Ep. 1038 - Jon Stewart Transitions Into A Blue Haired Trans Activist
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Jon Stewart allegedly delivers the definitive smackdown to conservative bigots who believe that men are men and women are women. Today we’ll take a look at the viral clips from this much celebrated segment, and show just how easily and thoroughly it can all be debunked. Also, we achieve a major victory as Vanderbilt announces that it will be pausing all gender transition procedures on minors. And, the Biden Administration decides it must remind parents across the country that your sons and your family names can be ended anytime they feel like it. In our Daily Cancellation, a Christian pastor explains his problem with What Is A Woman. Namely, that I’m in it.
- - -
DailyWire+:
Candace Owens presents “The Greatest Lie Ever Sold”, streaming exclusively on DailyWire+. Watch the trailer here: https://bit.ly/3dQINt0
Shop the Jeremy’s Razors Columbus Day Sale to get 40% OFF you Founder’s Series Shave Kit at jeremysrazors.com.
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
LifeLock - Save up to 25% OFF your first year with LifeLock: https://lifelock.com/walsh
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on The Matt Wall Show, Jon Stewart allegedly delivers the definitive smackdown to conservative bigots who believe that men are men and women are women.
Today, we'll take a look at the viral clip from this much celebrated segment and show just how easily and thoroughly it can all be debunked.
Also, we achieve a major victory as Vanderbilt announces that it will be pausing all gender transition procedures on minors.
Well, lots to say about that.
And the Biden administration decides it must remind parents across the country that your sons and your family names can be ended anytime they feel like.
And in our daily cancellation, a Christian pastor explains his problem with what is a woman, namely, that I'm in it.
All of that and more today on The Matt Wall Show.
[MUSIC]
October is Cyber Security Awareness Month.
And right now is the perfect time to ensure you're doing everything you can to stay safer online.
Be cyber-smart by taking these basic steps to help keep you and your family protected from identity theft, scams, and other online dangers.
Use strong passwords.
Set up your multi-factor authentication.
on authentication on your accounts and regularly update the software on your devices.
You know, it's important to understand how cybercrime and identity theft are affecting our lives.
Every day we put our information at risk on the internet.
In an instant, a cybercriminal could harm what's yours, your finances, your credit, everything.
Good thing there's LifeLock.
LifeLock helps detect a wide range of identity threats like your social security number for sale on the dark web.
If they detect your information, they'll send you an alert.
Nobody can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses, but you can keep what's yours with LifeLock Identity Theft Protection.
Right now, you can join and save up to 25% off your first year at LifeLock.com slash Walsh.
That's LifeLock.com slash Walsh for 25% off.
Well, last week was, you might say, eventful.
It began with three major medical organizations calling for the prosecution of high-profile social media personalities who have been reporting on and criticizing so-called gender-affirming care.
Having extremely well-funded and powerful medical associations not so subtly single me out and call for my arrest would have been enough activity for one week, as far as I'm concerned.
Very next day, Media Matters launched their most extensive hit piece against me yet in a transparent attempt to derail our campaign against gender ideology.
And while this was all going on, we were also in the first week of our What is a Woman college tour, where throngs of protesters complained that my presence was destabilizing their existence and responded by defiantly singing Bohemian Rhapsody in a vocal performance that resembled the sound of 7,000 chickens choking to death all at once.
And then came the big win on Friday, the capstone to all of these events.
At the end of a week where I think our enemies thought that they'd landed a knockout blow, it was announced by Vanderbilt in a letter to state lawmakers that they would be pausing all gender transition procedures on minors.
So they caved.
They surrendered.
For perhaps The first time in recent memory, anyway, a left-wing institution caved to pressure from the right.
Very rarely does that happen.
But we beat them.
Battle's not close to over.
The fight continues, of course, as we now move on to make gender transitions on minors illegal across the entire state, and then we move across the entire country.
But this was a major victory, and I think perhaps in some ways unprecedented.
And we'll have much more to say about it in a few minutes, but the week was not over with the Vanderbilt News.
That night, Jon Stewart opened the second season of his Apple TV show.
Even though nobody watched the first season, he got the second season anyway.
A little bit more of that left-wing privilege that he's benefiting from.
Most people didn't even know that the first season happened, but it did.
Season 2, Episode 1 comes along and focuses on the topic of Gender.
It is, in effect, Jon Stewart's response to our documentary, What is a Woman?, and even features a brief clip of the film.
The left has hailed this episode as the ultimate takedown of the conservative conspiracy theory that women don't have penises.
This is the, it just demolishes all of us, we're told.
So to begin the show today, we're going to go through what are being celebrated as the most compelling and persuasive moments from this episode.
And we will show that Jon Stewart is a shallow, spineless, left-wing hack who has long had the reputation as a free thinker and a sort of bold, comedic mind, even though he has always simply adopted the mainstream corporate position on literally every topic.
And that's what he's done now on gender.
So we start with a clip shared by the show's Twitter account.
And the caption of this clip on their Twitter account was, What is a woman?
It's a question that suddenly is everywhere.
It turns out the answer is complicated.
John breaks down the gender binary and gender spectrum in this week's episode.
We are in a new dawn of gender and sex complexity, where those who don't fit into a simple binary are meant to be seen with humanity.
It wasn't always like this, people.
as recently as, let's say, the 1990s, early 2000s, people were making reductive jokes about the subject.
[ Laughs ]
[ Laughter ]
[laughter]
The joke rhymed.
It would be sad to see Jon Stewart apologizing for his past jokes, disavowing his previous belief that men can't have babies, and groveling for acceptance from a bunch of purple-haired 22-year-olds.
But you must realize that Jon Stewart has always been a pathetic fraud.
This is fully in keeping with his brand.
It's still a sickening stomach-churning display of self-debasement as revolting and perverse as watching someone eat themselves on camera.
But it's exactly what you ought to expect from a lifelong shill.
Let's continue.
Any moment of progressive visibility will be met with a vicious backlash.
There are two genders.
There are two genders and everyone knows it.
Ain't but two genders!
[ Laughter ]
That last guy sounded like it's an emergency and we're running out of genders.
[ Laughter ]
Everyone!
There ain't but two genders!
So here you see the attempt to make a completely self-evident and obvious statement seem absurd.
The audience, with the enhancement of a laugh track, giggles at the statement that there are only two genders.
Like, this is the move.
If you just laugh at something, then that automatically makes it laughable.
Expecting us to believe that the claim is funny just because they're laughing at it.
But they can't make this objectively correct statement, funny by laughing about it, any more than they can make a statement like, the world is round, or John Stewart is a gutless smirking slug, funny by laughing about it.
These are all just simply objective, self-evident observations about the physical world.
It's really not funny at all, but let's continue along.
The point is clear.
The human race is defined by a simple binary.
A black and white understanding.
There are men and there are women.
And never the twain shall meet.
Trump is an alpha male.
Well, okay, yes.
There are obviously men who are more man than other men.
But that's an aberration.
Beta and gamma.
Okay!
There's an entire Greek alphabet, a continuum of masculinity.
But that doesn't mean...
Cuck.
Pajama boy.
Soy boy.
Girly man.
I hope the children are out of the room.
(audience laughing)
Clearly masculinity appears to be on a dimmer, not an on-off switch.
But ladies are different.
I was a big tomboy.
These purple haired angry freaks.
Rabid feminist.
Cat lady.
High rolling bimbos.
Pretty girly girl.
My god!
What a cruise line buffet of the gradients in American gender expression.
Turns out there's a lot of non-binary sh** happening between the binaries.
This is John's whole shtick, by the way.
It goes back to The Daily Show.
Just play a clip of someone saying something normal and then mug for the camera like it's an episode of The Office.
Someone says something normal and you look at the camera like...
And then that's the joke.
It's like automatically that thing is now funny.
But these are all just descriptions of personality traits.
And most of them are labels used to describe the same sorts of people.
So how does this at all, even slightly, call into question the existence of the man-woman binary?
Nobody ever said, John, that every man is exactly the same as every other man, or that every woman is the same as every other woman.
Squares can also come in many different shapes and colors, or rather, many different sizes and colors, not shapes, that's the point.
A square is still a square, so you can color a different color, you can have a big square, a little square, there are lots of different ways you can describe squares depending on how you decorate them, but a square is still a square.
You can do a lot of interesting things with a square, but you can't make it a circle, is the point.
So, is that really the best that Stewart can do?
Just, like, pointing out that there are different personality traits, different ways that you can describe individual men, different insults you can use against individual women?
Is that it?
Is that all you have?
Is that what the left considers some kind of definitive smackdown of the gender binary?
Surely he must have more in his arsenal.
He doesn't, of course, but we'll keep watching anyway.
That hasn't stopped the traditionalists from deploying their newest weapon in the culture war arsenal.
The obvious gotcha question.
A real basic question.
What is a woman?
Can you provide a definition for the word woman?
For all of recorded history, people have known what a woman is.
Yes!
All of recorded history!
It was simple until, like, a year ago.
The answer to what is a woman has always been the same.
It's, uh, a woman is a deformity that occurred in the ordinary course of nature.
I'm sorry.
That's... That's Aristotle.
I apologize.
That's... I'm sorry.
That's not what I meant.
I meant a woman is a person who has no legal existence once married.
That's... I'm sorry.
That's...
That's early American coverture law.
That's not right.
No.
Throughout history, it's not a gotcha question.
A woman is 30 shekels.
That's... I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
That's Leviticus.
Yes, John, those are different things that different people and institutions have said about women over the course of history, but what is your point?
Aristotle and the author of Leviticus and everyone else that you might name from ancient history all agreed on what a woman is fundamentally and physically.
They all agree that a woman can be defined because if they didn't, then they couldn't have said anything about women in the first place.
See John, that's what you're not understanding.
You can't even talk about them.
You can't say anything about them at all unless there's some shared understanding of what this entity is.
What you're proving is that over history, people have had different ideas about the legal standing of women, about their place in society, and so on and so on.
But you haven't proved that there was ever, at any time, ever in history, ever, until just now, even the slightest disagreement on the definition of the word.
No, indeed, you've proven the opposite, if anything.
I mean, there are people who would say different things about Jon Stewart.
Some people would say he's a comedic genius.
On the other hand, people with functioning brains say that he's a bland, boring chump desperate for approval.
These are all adjectives, some of them more accurate than others.
They don't make Jon Stewart into some kind of abstract, undefinable entity whose very objective existence is now up for debate.
But Stewart isn't done here.
He also interviews Leslie Rutledge, who's the Arkansas Attorney General and a great American who's helped to spearhead the efforts in her state to make it illegal to sexually mutilate children.
Yet, not every great American is necessarily equipped to successfully respond to a partisan hack like Stewart while the cameras are rolling.
Okay?
Not everyone is going to be good in that context.
And unfortunately, it doesn't seem like Rutledge really is, which is exactly why she was chosen for this segment.
But let's watch a little bit of this.
Why would the state of Arkansas step in to override parents, physicians, psychiatrists, endocrinologists who have developed guidelines?
Why would you override those guidelines?
Well I think it's important that all of those physicians, all of those experts, for every single one of them, there's an expert that says we don't need to allow children to be able to take those medications.
That there are many instances where... But you know that's not true.
You know it's not for everyone there's one.
These are the established Well, I don't know that that's not true.
I don't know that... Then why would you pass a law then if you don't know that that's true?
Well, I know that there are doctors and that we had plenty of people come and testify before our legislature who said that, you know, we have 98% of the young people who have gender dysphoria That they are able to move past that, and once they have the help that they need, no longer suffer from gender dysphoria.
98% without that medical treatment.
That's an incredibly made-up figure.
That doesn't comport with any of the studies or documentation that exists from these medical organizations.
What medical association are you talking about of these doctors?
Well, we have all of that in our legislative history and we'll be glad to provide that to you.
Okay.
Jon Stewart was, of course, extremely careful about which conservative he invited to speak to him about this issue.
I don't think I'm inflating myself in any respect by saying that I am Primarily the one who's brought the what-is-a-woman question to the forefront, and yet Stewart didn't reach out to me for an interview.
If he had, I would have eagerly accepted.
And here's how I would have responded.
Instead of making the mistake of getting into a credentialism contest, as Rutledge does here, takes the bait, once you do that, it's over.
Okay, that's all this conversation is now.
I would have said something like this.
John, you're coming out of the gate with appeals to authority because you don't have any thoughts of your own.
That's the first problem.
There was a time when a similar appeal to authority could have been used to prove that the Earth is the center of the universe, or that bloodletting is the cure for every known disease.
Okay, there was a time when every medical expert in the world would have told you that if you want to cure any disease, cut yourself open and bleed it out.
In this case, your brainless appeals to authority are even more asinine because the authorities you mention all have an obvious financial stake in the very medical practices you're seeking to justify.
So what you're telling me is that people who make millions of dollars mutilating kids all say it's a good idea to mutilate kids.
Wow!
Breaking news!
The tobacco industry also has funded studies showing that smoking isn't so bad for you.
Will you be citing those on your next show, John?
But this is all beside the point.
The burden of proof is not on me to explain to you why we shouldn't castrate and sterilize children.
You guys are the ones coming along out of nowhere demanding that we start engaging in those kinds of horrific practices.
So you tell me what your evidence is.
What studies are you talking about?
Tell me, John.
Which credible, long-term studies prove that it's a good idea to castrate and mutilate kids?
Which ones?
Which ones?
Here, I'll help you.
There are none.
They don't exist.
These medical institutions don't have studies to support their practices.
Our kids are the study.
This current generation is the guinea pig, the lab rats.
That's the part you're leaving out, you sycophantic gasbag.
Now, I'd like to tell you that this conversation progresses from here, but it really doesn't.
Stewart spends the entire interview obsessing over the guidelines of medical organizations.
That's the only thing they talk about.
Well, this organization said that we should do it, so we should.
That's literally all he has.
That's it.
His whole case comes down to, um, these people said we should castrate kids.
Which people?
Uh, well, the people who make billions of dollars doing it.
Oh, great.
Good to know.
He also lies, of course, and misrepresents the data.
Let's check that out.
I've got some bad news for you.
Parents with children who have gender dysphoria have lost children.
To suicide.
And depression.
They absolutely have.
Because it's acute.
And so, these mainstream medical organizations have developed guidelines through peer-reviewed data and studies.
And through those guidelines, they've improved mental health outcomes.
What data is that, John?
What are you talking about?
You're saying that there is data showing that a child's long-term mental health is improved by castrating and sterilizing and mutilating him?
Which data exactly is that?
Where is that data?
Can you cite it?
See, Leslie, Rutledge, unfortunately never flips it around on him.
He's very lucky that she never thinks to say, what are you talking about?
Can you show me?
What are you talking about?
Can you provide an example?
Can you say anything about it other than insisting that it exists?
No, you can't because it doesn't exist.
It never has existed, and it never will.
You're lying.
And fortunately for you, your guests didn't call you out on that.
But I will.
And I'd do it to your face if you had the courage to sit down with someone who won't be so easily railroaded.
But in some ways I'm grateful for the Jon Stewart episode.
He's grateful for it because it's the first time anyone has paid attention to him in like eight years.
I'm grateful because it's being heralded as the best defense of gender ideology ever put to film and yet it's laughably weak and can be dismantled with almost no effort at all.
And that really tells you everything you need to know about gender ideology and about Jon Stewart.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
(upbeat music)
All right, I would be remiss if I didn't just start off on our five headlines with the biggest headline of the day,
which is that it's Columbus Day and happy Columbus Day to everybody who is watching
and who celebrates and hopefully that is everyone who celebrates Columbus Day,
because despite what you have heard and we continue to hear every single year on this day,
despite anything that you've heard, Columbus was one.
One of the most consequential figures in all of history, especially in all of Western history.
And all of our lives would be dramatically different, for the worse, if Columbus never existed.
In fact, we might not even exist, a lot of us.
It's one of those things, it's like one of those people that you go back in time and remove him from the equation, you've just rewritten everything that happens after it.
So who knows what would happen from there?
But a great man who accomplished extraordinary feats of courage and whose contributions to history have stood the test of time.
And yet, of course, as with so many other historical figures, his statues are being torn down, his monuments are being defaced, his name's being taken off of buildings and off of holidays, and he's being posthumously, his whole life is being posthumously re-litigated and he's being convicted of all these crimes long after he's dead.
And all of this is happening on the part of people who are pathetic, And who have had no impact on history and won't.
I mean, whose lives will be instantly forgotten the moment that they die.
And yet they feel like they're in a place to cast judgment on one of the most significant men of history.
He's one of the most significant men.
You're nothing.
You're not contributing anything to the world at all.
He helped to reshape it.
And so that should be reason enough to humble yourself And honor the greater people who came before you and who established this civilization that you live in and that you are happy to live in despite what you may claim.
You live in modern Western society and you are happy that you do because if you weren't you'd go somewhere else.
But you don't, you stay here.
You stay here and you complain about and whine about all of the better people who came before you and gave you all of the things that you take for granted today.
That makes you a whiny, insignificant brat.
But for everybody else, happy Columbus Day.
All right, now for more on the story mentioned at the top of the show, the Vanderbilt Pediatric Gender Clinic has agreed to pause all gender transition surgeries on minors.
According to a letter from the clinic to a Tennessee lawmaker obtained by the Daily Wire, Vanderbilt also told the lawmakers that it would protect conscientious objectors who work at the facility and don't want to take part in the controversial treatments.
They said, we are pausing gender affirmation surgeries on patients under 18 while we complete this review, which may take several months.
The clinic says they've done about five such gender-affirming surgical procedures per year, which I don't believe, but this is what they're claiming, since they opened in 2018.
The letter addressed to, I don't believe because I think it's much More than that, to be clear.
The letter addressed to Republican State Representative Jason Zachary was written by C. Wright Pinson, the Deputy CEO and Chief Health System Officer at Vanderbilt University Medical Center.
Pinson said that parental consent had been given in each case for the surgery and that no general procedures had been done, but they're going to stop doing them.
But here's the best part, okay?
Well, the best part is that they're pausing the procedures, and that is going to really, in real time, save kids.
At least buy them some time from, you know, being mutilated in this way.
So that's the best part.
This part's also good.
Continuing with the article, it says, Pinson also said that the clinic complied with existing Tennessee law and would comply with any potential legislation that the legislature may pass.
He wrote, in addition, we understand this issue is likely to be taken up by the General Assembly in its next legislative session.
As always, we will assure that VUMC's programs comply with any new requirement which may be established as part of Tennessee law.
So, they're waving the white flag on the legislative fight before it even really begins.
Now, you might say, well, all they're doing is saying they're going to comply with the law.
What else are they going to say?
They're not going to announce ahead of time that they're not going to comply with the law.
Well, in fact, they could announce that.
I mean, they could come out and say, we're putting our foot down.
We're not going to go along with this.
But they also, one way or another, they didn't need to make a point in the letter of saying, oh, yeah, we heard about the fact that you're going to try to make this illegal and we'll go along with it.
I certainly read that, I think, within reason as waving a white flag and saying they're not going to fight it.
They are surrendering.
So again, this represents an occasion, one of the very few occasions, where a left-wing institution caves to pressure from the right.
I can't remember the last time that's happened.
It almost always happens the other way.
Institutions cave to pressure from the left.
And especially conservative institutions, what few exist, generally also gave us pressure from the left.
But it's not an accident that it happened.
Okay?
We didn't just, like, get lucky in this case.
We engineered this.
We made it happen.
It's all strategic.
How do we do it?
Well, utilizing a multi-pronged approach.
First was the public pressure.
Okay?
And that involves alerting the public, making them aware, And also, you know, there are many different ways to make people aware that something's happening.
You can just say, oh, this is happening.
But to really capture people, you need to sort of tell the story of what you want them to know in a way that resonates and makes sense.
That's another thing that I think oftentimes we fail in that regard.
We kind of like to just take a bullet point approach.
Here's what's happening.
Boom, boom, boom.
Doesn't resonate, people just, it doesn't capture people.
So the first thing is to make people aware, to capture them, and then we work with lawmakers to generate political pressure, and these two together create financial pressure.
You've got public pressure, political pressure, now you also have financial pressure because donors and supporters of Vanderbilt threaten to pull their funds and all the rest of it.
So now you've got public, political, financial, attacked from all angles, backed them into a corner, You don't wait for them to do the right thing.
You don't just hope that they'll have a change of heart.
You force them.
Leave them no option.
And that's what happened here.
Now, I think it's important to celebrate a victory when it happens.
And I do believe, again, this is a significant victory.
It's not over, though.
What we can't do, the mistake we can't make, is to say, well, we won that.
Let's just move on to the next thing.
No, because it's still legal to do in Tennessee.
There are still other, now this might be the big sort of gender clinic in Tennessee, but there are other medical clinics that perform these kinds of procedures.
There are plastic surgeons that perform double mastectomies on minors, even ones in Nashville, who aren't directly connected with Vanderbilt.
So the fight certainly continues, which is why it's all the more important now, if you are able, to come out on October 21st Here in Nashville, 4 p.m., we're going to have our rally.
We're still having our rally.
Even more important than ever to show up and speak out against this.
We hope to see you there.
Alright, look at this tweet from the Selective Service.
This is... I don't even know exactly how to process this, but this is real, okay?
This is from the government.
Very real.
It says, Parents, if your son is an only son and the last male in your family to carry the family name, he is still required to register with SSS.
Learn more about who needs to register at SSS.gov.
What?
Here's the translation.
Parents, we may kill your son and end your bloodline and your family name for the sake of defending some irrelevant pile of sand in some godforsaken corner of the globe that holds no worth to you or your family whatsoever, but that's just what we're going to do.
Now, it's hard to understand why they would even say something like this.
Now, yeah, it's true that there is no provision in the law that says that you don't have to register your son if he's the last male in your family.
So, yes, technically accurate, but why would you come out and say that?
Like, why?
And it seems confusing until you remember back to what we talked about a couple of weeks ago when Lizzo was playing the flute.
And it may seem like these two things are pretty unrelated, and they are, except in this one area where this is about demoralization.
That's the only way to understand this thing from Selective Service.
Why else would they put that out there?
Just, hey, just letting you guys know, just reminding you that we can take your sons and kill them and erase your family name and bloodline from history.
Why else would you come out and say it?
Other than to demoralize people.
It's the only reason you would ever say that.
It's to demoralize people and to sort of let you know, let us know, where we fall in the hierarchy, that we are the peons, and that they can come along at any time and take our children and have them killed off in some war that, if it's anything like the military engagements that we've had in recent history, it'll be something that is completely irrelevant to our national interests.
Speaking of the draft, this is from Post Millennial.
This is also from today.
It says the Biden administration's requirements for who must register for Selective Service in the event that there's a draft includes those persons that identify as transgender but are born male.
Almost all male U.S.
citizens and male immigrants who are 18 through 25 are required to register with Selective Service, and that includes males who identify as transgender.
Guidance on requirements from the Selective Service System say, US citizens or immigrants who are born male and change their gender to female are still required to register.
Individuals who are born female and change their gender to male are not required to register.
As soon as Biden took office, he enacted an executive order, one of many, that said those who identify as transgender should be treated by the military according to their gender identity and not according to their biological sex.
Okay.
So this is very interesting.
Now, we know that there's this effort to, and there's been a push in recent years, to make women eligible for the draft.
And I know there have even been some people on the right who've supported this, not because they support it in principle, but because they see it as kind of a, they see it as an F-you to the feminists.
And they say, oh, so you want to be treated like a man?
Well, now you're going to be drafted.
Now I can't get behind that because it's not, you know, what feminists are you thinking you're flipping the finger to here?
You see, you have in your mind like feminist college professors and gender studies professors.
They're not the ones who are going to get drafted, okay?
It's like my daughter gets drafted and yours.
So you line up behind this because you think that it proves some point to the feminists.
They're not the ones that are going to suffer and die.
It'll be your own daughters.
I don't want my daughters to have nothing to do with this.
Yes, it's true that our culture has bought into this feminist lie, this leftist lie in general, that men and women are the same.
My daughters have nothing to do with that.
It's not their fault.
Why should they have to pay the price for that?
So, the idea of drafting women, I think, is horrific and immoral in the extreme.
And a sign of a civilization that's simply given up.
When you get to the point where you are conscripting your daughters to go die on the battlefield, that is a civilization that has surrendered, that has given up completely.
So, we don't know if that will ultimately go through or not, that women are going to get drafted.
But until that does, now there is this, once that goes through, then it's like, whatever, they're drafting everybody.
But until that point, now they really have a little bit of an issue on their hands because we're told the Biden administration in particular says that even in the context of the military, in most other contexts, they say that a male who identifies as a woman is a woman and should be treated that way always, even to the point of being sent to a women's prison.
You have a male sex offender, a male rapist, should be sent to a women's prison, locked in a prison cell with women.
Because he is a woman, they tell us.
And yet, the only time when it's not going to work, the only government agency or department, the only organ of the government that will not recognize your female self-identity is Selective Service, are the people who would draft you.
They're the only ones.
So then to go along with it, we're going to pretend you're a woman in every context, including in context where it's going to hurt other real women, especially in those contexts.
But when we need you, you know, when the politicians need to send you overseas to die for one of their wars, that's when the act is dropped.
Now we're not pretending anymore.
That was all cute and fine.
Not anymore.
Really tells you everything you need to know.
All right, one other thing here.
What do we got?
There's a couple to choose from and we're running out of time in the five headlines.
All right, I want to mention this because it's kind of related.
This is from the Daily Wire.
It says, Author J.K.
Rowling slammed the idea that she's right-wing simply because she cares about child safeguarding and said she's been on the liberal left all her adult life.
Rowling, the famed Harry Potter author, who's been the target of transgender activists because of her defense of biological women, made several comments on Twitter Friday explaining that future historians will be able to trace the path of the culture as it relates to radical gender ideology.
She says, I say this as someone who's been on the liberal left all her adult life.
Own goals don't come any more spectacular than, if you care about child safeguarding, you must be right wing.
The crazy thing about this is it's all been documented virtually minute by minute.
Future historians won't be struggling to find out how this cultural moment happened.
Think how many books, blogs, videos, speeches, and documentaries will be available to them.
So she is once again reasserting her bona fides as a leftist, and we've seen this from her before.
We know, obviously, when she disavowed me a few months ago and said, yeah, I thought what is a woman was fine, but not this guy.
I don't want to be on the same side as this guy.
So this is not anything new for her.
I just wonder, and I once again, as I've said so many times, but I do feel the need to reiterate, because it's true, That she's had a lot of courage on this issue.
Serves a lot of credit for that.
Yes, she's a multi-billionaire, and yes, she has enough money to retire for the next one million lifetimes, and so you might say that she's got nothing to lose, but you do have something to lose.
Yeah, when you've got a lot of money, like when you're a billionaire, you just kind of take that for, okay, yeah, you're rich, and you always will be, and you just, like, you take that for granted.
At a certain point you don't think of that as something that you can lose because you can't but there are other things you can lose that you still value and cherish and you might cherish them even more now that money is like not an issue anymore to think about.
Things like your reputation, the admiration people have for you in the mainstream.
So those are things that she had and she's now lost in the mainstream anyway.
For someone like me, it's gone the opposite.
I respect our health a lot more than I did before, but she doesn't really care.
She's made it clear.
She doesn't care what I think or what you think.
So she has lost the respect of people whose opinion she otherwise cares about.
And that's something.
That's a lot.
And it takes guts.
So, all that said, I do wish that at some point J.K.
Rowling and everyone in her kind of camp, what they call themselves, gender-critical feminists, they're derisively called TERFs by the other side, but I wish that they would all just stop and think for a second.
I mean, you still claim you're filthy to the left and you say you've been a liberal and you still believe all of that.
Maybe stop and think about Okay, why is it that your side has lost its mind?
Have you noticed that?
It's only on your side.
You still claim this as your side, broadly, in the ideological struggle.
And yet, you are on the side that has totally lost its grip on reality.
Maybe you should think about that.
And you should think about whether you still want to align yourself with that.
You should think about, are there some fundamental, like, is it just a coincidence that this gender ideology, this trans stuff came along on the left?
Is that a coincidence?
Could it have been either one?
It could have been the right, you know, it could have been conservatives, but it just ended up being just some quirk of history.
It just ended up being leftists who got all behind gender ideology and, you know, women have penises and all the rest of it.
Is it that?
Or is there something fundamentally in leftism that inevitably led to this?
Because I think it's very much the latter.
And there's a lot there that we could talk about that we don't have time for, but I'll point to one thing.
The rejection of objective truth.
Leftism is inherently a relativistic worldview.
Always has been.
And that's where all this stems from, ultimately.
There's a lot more that goes into it.
Leftism is also anti-family.
It's anti-anything that has the stench of tradition in their minds.
Anything like that.
So they're anti all of that.
Inherently destructive.
Inherently anti-truth.
That's where it comes from.
Maybe think about that and say, well, maybe I'm not a liberal.
Maybe I'm not on the liberal left, or I shouldn't be.
Something to think about as we get into our comment section.
[MUSIC]
Well, this is a segment of the show dedicated to the SBG.
Really, every segment of the show is dedicated to my dear sweet babies, but this in particular.
And because of that, I need to make sure to give special credit and issue commendations to The SPG who showed up to an event on Saturday in Michigan where I was speaking, a great conference called the Body of Christ in the Public Square event, conference, and it's a wonderful event run and attended by some very solid Christians.
But the SPG was there, and to understand why their presence was so especially important and inspiring, you just need a little bit of background.
The background goes back to the greatest controversy of this current century, of course, which I don't need to tell you, is Walrusgate.
The controversy which did not conclude and was not settled when Ben Shapiro finally released his grip on my life-sized stuffed walrus.
That was only the end of chapter one.
That was one struggle and the beginning of another one, because now that it's been officially given to me, in theory anyway, the next step is to bring it home.
But home is where my wife lives.
And she has never been on board, I'm afraid to say, with the giant stuffed walrus.
She has never understood my pain over its absence, nor my desire for its presence.
And that's why, to this day, the walrus still is not at my house.
It's not there.
It's still at work.
Still in the studio.
In fact, my wife went around me.
She usurped me.
And started texting and calling people at work to prevent them from bringing it home.
This is true.
It's what she did.
I was actually on the air one day and she was conspiring.
She and my assistant Tessa, in particular, reached some sort of agreement whereby now the walrus is still at the office.
It's not at my house.
You have to understand that my wife, by the way, has a direct line to everyone I work with, and will simply go around me whenever it suits her.
She has the numbers of everybody in the wardrobe department, and she has no problem calling them to give her opinion about wardrobe issues.
She obviously is in touch with everybody.
And somehow, this agreement was sorted out, and so I don't have the walrus now.
My wife's argument against the walrus is that, number one, she thinks we don't have room for it in the house, which is absurd, because if we lived in a damned double-wide trailer, I would still say we have room for the walrus.
Okay, get rid of the couch and put the walrus there.
You can sit on it too, by the way.
And she says we can't fit it through the door.
Which, okay, you can take the door off.
You can cut a hole in the side of the house.
It's been done before.
It can bust through the wall like the Kool-Aid man.
Whatever you got to do.
These are not real problems.
These are excuses.
I'm a solution man.
I'm not an excuses guy.
I don't want to hear the excuses.
Tell me the solutions.
And if you don't have them, I'll tell you what they are.
Cut a hole in the wall.
That's it.
That's the solution.
This brings us to the event this weekend, which my wife attended with me, and she was in the audience when someone came to the microphone during the Q&A, addressed me as Sweet Daddy Walsh, which creeps my wife out to no end, so I was so glad she was there for that, and then also asked about the walrus, and it gave me an opportunity On the stage with the microphone to make my case for bringing the walrus home.
And I was able to get the audience to applaud along with me.
So it was like 400 against 1.
And you have to understand in a marriage, you know, it's a man-woman argument.
Men are often at a disadvantage.
But when you have the microphone and she doesn't, That's a whole different ballgame.
It made me think that I should just, I should have a stage and a microphone in my house.
So that anytime we're arguing about something, I'll just get up on the stage and I'll, you know, just start shouting it into the microphone.
Maybe I'll start live streaming it too to get, so the SPG can see the argument and everyone will get on my side.
Anyway, the Waller still isn't home, even after all that.
Jack Straw says, I drove 49 miles last night to hear Sweet Daddy's lecture.
I got detoured by road construction on campus, and by the time I found parking, it was 7.55 and couldn't get in.
There I stood, ticket in hand, and unable to hear Matt Wall speak.
This is at the college event, by the way, not the other thing.
I tried to bargain with the person at the door to no avail, so I sat outside the hall and watched it on YouTube.
It was a long trip, but it was not for naught, because I was able to trigger a protester by misgendering it.
I'm glad to hear that part.
And I hate that you couldn't make it in though, Jack.
You know, tell you what, we'll get in touch with you.
We'll send you a signed t-shirt.
And a signed book.
And a stuffed walrus.
And a couple stickers.
And a Leftist Tears mug signed.
And I just promised all those things, so we have to do it now.
Otherwise, I'd be a liar.
A. Reid says, The optics of these events are always exactly what you'd expect.
Massive crowds of normal-looking, well-behaved people versus small groups of colorful crybabies and social parasites.
Those are indeed the optics, and so you can watch and just decide whose side you're on.
It's really up to you.
Grey Webb says, If your presence makes her feel unsafe, why is she in the same building you're in?
Yeah, that is, that is really the ultimate question.
And as we were talking about the protesters and how they felt unsafe and they were complaining and all that.
Well, if you're really that unsafe, why are you, you could leave the building.
You don't have to, I'm not forcing you to be in the building.
I didn't, I didn't show up to the building that you were in.
I didn't like show up.
I didn't chase you down.
I wasn't chasing you across the campus.
So if you're really, if you really feel unsafe, then you would just go somewhere else.
But that's an easy solution.
And that's exactly what they don't want.
They want the excuse to complain.
They don't actually want the solution.
Happy Columbus Day, folks!
530 years ago, Columbus discovered the New World, but the left ruined it.
So Jeremy is building a new New World, starting with his razors.
And right now, you can get your Jeremy's Razors Founder's Shave Kit for 40% off, plus free shipping, as part of a historic Columbus Day sale.
The left wants to erase history and masculinity, but you don't have to let them.
Navigate your way to jeremysrazors.com to conquer your stubble.
and arrive in style this holiday.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Today for our daily cancellation, we go back a few months to a video posted in June, which is reacting to my film, What is a Woman?
I wasn't aware that this video existed until someone happened to send it to me last week.
We'll take a look at it, we'll talk about it now, because it helps me illustrate a point that I want to make.
That's a good way to get into the cancellation, is if you say something that just plays into an overall overarching point I feel like making.
And so that's what's happening here.
And the guy in this clip is someone named Jordan B. Cooper, who's a theologian and author, president of the American Lutheran Theological Seminary.
He also hosts a podcast, I believe.
Based on what very little I know about the guy, I'm assuming the two of us probably agree on a great many important issues.
In fact, we agree about the issue that lies at the center of the film.
So we're really on the same page in so many ways.
And Cooper seems to appreciate the film and has some nice things to say about the content and about the approach that we took.
And yet, You can't get fully behind it, because as he sees it, my documentary has one fatal flaw.
I'm involved.
Let's listen.
So I think there are some things I want to say about the film.
The first of those is, honestly, I think the film would have been more effective if it was not put out by the Daily Wire, and particularly Matt Walsh.
And I don't mean this as an insult to him or them as an organization in any way whatsoever.
They're a political group, so they do political things, and he's a political figure, and this has You know, very much has political implications.
But the reason I say that is because these issues of gender really extend far beyond the conservative, quote-unquote, conservative-liberal divide or Republican-Democrat divide.
Of course, these things affect people from all over the world.
It's not just our American political context that determines everything, even though us Americans tend to think everything centers around us, but it doesn't.
These are much broader philosophical claims that are being made surrounding gender that don't have really anything to do with politics.
There are assertions about what a male is and what a female is, and questions maybe more than assertions because there are no real answers, that are dependent upon particular philosophical constructs that have not in any way been proven but are instead being forced upon people.
Yes, that Matt Walsh movie, which Matt Walsh made, would be a lot better without Matt Walsh in it.
There are some major logical problems with such a criticism, of course.
Like, if I made a painting and you said that you really liked the painting, it wouldn't make any sense to then add that the painting would have been better if I hadn't been the one to paint it.
Now, it may be true that other people could make better paintings, but this specific painting wouldn't exist at all.
Without me.
So if I wasn't involved in the making of the painting, you wouldn't have a better version of the painting.
You just wouldn't have this painting in the first place.
It wouldn't exist.
So we'll pick up on that thought in just a moment.
But here's a little bit more of Jordan Cooper.
But I think because of the nature of the fact that it is Matt Walsh making the documentary, that it will turn a lot of people off from it and make, and I think give the impression, that this is just another kind of Republican-Democrat issue.
And it's really not.
And you see that, especially through the people interviewed throughout, and people that are speaking up on these issues, that this absolutely 100% should not be a Democrat-Republican issue.
This is a question of who is the human person?
What determines what and who you are?
Is it what you say you are?
Is truth determined just by whatever linguistic concept society happens to use, even if it can't define it?
Or is there something real about what we encounter in our everyday experiences?
What philosophically would be referred to as realism or essentialism?
that I know is a bad word among gender theorists. But unfortunately I do think that the fact that
Matt Walsh is involved is going to make a bunch of people kind of turn it off and say it's just
some political thing. Well I'm sorry for being involved in my own project.
I should have known better.
Though his critique about the alleged political nature of the film makes it sound like we spend the whole runtime ranting against Democrats and shilling for Republicans, and there is in fact none of that in the movie.
We do interview and ultimately embarrass a Democrat politician, but his humiliation is entirely self-induced.
So what is Cooper's actual criticism?
He tries to sort of make it about the approach of the film itself, but ultimately it's clear that he likes the approach.
He just doesn't like, or at least doesn't terribly respect, at least in this case, me or The Daily Wire.
Now, he's far from the only Christian in a position of leadership who's voiced this kind of objection to not only what is a woman, but all of the other work that we're doing on the gender ideology issue and in the culture in general.
So I hear this kind of thing a lot.
They appreciate the work.
But they really wish we weren't the ones doing it, because they're so deeply uncomfortable with us and about various different things about us.
They wish that we could leave it to more credible Christian voices to, you know, handle these kinds of things.
Those who can make more robust theological arguments.
Those who have PhDs in moral theology.
The problem with me, they say, is that I'm too polarizing, I'm too abrasive, I'm too controversial, and what's more, I'm not educated enough, not eloquent enough, not the right kind of Christian, not the right sort of voice.
And to those criticisms, I say yes.
Basically true.
I am too much of some things and not enough of others.
I am a very flawed vessel.
So why did I make the film?
Well, because No one else did.
Why am I fighting at the front lines in this battle?
Well, because there aren't very many other people scrambling to get up here.
There especially aren't very many Christian leaders coming to the front.
It's not as though the foxhole is full.
Okay, if you came up, we're not going to say, oh, we don't have room for you.
We got too many people who want to be here.
No, no, no.
We got plenty of room down in the trenches.
We invite any educated, PhD-wielding Christian pastor or theologian who wants to jump down into the mud with us and get their hands dirty.
We invite you all to come.
There's a few here already with us, but not that many.
Instead, they seem to prefer to stay far back from where most of the real fighting is going on, lobbing grenades that ultimately end up hitting us rather than the enemy.
Now, at the Daily Wire, we encounter this sort of thing pretty frequently.
And this is why it maybe just really annoys me at this point.
One other quick example.
We released the Jeremy's Razors commercial back in March of this year.
And we did something that no other conservative organization has done, to my knowledge, which is a high-priced sponsor left us because it opposed our values.
And rather than changing our values to keep the sponsor, we told the sponsor to go to hell and we made a product to directly compete with them instead.
Big win.
It's an important cultural counterpunch.
But some Christians were uncomfortable with it.
It's uncomfortable.
Toby Sumter is a prominent pastor, co-host of a popular podcast called CrossPolitik.
They do a lot of good things on the podcast.
I've listened to it.
But he wrote a lengthy article attacking the Jeremy's Razors ad, claiming absurdly that we somehow had sold out by making it.
And he explained all the ways that it could have been done better.
He also threw an irrelevant blindside punch at me and Michael Knowles, accusing us of being Pappist idolaters.
You see, the whole Jeremy's Razor's campaign is a nice idea, he says, but he knows how it could have been done better.
He could have done it better.
And yet, he isn't doing it better.
And never has.
Has he ever produced anything with the cultural relevance of what The Daily Wire creates?
Has he ever had a real substantive win in the culture in the way that we have?
We're changing laws and saving kids from getting mutilated and making content that has a real, lasting, noticeable impact for the good in our culture.
Is Toby Sumter doing that?
Is Jordan B. Cooper?
By the way, it won't surprise you to learn that the cross-politic guys also criticized What Is A Woman on the grounds that I'm Catholic, which means the film, in terms of impact, quote, won't do much, and B, I didn't bring Jesus into the film.
In the scene where I'm debating the pro-trans pediatrician, they wanted me to launch into a sermon about the saving power of Jesus Christ in the middle of the movie, and because I didn't, you know, that's a big problem.
Once again, they could have made a much better version of the movie, a much more Christian, much holier version.
And yet they haven't.
They didn't.
They aren't.
See, Christian leaders, those who actually pastor churches and have degrees in theology and so on, they've spent the last several decades suffering one defeat after another in an unrelenting and unbroken chain of failure.
Our culture has slipped ever further into madness, into moral confusion and abject insanity, and all while they preside in their positions of alleged leadership, doing nothing.
There are two kinds of culturally ineffectual Christian leaders in the country.
The first, and I would say the more common brand, are those pastors and other people in positions of spiritual leadership who have simply surrendered the moral fight outright.
They run from Any issue that might be considered controversial, they choose instead to drone on about the faux virtues of tolerance and inclusivity.
Some of them haven't just fled from the controversial fights, but instead have actually adopted the mainstream positions in those arguments, now using their undeserved credibility to directly shill for gender ideology, abortion, the destruction of marriage and the family, and so on.
This is one category, and certainly the more pathetic and shameful one, to be sure.
But it's not the one I'm concerned with today, because there's this other category that doesn't get criticized quite as much.
The other type of ineffectual Christian leader is the type who maintains his belief in and defense of Christian values, rejects the spirit of the age, adopts the correct positions, talks about important things, but only talks about them.
He's very impressed with his theological and philosophical training and wants us to be impressed too.
He pontificates in the abstract, saying many intelligent things and impressing everyone who already agrees with him anyway and who shares his level of education and erudition.
This type not only makes no real inroads in the culture, not only fails to win any battles, but indeed prefers not to win them.
Because he likes being on the losing side.
This is his brand.
It's his M.O.
and it's his cover.
Because the culture is lost anyway, he reasons.
There's no point in putting up a fight.
He can't win.
None of us can, he says, which means that nobody can judge him for not winning.
Which means that there's no way to discern whether he is achieving anything at all in his career.
So there's really no pressure.
We can't accuse him of losing because we're all losing all the time and that's how he likes it.
This is why someone who belongs to this category actually actively opposes any attempt by conservatives to make progress in the culture.
The only reason to engage with the culture at all, they think, is to virtue signal to it.
He doesn't want to change the culture, he just wants the culture to know how different he is from it.
Now, not every pastor, priest, Christian leader in the country falls into one of these categories.
But most do.
And if they didn't, we wouldn't be in the position that we're in.
This used to be a Christian society.
It is no longer.
And hasn't been for a long time.
It slid all the way down the slippery slope and off into the abyss, while most of the people tasked with preventing such a decline were at the wheel, too afraid or too distracted by the sounds of their own voices to bother steering us away from destruction.
So now the job falls to other people.
I mean, it falls to people who may be a little bit edgier than you'd like, a little rough around the edges, a little problematic.
Not the right kind of Christians.
Not Christian at all in some cases.
This rogues gallery, this collection of misfits will be out there in the fight doing what needs to be done and what you never did and refuse to do even now.
You can stand back safe and out of range criticizing and pontificating and telling us what a better job you would be doing if you were doing anything at all.
You can make yourself feel better that way.
While the battle is fought, and ultimately won, by others.
And that's why, because this is the segment we're doing, you are today cancelled.
That'll do it for today.
We'll talk to you tomorrow.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
On today's episode, the U.S.
labor market slows, Vanderbilt University pauses its gender surgeries for children, and will New York elect a Republican governor?
