave and clear obligation to oppose any law that attacks human life.
And the full statement goes on longer than that.
It's worth going and looking up and reading it because it's eloquently stated and it also states what the Catholic position is here.
And it's an example of courage, you know, actual courage on the part of church leadership in the United States.
And there has not been a whole lot of that in recent decades.
So, when you get an example of it, it's worth celebrating.
Even if there's also, it's kind of a bittersweet celebration, because one of the reasons you're celebrating is that this is so rare.
Like, Nancy Pelosi should have been publicly told years ago that she can't receive communion, and this should be every bishop in every diocese should be saying this.
To Anyone in a public position who supports abortion.
But of course, the media, they're not happy about this.
There's an article in the San Francisco Examiner, which this is the argument they're putting forward.
They're saying, in open defiance of Pope Francis, San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordeliani on Friday banned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from taking Holy Communion here in her home diocese.
The reason?
Her strong support of women's abortion rights.
His decree was guaranteed to provoke deep chagrin among San Francisco Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
And then the article goes on to claim that this is in contradiction of Pope Francis.
Another thing we're hearing from the media a lot, actually, is that the Archbishop of San Francisco is contradicting, is rebelling against Pope Francis, because Pope Francis has said, allegedly, that pro-abortion politicians should be able to receive the Eucharist, and that's not true at all.
That's actually not what Pope Francis has said.
And if he had said that, I'd be willing to admit it and call him out for it and denounce it, because Pope Francis has unfortunately said a lot of things that he shouldn't say and are not consistent with Catholic teaching, but that's not one of them.
And also, it's funny to me when you see these leftists, many of whom are not Catholic, pretending to care about the hierarchy in the church, pretending to be offended.
That an Archbishop, allegedly, is contradicting Pope Francis?
This is not the hierarchy!
You should respect the Pope!
Since when do you care about that?
And by the way, if you do care about the hierarchical structure of the Church, and who has power to make what declarations, well, the Archbishop has the authority to do this.
And so, if you care so deeply about the hierarchy of the Church, then what you should be saying to Nancy Pelosi is, you should respect this, because your Archbishop has said it.
I also think it's funny in this article when they say it's provoked deep chagrin among Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
First of all, let me say, if you're not a Catholic, your opinion about this is completely irrelevant.
And the reason why it's irrelevant is because this is about the Catholic faith, the doctrines of the Catholic Church.
And a lot of this rests on, of course, the moral doctrines of the Catholic Church, which are very clear on abortion, and have always been.
Like, there's no debate about this.
There never has been any debate about it.
It is a moral teaching of the Church that human life begins in the womb, that human life in the womb has intrinsic value and dignity, and to kill that life is a deep, grave, moral crime.
Okay, so this is why it doesn't even make any sense to be a pro-abortion Catholic, because the only way to be a pro-abortion Catholic is to reject the moral authority of the Church.
There's no other way to do it.
You can't cling on to your support for abortion while also clinging to the moral authority of the Church.
It's one or the other.
These are mutually exclusive things here.
And if you believe that the Church doesn't have moral authority, well, fine, you're allowed to believe that, given that we don't actually live in a Catholic theocracy, even if it were otherwise, if I had a say in it, but I don't, because my theocratic regime has not yet taken over.
So you can have that opinion that the Church doesn't have any moral authority, but then you can't be Catholic.
Say, I'm a Catholic, but I don't believe that the Church has any moral authority, so it was not instituted by Christ then, we must assume, or it was, but you don't think that Jesus Christ has moral authority?
Like, how does this work?
It's incoherent.
So you give up the idea that the Church has moral authority.
You're giving up on the Church, which again, you're allowed to do in America, but then don't go around claiming you're Catholic.
It doesn't make any sense.
Aside from the scandal and everything, the moral scandal involved and everything else, it's also just, it's illogically incoherent.
And this is also why the opinion of non-Catholics about who receives communion is completely irrelevant because the issue comes down to the moral teachings of the Church and also the doctrine of the real presence in the Eucharist.
That Christ is really present in the Eucharist and that this is not a sort of symbolic gesture as they believe in many Protestant churches.
So, if you don't believe in either of those things, the real presence in the Eucharist or the moral authority of the Church, then obviously you're not going to care who takes communion.
As far as you're concerned, anybody should be able to take it.
Because you don't share those beliefs.
That's why this is a Catholic issue.
And if you are Catholic, again, It does not make any sense to support abortion as a Catholic or to say that pro-abortion politicians should be able to receive the Eucharist.
And the reason why you do this is because you want the Catholic Church and the Catholic faith to work like you want everything else in life to work.
You want it all to be sort of your plaything and everything to be relative to your own desires and feelings.
You don't really want to be a Catholic.
You've created your own religion, your religion of the self for yourself as a leftist, but you want to put a little bit of Catholic dressing over top of it.
It's like you want to take the priestly robes and just kind of drape them over top your self-worshipping religion.
Moving on, AOC also had some thoughts on abortion that she shared, and not much more coherent than Nancy Pelosi's thoughts on the subject, but let's listen to that.
For people who say, oh, but you're, you know, you're, you're harming a life.
I believe this is life.
Well, some religions don't.
So how about that?
Our Jewish brothers and sisters, they are able to have an abortion according to their faith.
You know, there are so many faiths that do not have the same definition of life as fundamentalist Christians.
And so, what about their rights?
What about their right to exercise their faith?
It's ridiculous.
And it is theocratic.
It's authoritarian.
It is wrong.
Once again, what's the rule here that we've talked about is when religion is introduced to the topic of abortion, it's almost always a leftist introducing it.
Because that's what they want this to be.
They actually want this to be a religious conversation.
And so her rebuttal to the claim that human life exists in the womb, her rebuttal is, well, other religions feel differently.
Which, first of all, who cares?
Got nothing to do with anything.
You're the one trying to make this religious because you don't want to have this argument on any other grounds.
You want to make it totally, sort of, act like it's completely subjective and it's all based on, you know, you want to make it all doctrinal, right?
You want to make it nothing but doctrinal, like we all have our competing doctrines and nobody really knows what's going on.
There's no, there's no self-evident demonstrable reality at the center of it.
That's how you want to, that's what you want to pretend, but there is.
Because at the center of this discussion, there is an actual being in the womb that, like, exists.
And so we can look there and say, well, what is that?
And the what is that, and what you find is that when you're actually having the what is that conversation, it's not religious at all.
There's no reason why it's religious.
It's actually a scientific, it's first and foremost, number one, actually a scientific question.
When you have a living being and we want to know, well, what is that?
That's first and foremost a scientific question.
And we know that it's a human because it has human parents.
And we know that it's living because it's growing and developing.
Non-living things don't do that.
You know, a non-living inanimate object, you could have this table here, right?
And you could just let the table sit, let it sit for hundreds of years, and it'll decay, it'll fall apart.
It's not going to ever become anything that we would all recognize as a living thing.
You could even take it and chop it up and build it into something else, and it's still not going to be a living thing.
So she wants to make it a religious conversation, first of all, and then she also, of course, misrepresents other religions.
She just declares that, well, Jewish people all support abortion.
I don't know, maybe check, maybe ask, that'll come as news to Ben Shapiro, because I know he doesn't support abortion as an Orthodox Jew.
That'll be interesting news for him to learn.
From AOC, who's not Jewish.
Do you know that this is what your religion teaches?
This is what non-religious people do.
They do it to Jews, they do it to Catholics all the time.
We just heard it in that San Francisco Examiner article.
They're constantly telling us what we believe.
Even though they have no frame of reference, they have no clue at all.
Alright, but we should say actually congratulations anyway to AOC because she did just get engaged.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention she got engaged to her longtime boyfriend and she was bragging about the fact that she has a zero emissions diamond that was given to her as her engagement ring because that's important to her.
And you know she probably did ask that.
Like whatever the scenario was when Riley, her boyfriend, I think that's his name, proposed Pulls the ring out.
Before she even said yes, I could totally imagine the first thing she asked, is that zero emissions?
And then he said, uh, yeah.
Well, well, then I, then yes, let's get married.
And he, and, and, but his answer saying it's zero emissions, of course, that doesn't mean anything.
Cause how can you have a zero emissions diamond?
What does that even mean?
I assume what you're trying to say is that it was manufactured in a laboratory.
They didn't dig it out of a mine.
And so you're saying, well, there's zero emissions.
So you're saying that it was manufactured in a way that produces no emissions?
That doesn't make any sense at all.
I can tell you right now, that's impossible.
You cannot manufacture anything in a way that doesn't produce emissions.
Impossible.
Anyway, all right, last week we played some clips first shared and reported by Chris Ruffo of a training session from the far-left LGBT extremist group, the Mazzoni Center.
And if you remember, this was a conference attended by Philadelphia teachers and also by kids, and minors were invited to attend this conference as well.
And there was a lot of depraved stuff.
We don't have to go through all of it, but you can go back and watch that show if you want some examples.
They had all kinds of, you know, they had people presenting information about, you know, sex toys and everything else, like to teachers for some reason.
And now we have more footage.
This is from Rachel Simon.
She's the woman in the video.
She's a trans-affirming quote-unquote psychoanalyst.
And I want you to listen to what she says.
Listen.
I am Rachel Simon.
I use she, her pronouns.
I am a psychotherapist, educator, consultant, and author.
I run my private practice here in Philadelphia, and I am the author of The Every Body Book, which is an LGBTQ-inclusive sex ed resource for 7- to 12-year-olds.
I love that you said that this talk specifically was geared towards teens, but you're so right that sexuality education starts The minute you're born.
I mean, we're born with bodies.
These bodies are cool.
We want to touch our bodies.
We're learning about privacy and, you know, being sexual in public from a very early age.
Drop the cons of talking about sexuality with parents and getting our sexual info from parents in the chat.
Because we're getting some of that embarrassment, awkwardness.
Those can be cons.
They don't want to talk about it.
Uh, homophobic and transphobic ideas from parents can absolutely be a problem.
Inescapable judgment.
Yeah, bigoted, misinformed parents who have no idea how to talk about gay sex.
They're biased.
If they are religious, it can be very difficult to get into the conversation with them.
Yeah, sometimes you can get stonewalled out of information.
So, psychotherapist there.
Sorry, I misgendered her as a psychoanalyst.
She's a psychotherapist.
And what's her message?
Well, don't bother talking to your parents, you know.
They're religious and bigoted.
Don't bother talking to them.
But sexuality education begins at birth, she says.
Now, I have to keep banging this drum here because it's important to point out where this stuff comes from, and that is, and all of the sex ed stuff comes from Alfred Kinsey originally, and that is Alfred Kinsey to a T. That children are sexual from birth.
Literally from infancy.
And as you're familiar with if you listen to this show, and we've talked about before some of the horrific details around that pervert's life, he actually Tried to prove through sexual experiments on young babies that babies are, quote, sexual from birth.
So, sexual from birth.
We're going to do sexuality education for infants now, I guess.
See, we're behind the eight ball because we're sitting here saying, what do you mean?
We're going to do sex education in kindergarten?
This is ridiculous.
That's way too young.
But what the left is saying is that, no, that's too late.
What are you talking about too young?
If anything, like by kindergarten, they're five years old.
That's five prime years of sexualizing that they've missed out on, they're telling us.
And then she also says, she gets more and more disturbingly specific.
She says that from a very young age, we're learning about being sexual in public.
That's what, what are you talking about?
But of course nobody, these people, they're always running unopposed, as it were, and you're only ever going to hear them talking into a camera in a conference like this or on stage in front of a like-minded audience of degenerates and perverts.
They're never going to put themselves in a position where there's going to be any follow-up questions.
So they could just say stuff like this.
Because if there was a follow-up question, then the follow-up would be, what?
No, no.
Back up a second.
Little kids being sexual in public?
What the hell are you saying?
Explain that to me.
Is that what you think?
When you see kids out in public, that's what you think they're doing?
Go ahead.
Explain.
And we know whatever the explanation is, there's no way to make that any less depraved.
And this again, this was a training session, at least in part, for teachers.
This is what teachers are being told.
All right, the Daily Mail has this.
The man who attacked Dave Chappelle on stage at a Los Angeles comedy show earlier this month said he was triggered by the comedian's jokes about gay people and also about homelessness.
And he told Chappelle he should be more sensitive.
Isaiah Lee was charged with four misdemeanors after the May 3rd attack.
Misdemeanors, okay.
Battery, possession of a weapon with intent to assault, unauthorized access to stage area during a live performance, and commission of an act that delays the event or interferes with the performer.
So, battery and possession of a weapon with intent to assault.
So those are misdemeanors for this guy.
He was contacted by the New York Post and he said that he's, this is what he said, he said, quote, I identify as bisexual and I wanted him to know what he said was triggering.
I wanted him to know that next time he should consider first running his material by people it could affect.
Okay.
So a couple of things here.
Now we understand why this guy got off with a misdemeanor.
When he charged on stage during an event, assaulted somebody with a knife, With a knife that, oddly enough, he had disguised as a gun, so we've already tried to figure that out.
I don't know exactly how that works, you know.
He's like, you don't want security to know you have a knife, so instead you just pretend you have a gun.
I don't know.
But he got through security anyway.
And he was charged with misdemeanor, and now we know why.
Because he's a member of a protected class.
So he's a member of the group that even during a virus outbreak, you can't tell them to not go to a fetish festival or a bathhouse.
So that's the first thing.
That's why that happened, because he's a member of the protected class.
And this is also more confirmation that all of these attacks against Dave Chappelle, and in particular, it's not just like Criticizing Dave Chappelle leads to people trying to kill him on stage.
That's not the point.
You could criticize somebody without provoking anyone else to attack them.
But, when you're claiming relentlessly that words are violence, and that just by saying words, Dave Chappelle could be hurting and potentially killing people because that's what they say, just with Dave Chappelle's jokes about trans people, All of which are mild, okay?
But those jokes could lead to death.
It could be killing people.
So when you say that enough about somebody, then yeah.
And also, you have these protected, privileged classes of people who could basically do whatever they want, especially if they're acting out emotionally and they feel quote-unquote triggered.
You put all that together, then you're creating, you know, that's the recipe for something like this.
And of course, the last little ingredient in the recipe is Will Smith charging the stage and assaulting someone during the Oscars, and then a lot of people on the left were making excuses for him.
And saying that at least, well, it's not good, but it's not any worse than making a G.I.
Jane joke about a bald woman.
So you add all those things together and this is what happens.
Now it's interesting that the assailant here...
Says that the reason he did it is he wants Dave Chappelle to be too afraid next time to make jokes like this.
That's also terrorism, by the way.
Trying to use fear to manipulate people.
Using fear to bring about a certain political or ideological end, that's terrorism.
So he should be brought up, not on a misdemeanor, but on terrorism charges.
Like, if you really cared about stopping this from happening in the future, that's what you would do.
But they don't want to stop this from happening in the future.
They agree with him.
That is the message to Dave Chappelle from his assailant and from the media in the left as well.
Oh, you didn't like getting assaulted by a guy with a knife in the middle of a performance?
Well, just don't make jokes about us.
That's all.
Make jokes about everybody else, but just not us, because we're special.
Finally, it's from the Jerusalem Post.
It says, a scientist may have pinpointed the origin of the Wow!
signal, the most famous alien radio broadcast in history, making it an ideal candidate for future research and observations in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence.
The study, which was polished in the I assume that's supposed to say published.
It was published in the peer-reviewed academic periodical, the International Journal of Astrobiology.
It suggests that the famous signal could very well have come from a star located in the Sagittarius constellation that is similar to our own.
The Wow!
signal is easily the most famous and enduring extraterrestrial radio transmission to Earth in history.
To this day, it's the strongest candidate for a genuine radio transmission from an intelligent source.
The signal itself And you know what?
Never mind.
Because you guys don't care about this, do you?
Like, I'm just sitting here reading this.
Nobody cares.
Nobody cares about the space and alien stuff.
It's just me.
Why do I even bother?
I'm gonna go cry.
I'm gonna go lock myself in the bathroom now and cry.
After the show.
Because we got to get to our comment section right now.
[Music]
Marley says, "My brother's biology teacher is refusing to say male or female and instead describes the body parts one
has."
My brother watches your show and emailed and spoke to the teacher about how wrong it was.
Thank you for being such a great role model.
Well, thank you to your brother because this is, it's really sad, to put it lightly, that kids in school have to be put in this position where they have to correct their biology teachers on basic human biology, but that's exactly what needs to happen.
And so, it's good that your brother did that.
And hopefully your parents are encouraging it.
Because I can tell you, even when I went to school, going to public school, this was, you know, public schools were bastions of sanity when I went, compared to now anyway.
But even back then, they were bad by their own standards.
And this is one thing that my parents used to tell me.
It's like, respect your teachers, okay?
Respect your elders.
But, if you're being lied to, And they're saying things that are not true, and they're lying to you, then you should speak up.
And if you get in trouble at school, you will not be in trouble at home for that.
So, that's great from your brother.
Donald says, the Musk accusation isn't a she-said-she-said situation, it's a they-said-she-said-she-said-she-said.
Yeah, you're right, actually.
We're being told by the media that They were told by a woman who was told by another woman who claims that she was sexually harassed by Elon Musk.
So yeah, there's like four or five degrees of separation there.
Aaron says, Matt, I'm new to your show this week and finding your logic and insight refreshing.
I also recognize that the subjects you dive into are extremely dark and troubling to say the least.
Without intending to sound cliche or silly, I will purpose to pray for your strength and peace.
Thanks for your boldness to fight and inspiring others to take a stand as we're intended to do.
Well, I appreciate your prayers.
I don't complain about it.
I don't mention this too much because I don't want it to come off as overly dramatic and being traumatized, you know.
In my own small little way, being totally immersed in this kind of stuff every day does take a little bit of a toll on you, so I appreciate your prayers.
And, you know, especially because I want to break up All of the deep, dark, depressing stuff by talking about space and aliens, but I can't even do that because I get made fun of.
So that just makes the trauma even worse.
Samantha says, absolute fun sponges.
Karen Jean pair makes me laugh out loud every time I hear it.
Well, thank you, Samantha.
So you and I, at least, can have fun with that.
Let's see.
And finally, Tony says, can't help but notice Matt has gone quiet about his interpretive dance promise.
The numbers are almost there.
I have a feeling after June 1st, it will reach 1 million.
I don't know what promise you're talking about.
I don't remember.
I've... Because I had COVID.
So that's... It supposedly affects your memory, right?
That's what... So I'll go with that.
I have long COVID.
So I can't remember anything that I said prior to right now.
So, unfortunately.
If you follow The Daily Wire for any amount of time, you know that we're fixated on the truth.
Whether it's our journalists exposing the cover-up of a sexual assault in Virginia schools, or hosts like myself just trying to get a straight answer to a simple question like, what is a woman?
As I do in my documentary of that name, out on June 1st.
Well, over the last few months, our very own Candace Owens has been digging into the $90 million bag of abject lies that is Black Lives Matter, and she's come up with her hands full, I can tell you that.
Her Daily Wire original, The Greatest Lie Ever Told, George Floyd, and the rise of BLM is on its way, and it's going to be pure kryptonite.
We had planned to release it this week, but as you can imagine, when you start a documentary, you never fully know where the facts will lead.
What Candace has uncovered on this journey is going to blow some people's minds, so we're going to take some time to finalize the film and make sure every last damning detail sees the light of day.
Believe me, it'll be worth the wait.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Today we have another case of daily cancellation inception, where we respond to somebody responding to me.
In this case, it's Jamie Raines, who Wikipedia tells me is an English YouTuber with over 900,000 subscribers, a research psychologist, and LGBT advocate.
Raines has a PhD in psychology and has disturbingly, quote, conducted research into the sexual response of transgender men.
Raines is also a self-professed, quote-unquote, trans man.
There have been many YouTube responses to the trailer for my film, What is a Woman?
Also many responses on other platforms, including on Twitter, where the primary response from the left on Twitter has been to mass report it and try, so far unsuccessfully, to get it pulled from the site.
So I'm getting, like, I'm getting these email notifications about reports, people reporting the trailer, you know, multiple times a day.
But I'm choosing Reigns to respond to because this is a channel with more subscribers than I have, and somebody with, um, Much more formal education than I have, so nobody can accuse me of punching down.
Not that there's anything wrong with punching down, mind you.
I'm a firm believer that one should punch in whichever direction needs to be punched, but we'll focus here for now.
The video is over 10 minutes long, so we won't be able to pick it apart piece by piece, but we'll watch enough to get the point.
Surely, I mean, this PhD psychologist and LGBT activist will be able to swiftly debunk the entire premise of my film and utterly humiliate me in the process.
I'm just a transphobe with a high school diploma, after all.
Shouldn't be much of a challenge.
So we'll see how our friend Jamie Raines does.
It's called, What is a Woman?
From the Daily Wire, which I think I've heard of, made by somebody or involving heavily somebody called Matt Walsh.
What is a woman?
Immediately, is he wearing a sandwich board that says, what is a woman?
Okay.
Can you tell me that?
Well, you're at the Women's March, you must have some idea.
Please, if one person could tell me what a woman is.
You are not here for women!
We ask you to leave!
What is that?
What is that?
Oh, wow.
So, a dude going to a Women's March and going up to women and asking them to define what a woman is.
And probably acting like it's some big gotcha moment.
Yeah, that's interesting.
Oh, let's not forget the sandwich board.
I mean, what definition was he looking for?
One based off of genitals and reproductive organs?
That's a little bit very narrow and not exactly great to boil people down to their parts.
Okay, well first of all, Jamie, how do you know I'm a dude?
I don't, I didn't tell you that.
That was not, that was not said.
So where'd you get that from?
And yeah, it is a gotcha moment.
In fact, if people are marching in a women's march and holding signs and chanting slogans claiming that women are under attack and being oppressed, and yet they have absolutely no idea what a woman is and can't begin to define the term, then yes, that's a gotcha moment, as it reveals the inherent absurdity and incoherence of their worldview.
But it's not a gotcha moment that I engineer, okay?
I'm not backing anybody into a corner.
All I did was walk up to them and ask them what the words they're using mean.
That's a fair question.
In fact, that's the fairest question you can ever ask anyone, is when they're using words to say, well, what do you mean by that?
How could that be an unfair question?
If it becomes a gotcha moment for you that only shows just how totally vapid and ridiculous your ideology is.
As for what kind of definition I'm looking for, well, to start with, I'd like a definition.
Some kind of definition.
Let's just get a definition on the table first, and then we can debate whether it's the right or wrong one.
But you guys won't put any definition at all on the table.
You act like the word has no meaning at all, like it's just a bunch of arbitrary gibberish, and yet you continue to use the word, and you expect us all to know what it means, or to know what you mean when you use it.
So, again, is it a gotcha?
Yes, it certainly is.
But I didn't get you.
You got yourself.
All from the controversial mind of Matt Walsh.
I'm a husband.
I'm a father.
I host a talk show.
I give speeches.
I write books.
I like to make sense of things.
A woman is not anything in particular.
There is not one particular thing.
It could be many things to many people.
Some women have penises.
Some men have vaginas.
I like scented candles.
I've watched Sex and the City.
How do I know if I'm a woman?
Oh dear god, what is he doing?
Why is he making this?
Do you just show a compilation of people saying it can't be boiled down to one thing?
Some women do have penises, like trans women.
Some men do have vaginas, like some trans men.
And your response is, I like scented candles.
Is that what makes a woman?
I don't know.
Does it?
I mean, you tell me.
Because a second ago, you said that a woman can't be defined by her parts.
Now you're saying that having an interest in feminine things also doesn't make you a woman.
So what does, Jamie?
You've declared that neither interests nor body parts define a woman, which would seem to indicate that you have a solid idea in your head as to what does define a woman, and yet you have yet to provide that definition.
What if I decide that my love of scented candles makes me a woman?
After all, I'm not just talking about the manly scents, okay?
Like leather or bonfire or something.
I can go with a lavender candle, okay?
That's how girly the candles can get sometimes.
And if I say that makes me a woman, who are you to say that I'm wrong?
You can only dismiss my scented candle-based definition if you have some other objective definition in mind.
But if you don't, If you have no idea what a woman is, then for all you know, a woman is truly just anyone who's purchased a scented candle at any point in their life.
That definition is at least better than the definition you're offering, because you aren't offering any.
You're not a scientist.
You're not a gender studies major.
No.
How do you know that you're a man?
I guess because I got a dick.
A journey to discover the truth, the truth about love.
The truth about what a woman is.
It's right there in the title.
How are you confused already?
That's what this is about.
Try to keep up, Jamie.
Can a man become a woman?
I'm not a woman, so I can't really answer that.
Women only know what women are.
Can a man become a woman?
That's a silly question, because trans women are not men who become women.
They are women who happen to be trans.
Just like trans men are not women who become men.
We're men who happen to be trans.
At least ask the right questions.
Well, this is shocking.
I'm appalled.
Jamie, are you suggesting that gender is not fluid?
Like, 90% of people on TikTok identify as gender fluid.
Do they not exist?
Does TikTok not exist?
Are you saying their identities are not valid?
Are you marginalizing gender-fluid people?
Because, in fact, according to your worldview, a man can absolutely become a woman.
An individual could identify as a man one day and a woman the next.
So, in fact, an individual could identify as a man one minute and a woman the next.
And each of those identities are valid and true, right?
Isn't that what you think?
If you are whatever you identify as, and you identify as a woman after having identified as a man, that would mean that you became a woman.
You were one thing, and now you're another.
So you became the other.
Unless gender fluidity is false.
Is that what you believe?
You're a fluidphobe?
Duly noted, Jamie.
Are you a cat?
No.
Can you tell me what a cat is?
You want to tell us what a woman is?
Ah, yes.
I mean, I don't know if this is lovely editing or if this is actually how it went down, but ask somebody to define an animal.
Yeah, that really makes sense.
Asking someone to define an animal that has nothing to do with the human concept and language of gender and sex is really not the clever move he thinks it is.
I could bring up the example when a well-known transphobe tried to define a chair, and then multiple people pointed out to him that that definition could also work for horses.
So, well done.
A horse is now a chair, apparently.
No, see, you're confused again.
The point of the cat question was not to quiz that person about the definition of a cat.
The point was to respond to the claim that only women can know what women are.
And first of all, as I discovered at the Women's March, that's not true, because lots of women don't know what women are.
And second, you can absolutely know what something is without being that thing.
Everybody knows what a cat is.
And yet, none of us are cats.
I also know what a Chinese person is, despite not being Chinese.
I know what planets and sandwiches and mice and trees and Mark Wahlberg is, despite the fact that I'm not any of those things.
I even know what a chair is.
That's not a hard question.
That's a seat built for one person, usually with four legs and a back.
There you go, that's a chair.
That definition would not apply to horses because horses aren't built, okay?
Let's keep going.
I'm a biological woman that medically transitioned to appear like a male.
I will never be a man.
Oh, no, absolutely no.
Do not agree with that.
99.9999999% of trans men will very strongly disagree with that statement.
I don't know if that person actually identifies as a trans man.
By the sounds of it, they are assigned female at birth and transitioned in the sense of taking testosterone and living within society as a man.
But yes, sure, for the purposes of your seemingly transphobic documentary, go and find one of the very, very few trans people who holds these kind of gender-critical, transphobic-y views on trans people and include them.
Ignore the many thousands and the vast, vast majority of trans people who will very strongly disagree with this very, very small number of trans people who will say things like this.
But who cares if Scott Nugent's views are in the minority among trans people?
Trans people are in the minority among the general population.
If you can dismiss Scott for being in the minority, then can't I dismiss you for being in the minority?
Also, I did not ignore other trans people.
We talked to lots of trans people in the film, some of whom you've already seen in the trailer, despite claiming that we ignored them.
We tried to speak to many more trans people, but they refused to speak to us.
And this is a pretty common phenomenon, right?
Trans activists claim that, nobody will talk to us!
Oh, why don't you talk to us?
And yet, when I try to talk to them, they literally run away.
I mean, literally, get up and run away in some cases.
Okay, jumping ahead now, we get to the part of the trailer where I'm talking to a gender-affirming pediatrician about the, quote-unquote, gender-affirming, about the chemical castration drug she gives to kids.
Well, I say I'm talking to her about it, but it's more accurate to say that I tried to talk to her about it.
She threatened to storm out of the interview, and as soon as I correctly noted that the puberty blocker Lupron is used to chemically castrate pedophiles.
And then, that's what brings us to what Jamie has to say about all this.
Let's listen.
Puberty blockers have actually been used in cis kids with precocious puberty for a very long time.
Decades as well.
Decades.
Precocious puberty being when puberty starts too early, so they use puberty blockers to hold it off a bit till the child is a more appropriate age.
There has never been a fuss over cis kids with early puberty having access to puberty blockers in the same way that there has been a fuss over trans kids.
They're the same drugs, they're used in the same way, to hold off puberty until the child is ready to go through puberty.
No one ever gave a shit about puberty blockers until it became widely known that they were used to help trans kids.
Okay, Jamie.
Lean in close here so you can hear this.
I want you to hear it.
Pay close attention.
Precocious puberty is a physical condition.
It's an ailment, often caused by tumors on the ovaries or adrenal glands, or by problems with the nervous system or genetic syndromes.
Precocious puberty happens when a child's body is doing what it is not supposed to do, naturally.
That's why we call it precocious, meaning it's happening earlier than it's supposed to.
There are also direct physical consequences to not treating precocious puberty, such as the potential for stunted growth and other problems.
But puberty blockers for, quote, trans kids are used to treat, quote, unquote, puberty that is not precocious.
There's no physical problem.
Puberty is happening exactly when it's supposed to.
So on the one hand, we have puberty blockers used to treat early puberty in children with a physical health condition.
On the other, we have puberty blockers used to stave off normal puberty in children with no relevant physical health condition.
It's very similar to the difference between top surgery for physically healthy girls and a double mastectomy for someone with breast cancer.
And you don't see a difference in these two scenarios?
The difference is that they are literally opposites of each other.
That's the difference.
I know it might be a little too subtle for you PhDs, not the most perceptive bunch, I've learned.
Is it transphobic to tell the truth?
The interview's over.
Let's turn off the cameras.
Excuse me.
I just wanted to know, what is a woman?
And you're not going to find out.
Based on what I'm saying, would you ever want to move to America?
They say no.
Never.
No, never.
(upbeat music)
Oh my God.
Oh my God.
Honestly, that felt like a hot mess and was just filled with all of the transphobic dog whistles and transphobia that was thinly veiled as caring about children.
Truth is, these people, the people with these views and the transphobic views and making films like this, will not have had any concern for the cis kids receiving the exact same treatment and I'm not saying they should have.
What I'm pointing out is that they all of a sudden have concern and are pouring Why?
It doesn't make sense to me.
There's just a lot of fear-mongering going around, there's a lot of misinformation, there's a lot of half-truths, there's a lot of dog whistles, and there's a lot of people buying into it.
When in reality, trans people, we just want to live our lives, okay?
Trans kids deserve access to trans-affirming healthcare.
Which again, just reminding you, a majority of which is purely just social.
And then the other little bit is puberty blockers.
So lots of parts through here, but I couldn't help but note, Jamie, that you never said anything specifically about the African tribe.
I mean, they were literally laughing at the very idea of transgenderism.
And they had a lot more to say, which you'll see in the film when it comes out on June 1st.
But you seem to let them off the hook.
You called Scott Nugent a transphobe and me a transphobe, but you seem somehow reluctant to call out the bigotry of that group of Africans that I spoke to.
Which is kind of interesting.
Hmm.
As for your claim at the end that most trans-affirming healthcare, quote-unquote, for kids is social and the rest is puberty blockers, well, you're lying.
As you know, kids are getting surgery as young as 14, or even younger potentially.
They're chopping the breasts off of minors.
That's part of the trans-affirming healthcare that you seem to want to skate around.
The puberty blockers we've already covered, they're not reversible, they're not safe, and these are indeed the exact same drugs they use to chemically castrate convicted pedophiles.
The social transition that you talk about is designed to, and almost always has the effect of, putting kids on the path to medical transition a little further down the line, as you also know.
So the distinction between social and medical transition for kids is misleading at best.
But no surprise there, as a trans activist, misleading people is what you do best.
Speaking of which, I noticed something else, Jamie.
You just gave a whole 10-minute response, and yet you never did actually respond to the question.
Kind of curious.
Your response could have been 15 seconds.
You could have invalidated and debunked the whole film, humiliated me, and scored a major victory against transphobia simply by providing a definition of woman that's coherent and consistent with gender ideology.
But you didn't.
Is that because you're polite?
So polite that you'll repeatedly accuse me of bigotry and call the film a hot mess, but not provide the one thing that would actually debunk the central premise of the film?
Is it politeness, or are you sitting on a gigantic house of cards, and you know it, and you know I know it, but you don't want anyone else to know it?
Well, I guess that's just another question that I'm asking, even though I already know the answer.
And that's why you're cancelled.
And that'll do it for us today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
Don't forget to subscribe.
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, Our associate producer is McKenna Waters.
The show is edited by Robbie Dantzler.
Our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
And hair and makeup is done by Cherokee Heart.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2022.
A new pandemic drops just in time for the midterms.
The Archbishop of San Francisco denies communion to Nancy Pelosi.
And Hispanics flee from the Democrats' sinking ship.
