Ep. 1173 - Stop Cowering To The LGBT Extremist Cult
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the struggle sessions are ramping up in preparation for Pride Month. Yesterday a professional baseball player groveled and apologized for publicly supporting the Target boycott. It's one of the most pathetic caves we've seen recently, and we need to start calling this kind of cowardice out. Also, Chick-Fil-A goes woke. Actually they went woke years ago. I'll explain. Disney now has men in princess dresses at their theme parks. And MSNBC explains why boycotting left wing companies is a form of terrorism.
Ep.1173
- - -
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
- - -
DailyWire+:
Get 30% off Jeremy’s Razors products here: https://bit.ly/3xuFD43
Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
PureTalk - Switch to PureTalk and get 50% off your first month. Use promo code Walsh at checkout! https://bit.ly/42PmqaX
Innovation Refunds - Learn more about Innovation Refunds at https://bit.ly/3LEwYnO.
Genucel - 70% off the Most Popular Package + FREE SHIPPING + Free Spa Essentials at https://bit.ly/428Hmtq
- - -
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 Walsh Show, the struggle sessions are ramping up in preparation for Pride Month.
Yesterday, a professional baseball player groveled and apologized for publicly supporting the Target boycott.
It's one of the most pathetic caves we've seen recently, and we need to start calling this kind of cowardice out.
Also, Chick-fil-A goes woke.
Actually, they went woke years ago.
I'll explain.
Disney now has men in princess dresses at their theme parks.
And MSNBC explains why boycotting left-wing companies is a form of terrorism.
All of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
I say a lot of things that make a lot of people angry, and this tends to scare off advertisers.
That's just part of the bargain.
That's why I'm so grateful for partners like Pure Talk, who stand behind me and my show, no matter the consequences they might face.
That takes real courage on their part.
It really does.
Pure Talk shares my values, which is why we've made them the official cell phone wireless partner of The Daily Wire.
That's not the only reason, though.
Pure Talk offers the most dependable 5G network in the U.S.
I use it myself.
It's a great product.
So you're not just buying it because you're supporting the cause.
You're buying that, but also it's a great product and a great service.
Their plans are top tier, but at a fraction of the cost of AT&T, Verizon, or T-Mobile, you can get unlimited text, talk, and unlimited data with a mobile hotspot for just $55 a month.
You vote with how you spend your money, so stop supporting woke wireless companies that don't support you.
Instead, go to puretalk.com slash Walsh.
You'll get great coverage, and you'll save while you're doing it.
When you go to puretalk.com slash Walsh, you'll save an additional 50% off your first month because they actually value you, if you can imagine that.
That's puretalk.com slash Walsh.
Pure Talk.
Wireless for Americans.
If you lived in China in the mid-20th century, you would be very familiar with the concept of struggle sessions.
During these displays of ritual humiliation, those judged to be enemies of the regime were publicly denounced and shamed.
A Wall Street Journal op-ed a few years ago described these ceremonies, quote, In the struggle sessions, the accused, often teachers suspected of lacking proletarian feeling, were paraded through streets and campuses, sometimes stadiums.
It was important always to have a jeering crowd.
It was important that the electric feeling that comes with the possibility of murder be present.
Dunce caps, sometimes waste baskets, were placed on the victim's head and placards stipulating their crimes hung from their necks.
The victims were accused, berated, assaulted, many falsely confessed in the vain hope of mercy.
Now, an important feature of the struggle session is that friends and colleagues and spouses and children were set against the person who'd been accused.
Those closest to the class enemy had to show their loyalty to the regime by betraying their friends or even their own blood.
The point behind all this was to get the alleged wrongdoer to confess and repent.
Whether they were guilty of any crime or not.
Like I said, it hardly mattered whether they were guilty.
Sometimes, though, it took a lot of persuading.
And the Wall Street Journal article offers a vivid anecdote of what was sometimes involved in this.
Quote, the Chinese Catholic Margaret Chu, a medical lab assistant, was dragged into the office of her labor camp in 1968 and made to answer invented charges.
Quote, their real motive was once and again to force me to admit all my alleged crimes.
She wrote decades later, I did not commit any crimes.
I asserted.
She was accused again, roughed up.
She denied her guilt.
Quote, immediately two people jumped on me and cut off half my hair.
She was tortured, left in handcuffs for a hundred days, and imprisoned for years.
While being tortured, she sometimes prayed for death so her suffering would stop.
Now, That was a struggle session in Maoist China in the 1960s, but you've probably heard the phrase used to describe circumstances in Western society in the year 2023, and we do indeed have our own version of these humiliation rituals.
In our case, the methods used to disgrace and humiliate the accused will often be less violent.
Often less violent, not always.
But in many ways, that only makes the humiliation worse in the end.
I mean, it's one thing to fold after weeks of physical torture.
Almost anyone would.
It's another thing to fold after a few hours of mean comments on the Internet.
But for many people, that's all it takes.
The Postmillennial reports on just the latest example of this.
Quote, Toronto Blue Jays pitcher Anthony Bass apologized on Tuesday for sharing a social media post that explained why Christians should participate in boycotting companies like Target and Bud Light, who have been at the height of national scrutiny over their failed marketing campaigns chalked full of LGBTQ propaganda.
Bass briefly shared the faith-based video to his Instagram stories on Monday evening, which called on Christians to stop patronizing US companies that go against biblical teachings, but then quickly deleted it following backlash.
According to USA Today, the original video that Bash shared took aim at those companies saying, quote,
"Here's the reason, biblically, why I believe Christians have got to be boycotting Target, Bud Light, and any other
corporation that's pushing the things they're pushing. This is evil. This is demonic. We won't
stand for it.
We're not going to go to the stores anymore, and we're not going to give you our money."
That's what the video said.
Despite the post only being up for a brief amount of time, it was long enough for the outrage mob to come after Bass, who claims to be a devout Christian.
Now, that very mild Instagram video, which just points out, just says what's happening, we're not going to go to the stores anymore, calls it demonic, which it literally is.
I mean, Target was actually selling satanic merchandise.
That's what they did.
Posted for only a brief period of time was enough to provoke outrage from the left, and it was helped along by Bass' own team throwing him under the bus, of course.
The Blue Jays put out a statement clarifying that, quote, individual player sentiments are not representative of the club's beliefs.
And then the team went on to explain that, quote, the Blue Jays bring millions of fans together across Canada and are committed to providing an inclusive and welcoming experience for all.
The Blue Jays are proud to celebrate LGBTQ2S Plus Pride Month, including a special fourth annual pride weekend at the ballpark, June 9th and 10th, and demonstrations of allyship all month long around the ballpark.
That's what the team said, and then Bass followed a short time later with his own groveling statement.
Watch.
I recognize yesterday I made a post that was hurtful to the Pride community, which includes friends of mine and close family members of mine, and I am truly sorry for that.
I made a post.
I made a post that was hurtful.
with them my actions yesterday. I apologize with them. And as of right now I'm using the Blue Jays
resources to better educate myself to make better decisions moving forward. The ballpark is for
everybody. We include all fans at the ballpark and we want to welcome everybody. That's all I have to say. Thank you.
I made a post. I made a post that was hurtful. It was a hurtful post. The ballpark's for everybody.
What did he say that would contradict that?
When did he ever imply that the ballpark isn't for everybody?
Did Anthony Bass say that gay people aren't welcome at the Toronto Blue Jays stadium?
Is that what he said?
Did he say that if he sees a gay person that stands, he's gonna throw a line drive right at their face?
I mean, is that what he said?
He didn't say anything about gay people.
He was talking about Target and Bud Light.
Well, are there fans that would hear that Anthony Bass supports boycotting Bud Light and Target and then interpret that as they aren't welcome in the stadium because they're gay or whatever?
Are there fans who would interpret it that way?
If they would interpret it that way, that's their problem.
Okay, if you're that stupid and that sensitive that you feel like you're not even welcome in a stadium because one guy on the field has a point of view that you disagree with, that's your problem.
It's not anybody else's problem.
Now, as we know, the left loves nothing more than to castrate people, especially children, but not every castration is performed medically.
What you just witnessed is more of a spiritual and emotional castration.
That was a man utterly debasing himself, sacrificing his dignity and his masculinity on the LGBT altar, giving up everything, forfeiting his good name, his self-respect, all in exchange, once again, for nothing.
The LGBT mob, as always, demands total acquiescence, absolute submission.
You must give up your values, your beliefs, your sense of right and wrong, your common sense, your faith, your understanding of basic biological reality, your soul.
And in return, they give you nothing.
That's the deal.
They say to you, like they said to Anthony Bass, you give us everything and we will give you nothing.
Nothing but more demands and more accusations.
Because nothing is ever good enough.
That's why the activist media responded to this apology by demanding that Anthony Bass still be fired.
Yahoo Sports published an article by Nick Ashbourne with this headline, Blue Jays can't roster Anthony Bass and keep his views at arm's length.
Ashbourne goes on to explain that quote when Bass shared a video to his Instagram story that strongly endorsed boycotting
target due to the company's pro LGBTQ 2s plus initiatives he took the step from controversy
into bigotry as long as he's wearing a blue jays uniform That's a stain the club can't scrub out
He's a stain Referring to a person as a stain
And then he then spent several paragraphs demanding that The baseball players career should come to an end and
warning that his team better not stand by him quote in any way shape or form
[BLANK_AUDIO]
His team has received this message, by the way, loud and clear.
The Blue Jays manager told the media yesterday that, quote, we're not going to pretend like this never happened.
We're not going to pretend like it's the end and move on.
There are definitely more steps that we're going to have to follow.
This is what Anthony Bass gets for bowing before the LGBT cult and apologizing for daring to have his own point of view.
The consequence that he was trying to avoid will likely happen regardless.
See, the left, they take hostages, they make demands, and then they receive the ransom, and they execute the hostage anyway.
This is how it goes every single time.
And yet somehow their ransom demands are still met every single time.
Or almost every time.
Keep in mind also that Anthony Bass is 35 years old.
He's a multi-millionaire.
He's near the end of his baseball career anyway.
What would he really lose by simply standing by his own words?
What is actually at stake for him?
Now there are some who Well, I can tell you that I am not judging from a distance.
all the Anthony Bass's of the world, all the other people who are the cowards
Okay?
who cave to the slightest pressure from the left.
And they say that we can't know what it's like to be in their position.
It's easy to judge from a distance.
Well, I can tell you that I am not judging from a distance.
Okay, I'm in the thick of it too.
And I can say that, yes, the average person doesn't fully understand,
nor do they anticipate the level of outrage they will encounter if they wade into these waters.
They do not realize just how vicious and personal and ruthless the LGBT cult can be when you dare to disagree with them publicly.
The moment you cross them, you have unpersoned yourself in their eyes.
You are not a human anymore.
You are some sort of animal to be caged and tranquilized and maybe put down.
They will try to beat you down, they will rip you to shreds, they will absolutely set out to destroy your life and the lives of anyone close to you.
I have tried to explain this many times, okay?
I have talked about my own experiences, how my opposition to the LGBT agenda and trans ideology has led to me being doxed and hacked and threatened and smeared relentlessly and without end every day.
When I say, for instance, that my family needs 24-hour armed security in our home, I am not saying that for dramatic effect.
It's literally true.
And the reason that I share these experiences, though I haven't even told you the half of it, trust me, is that I want people to be prepared for the fight that they're getting themselves into.
I don't want them to be blindsided.
That's why I talk about this.
And yet people still don't know what it's like until they see it up close.
They just don't know until they see it.
Okay?
Because it's true.
If you stand off at a distance and you've never really gone up against this mob in any kind of substantive way, and then you hear from people who have and they try to tell you what it's like, it's easy to say, oh, it's not that bad, come on, you're exaggerating.
And then the letters start coming to your home from anonymous senders, you know, making threats against your family.
Like, once that happens, you realize, oh, okay, this is serious.
But no matter how many times we've warned about this, invariably, people are shocked, and many turn around and run for the hills.
So, as someone who knows very well just how fierce and merciless the backlash can be, I still say, That there is no excuse for this kind of cowardice.
We have made too many excuses for too long.
Yes, it is difficult to withstand the pressure.
Yes, the leftist mob is vicious and deranged.
Okay.
So what?
Sometimes you simply have to just do the difficult thing.
Sometimes you have to give the mob the middle finger and let the chips fall where they may.
For years and years, very few people have been willing to do that, which has only emboldened the left and given them the power that they now wield.
And now the cowards want to use that power imbalance as an excuse for continuing to be cowards.
No, it doesn't work that way.
If you're a coward, it's your fault we're in this position in the first place.
You don't get to hide behind the consequences of your own actions, or inaction in this case.
Enough hiding.
Stand up straight for a change and let yourself be counted among the sane and the decent.
Do the right thing and stick by it no matter what happens.
And if you're not willing to do that, by the way, then just shut up and don't say anything.
That's the other alternative.
It's not good.
It's not a good alternative.
But I prefer for you to say nothing.
If you can't stand by what you say, then shut your mouth and don't open it to begin with.
Just stay silent like everybody else.
Once you speak up, you have an obligation to stand by it.
And if you don't, you're just as bad as the mob you're caving to.
You're just as bad.
I have just as much contempt for you as I do for them.
Actually, you're worse.
You're worse because you're a traitor and a weakling.
In fact, because you surrender to the mob, you deserve the treatment that you get from them.
They're going to try to ruin your life anyway, and so be it.
You are not worth defending, if you won't even defend yourself.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
The CEO of Innovation Refunds and GetRefunds.com has been on TV explaining how they've helped
so many small businesses with their ERC tax refunds.
They've completed thousands of returns for different kinds of businesses, including over
$700 million for construction companies and over $200 million in restaurants, bars, and
hotels.
Innovation Refunds has hundreds of five-star Trustpilot and Google reviews, and it's certified
with the Better Business Bureau.
In just eight minutes, you can easily start the process on getrefunds.com.
You could be on your way to receiving up to $26,000 per employee.
You don't want to miss out on that.
The ERC tax credit is not a loan.
It's a refund of your already paid taxes designed to let the business owner direct the refund
money into anything the business needs to grow. It's money that you can use to
improve your business however you see fit.
So go to GetRefunds.com to start the process.
There's no upfront charge.
They don't get paid unless you get paid.
Innovation Refunds has already helped clients claim over $5 billion in payroll tax refunds through the ERC, and they may be able to help your business too.
So go to GetRefunds.com or download the app from the App Store today.
That's GetRefunds.com today.
We should acknowledge that there are a few bright spots in professional baseball.
Yesterday, while Anthony Bass was groveling on his hands and knees, pleading for a mercy that he will never receive, there were other baseball players who actually came out and did well.
They said the right things.
Whether they stand by it remains to be seen, but let's hope they do.
Trevor Williams, a pitcher for the Washington Nationals, put out a statement blasting the L.A.
Dodgers for inviting the satanic drag nuns for their upcoming Pride Night festivities.
He called the decision grossly disrespectful and wrong, which, of course, it is.
He's right about that.
And then a few players on the Dodgers have also spoken up, starting with the team's pitcher, Clayton Kershaw.
Soon another pitcher, Blake Trennan, followed suit.
Warning that the inclusion of the drag nuns will have the effect of, quote, disenfranchising a large community and promoting hate of Christians and people of faith.
And he's right about that, obviously.
There are at least some men with spines who still are in the professional sports world, but not nearly enough.
And that's the point.
But there are enough to at least shame the cowards.
And that's what you have to think about.
If you're ever too afraid to speak out and too afraid to do the right thing and take a stand and all that, look at the people who have and ask yourself why you can't if they can.
So, if Clayton Kershaw and Trevor Williams, if they could take a stand, then why can't Anthony Bess?
Any excuse about why he can't do it goes out the window in the face of people who have done it.
And this, you know, this is generally a good rule for life.
This is a good rule of thumb in life.
Don't say that you can't endure something if other people have endured it.
There's no reason why you can't if other people have.
All the young adults who don't want to move out of the house and don't want to move out of their parents' house, they don't want to live on their own and pay for their own bills and support themselves because they'll be deprived of the luxuries and comfort and the safety net.
And they don't want to do that.
And they say, well, I can't do that.
I can't do that right now.
I can't.
I'm only 27.
I can't be expected to live on my own.
Well, what do you mean you can't?
Millions of people have done exactly what you say you can't do.
So why are you a special case?
What do you mean you can't do it?
That's a different topic, but the principle remains the same.
So just because someone else does something doesn't mean you can do that, depending on what it is, right?
But But if someone, if people can endure something, they can endure it, then you need to think about whether your excuses make any sense.
And they probably don't.
Daily Wire has this report.
Fast food restaurant chain Chick-fil-A received backlash on social media as conservatives learned that the firm's corporate office advances a number of diversity initiatives, a revelation which came as brands such as Bud Light and Target faced criticism for embracing woke ideology.
Social media users noted that Chick-fil-A, which has a longstanding reputation as a firm run on the basis of conservative and Christian principles, hired Eric Reynolds as vice president of diversity, equity, and inclusion two years ago.
Chick-fil-A prominently features a number of diversity programs meant only for females and members of racial minorities on a DEI segment of its website, which surfaced in the days after Target and Bud Light witnessed sales and market capitalization hits.
Beyond collaborations with various national diverse professional development organizations such as the Women's Food Service Forums, the National Black MBA Association, and the Association of Latino Professionals of America, The restaurant chain offers community groups such as Women in Business, the Black Employee Resource Group, and the Chick-fil-A Green Team.
The company also seeks to develop, quote, mentorship, development, and partnership opportunities for minority-owned businesses to strategically engage with their supply chain.
Chick-fil-A additionally includes sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression in its employment non-discrimination statement alongside race, sex, religion, and veteran status.
Now, first of all, as others have pointed out, this is no surprise from Chick-fil-A.
They didn't go woke just now.
If there was a specific moment when they went woke, or at least when it became apparent to the public that they went woke, that was back, and I think this was in 2020, when Dan Cathy, the CEO of the company, a couple years ago, on stage at some kind of event, Got on his knees and shined the shoes of a black man on stage as a show of racial submission.
So it was another struggle session, ritual humiliation, that he willingly engaged in.
And this was the CEO of Chick-fil-A.
So after this moment, if you still had any notion that Chick-fil-A wasn't woke, well, I don't know where you got that idea from.
Let's go back and watch that again.
Here it is.
A story that was shared with me by a dear friend who shared with me about a revival that was taking place at a church in Texas.
And at that revival on the front seat was an older African American man that was sitting there.
And this young man got up.
That was there in that service and he'd been so gripped with conviction about the racism that was in that local community in a small town in Texas that he took a shoe brush and he walked over to this elderly gentleman and he knelt on his knees and began to shine his shoes.
And tears began to flow in that service.
It was an attitude of conviction.
So I invite folks just to put some words to action here.
And if we need to find somebody that needs to have their shoe shined, we need to just go right on over and shine their shoes.
And whether they got tennis shoes on or not, maybe they got sandals on, it really doesn't matter.
But there's a time in which we need to have, you know, some personal action here.
Maybe we need to give him a hug, too, brother.
And some stock in Chick-fil-A.
[laughter]
But I bought about 1,500 of these, and I gave them to all our Chick-fil-A operators and staff
a number of years ago.
And so any expressions of a contrite heart, of a sense of humility, a sense of shame, a sense of embarrassment, begin with an apologetic heart.
Well, certainly you get embarrassment out of that.
So if he has a sense of embarrassment, if you have a sense of embarrassment while bending down to shine a black man's shoes as a show of white guilt, the sense of embarrassment is not from the fact that you're white, it's from what you are doing.
You are embarrassing yourself.
And did I hear that right?
Because I've seen that clip before.
I think I, maybe I never watched that clip all the way to the end because it's unbearable.
Although I just made you Barrett just now.
But did he say at the end there that he gave shoe shining kits to his employees in case they come across any black people whose shoes they want to shine?
Did I get that right?
I think I did.
So yes, Chick-fil-A is woke.
And even putting aside the pathetic display that we just watched there, the diversity, equity, and inclusion stuff is always left-wing indoctrination.
It's always woke.
And I've heard some people say that, hey, just because they have a DEI initiative doesn't automatically mean they're kowtowing to the left.
Yes, it does.
That's what these initiatives are.
Like, there's no such thing as a DEI initiative that is conservative or is neutral.
It is all born from left-wing ideology.
All of it.
And automatically, if it's a diversity, equity, and inclusion program, they mean diversity, equity, and inclusion in the way that the left means it.
That's automatically how it's meant.
There can be a context where you can use the word diversity and it's not a bad thing or a left-wing thing.
Right?
But if it's in this context, then the left owns that.
And so they mean diversity in the way that the left means it.
And how does the left mean it?
They mean it exactly the way that we just saw there from Dan Cathey.
Which is anti-white, white people debasing themselves, white people are guilty, white people have to apologize, fingers pointed at white people, it's all your fault.
That's what they mean.
That's what diversity, we talked about this last week, that's what diversity always means.
Diversity means anti-white when it's coming from the left.
If Chick-fil-A has diversity initiatives, that means it's an anti-white initiative.
And that's why they have programs to help minority-owned businesses.
Or women-owned businesses.
So white males, they don't need your help?
It's horrific.
It's wrong.
It's evil.
It is evil to go out as a wealthy corporation and say, we're going to help all the women and minority-owned businesses.
You know there are a lot of white males out there who own businesses and they're serving their communities and they're struggling.
And they could really use the help too.
So to skip over somebody because they're a white male is disgusting.
It's awful.
We should condemn it.
For the same reason everybody would condemn it if it was a diversity initiative where we're going to help all the business owners except for black women.
Can you even imagine that?
Can you imagine any sort of initiative, any kind of program that any corporation or any government entity endorsed where we're going to go out and we're going to find business owners and we're going to help all the business owners, except if you're a black woman, we're not going to help you.
And it wouldn't, it wouldn't, then everybody would say, well, that's, that's incredibly racist and sexist.
And, you know, it wouldn't do any good to say, well, no, it's not.
It's not nothing against the black women.
What do you mean?
You're specifically excluding them.
Of course, it's something against them.
Well, no.
I mean, just because we have a program to help everybody except this one group that we've singled out doesn't mean it's nothing personal against them.
Well, then why aren't you helping them?
Why not have a program to just help everybody?
Why not help any business owner?
Here's a crazy idea.
What about looking at the actual businesses themselves and making your judgment based on that?
Finding the businesses that are especially struggling, finding the ones that are especially important to their communities, whatever.
So yeah, this is woke, this is, it's not just left wing, it is far left, it is gross and disgusting and we should condemn it.
And I don't wanna hear from it.
There have been some conservatives, even ones that I respect, who have said, well, look, we don't wanna, you know, we don't wanna, The perfect is the enemy of the good and all that, and Chick-fil-A is generally on our side, so let's not go after them.
Yeah, they have a DEI initiative, but who cares?
Yeah, they're doing programs to help everybody except for white men.
They're singling white men.
White men, get on your knees and shine the shoes of a black man.
We're not going to help you.
Yeah, they're doing all that, but otherwise, they're good.
No, I mean, it's a tired slogan at this point, but it is true to say, this is why we lose.
It's because of that kind of attitude.
We gotta stop making exceptions.
We have to stop extending grace to these people that will never extend it back to us.
Like, call things what they are, and let's just be—and have zero tolerance, okay?
A zero-tolerance policy.
As conservatives, we should have a zero-tolerance policy for any DEI, any diversity initiative, anything anti-white, anything that pushes the trans agenda, pride flags.
All of that is far-left extremism.
It is harmful.
It is poisonous to society.
All of it.
And we should have zero tolerance for all of it.
That's the only way.
It is the only way.
Because the other way we've tried.
So if you're one of the people that says, well, let's, you know, let's, uh, we don't have to throw it all out.
Let's try to be a little bit more, you know, um, find a middle ground.
If you're one of those people, you are representing the viewpoint.
That's not a new idea.
This is, this has, that has been the strategy up until now.
Has it worked?
It's worked for the left.
Hasn't worked well for us.
We only started making real progress in the culture as conservatives when we drew a hard line, okay?
Not a line in the sand, a line in the cement that is not going to move.
When we started drawing the hard lines, that's when we started making progress.
When we started to look at entire categories of things and said, all of that is wrong, we don't want any of it, we have no tolerance for it, get rid of all of it.
Okay, the transing of kids.
Finally, the right draws a hard line and says, all of that is terrible.
I don't want any of it.
Don't bring the trans stuff around kids, period.
None of it.
Don't put it on a baby onesie.
Don't put it in the front of your store so kids can see it.
Don't put it in the schools.
Don't put it in the textbooks.
And when we said that, we finally started making progress.
But only then.
It's the same thing with all this LGBT pride stuff and the DEI stuff.
There is no way to like, well, we'll take, we want little, little pieces of it are okay.
You know, and then we'll get rid of the bad stuff.
The only way is, is push all of it aside.
Make all of it toxic and punish, punish the people who promote it and engage in it.
That's the only way.
All right, if you want to know how bad it's gotten at Disney, here's what is happening at their California theme park.
This is the, I guess, their princess boutique where little girls go to buy princess outfits, and they are helped by princesses who work there.
And here's one of the quote-unquote princesses.
Okay, so you saw there, and as if to prove my point, that's exactly what I'm talking about.
I'm here to shop you around and make all your selections for the day.
Okay, so you saw there and as if to prove my point, that's exactly what I'm talking
about.
That's why we need to reject all of this.
This is when Disney starts going woke and they start introducing the LGBT pride stuff
and the trans stuff.
When they start doing this, that's where it leads.
The only way it doesn't lead there is if they reject all of it.
But it leads to a man, a grown man with a mustache in a princess outfit, I'm standing there and talking to a confused little girl who's just trying to go buy a princess dress, okay?
She doesn't need to be wrapped up into your confusion.
Okay?
And the little game, this guy, this game he wants to play, because it makes him feel good, for whatever reason, to dress up that way and present himself that way makes him feel good.
Well, that little girl doesn't need to be involved in that.
Okay, you want to go to your own home, And wear the princess outfit in your own home where no one else can see you?
Well, uh, you know, there's nothing anyone will say about that because we don't know.
You know, what everyone always says, what people do in the privacy of their own home is none of your business.
Well, that certainly is not always the case.
There are plenty of things you can do in your home that are our business.
But, uh, but yeah, if you actually are in your own home dressed like that, nobody would know.
I wouldn't know.
Nobody would know.
You come out in public that way, especially go to Disneyland that way, talking to kids that way, well, now it is everybody's business.
And you're trying to involve them.
And this is always where it leads.
To exactly that.
All right, two things here that are related.
This is from the Post Millennial.
A new report from the Media Research Center has revealed that Biden's Department of Homeland Security has associated Turning Point USA, PragerU, and other conservative organizations with terrorist and Nazi groups.
The targeted violence and terrorism prevention grant program under the Biden administration gave a total of 80 grants costing taxpayers just under $40 million per the report by Luis Cornelio and Tim Kilcullen.
One of these grant recipients was the University of Dayton, which MRC stated was among the most radical grantees and was awarded $352,000 to create the Prevent OHS program, which promised to draw on the expertise of the University of Dayton to fight domestic violent extremism and hate movements.
The university's grant application approved by the Department of Homeland Security contained a graphic placing Turning Point USA, the Make America Great Again movement, Quillette, PragerU, and the Heritage Foundation on a pyramid of far-right radicalization.
Organizations such as Turning Point were placed one level lower than Nazis, with Fox News, the National Rifle Association, and the RNC at the bottom of the pyramid.
So, lower than Nazis.
Okay, so the Nazis are the most extreme, and then you've got like Turning Point USA, who are almost Nazis, and then you have Fox News who are on the Nazi continuum.
I have to say, I'm, and I'm just skimming through this because maybe I missed it, but no, it looks like I didn't.
We didn't make the pyramid.
The Daily Wire didn't make the pyramid.
I'm not on it.
I take that.
I mean, congratulations to Charlie Kirk and Turning Point USA.
You guys deserve the accolades as well.
But I am a little upset about that.
I mean, it's been well established that we are also terrorists, okay?
And we're also Nazis.
We've been told that.
And so I think we deserve to be on the pyramid.
I mean, the fact that they still put Fox News, they're still classifying Fox News as this extremist organization, Nazi terrorist extremism.
When, as we've reviewed recently, Fox News, I mean, they put together packages and reports promoting the transing of kids.
They have a 100% rating from the human rights campaign.
They let men use the women's room in their own studios.
Because they're full-on proponents of gender ideology.
And yet they still get labeled terrorists.
Which only shows, again, why there's no point in surrendering to the left or, you know, giving them an inch at all.
Because even when you do, you can give them an inch, you can give them a mile, and you can give them everything, and you're still going to be a terrorist.
A guest on MSNBC also raised this issue of terrorism, and he says that, you know, the terrorism problem on the right is much broader than this because anybody involved in the boycott of Bud Light or Target is also a terrorist, he explained.
Let's watch.
When Target caves into this, then it says that the moment you threaten the employees of even a very large corporation, you get to control its policies.
This is economic terrorism.
Literally terrorism.
Creating fear among the workers and forcing the corporations to sell the things you want and not sell the things you don't.
Economic terrorism.
If you stage a boycott.
If you participate in a boycott, then you are committing economic terrorism.
Now, I haven't checked.
I don't even know who this guy is.
Didn't get his name.
But I am still going to go out on a limb.
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that in no other context has he ever said that a boycott is economic terrorism.
I'm going to assume that.
Especially when the left is boycotting someone they have never called an economic terrorism.
The boycott of Chick-fil-A, which was an abysmal failure.
An abysmal failure, the left went after, I mean they took their best, now I'm getting distracted, but I'm back on Chick-fil-A again.
The left took their best shot at Chick-fil-A, and it failed spectacularly.
And still, Chick-fil-A surrenders to them anyway.
I mean, it's one of the few examples of the left going after a corporation.
The corporation, you know, doesn't back down.
In fact, what happens is people end up rallying around Chick-fil-A.
I mean, I still remember years ago when the Chick-fil-A boycott first started.
And like a day later, I went to go to Chick-fil-A, you know, because I wanted a chicken sandwich and it's delicious, but also I wanted to support them.
And I was in line for like an hour, which is saying a lot for Chick-fil-A because we know that they move that line along.
But I was in line that long because there were so many people.
I mean, it was like blocks and blocks of people who were there just to support Chick-fil-A.
So it backfires tremendously.
And yet they still, they still give them everything they want in the end.
I'm going to guess that that guy never said that the Chick-fil-A boycott is economic terrorism against Chick-fil-A.
It only works on this end.
And you know what?
I'm fine with it, if that's what you want to call it.
I mean, obviously it's absurd, but I'm not going to spend any time explaining or defending us against that charge.
We're not terrorists!
No, let me prove to you why we're not terrorists!
Whatever.
If that's how you want to see it?
You know, if you're terrified?
Because that's what he's saying, is that it's terrorism because he is scared.
He's scared on behalf of Target and Bud Light, the poor corporations, the poor conglomerate multinational corporations.
Won't someone think of them finally?
And so he's scared, and that means that we're terrorists.
And all right, fine.
If that's what you mean.
If by terrorists you mean that we strike fear into your heart deeply.
Because we're actually, some of us anyway, are taking a stand and making some progress?
And you're afraid of that?
Then good.
I'm glad you are.
Yeah, fine.
Call us whatever you want.
It doesn't matter to me.
Just means you're scared, and I'm glad you are.
All right, here's something I gotta show you, maybe not quite as serious, but this account on Twitter called Daily Loud tweeted a video that went very viral, 20,000 retweets, 150,000 likes, lots of comments.
The caption of this video is, quote, incredible moment captured on video as a shark takes an injured sea turtle to humans on a boat so they can help save it.
And then they posted the video of a shark supposedly rescuing a sea turtle and bringing it to humans on a boat to help because it had like a rope around its neck or something.
And let's just play a little bit of this video here so you can see it.
Oh my god!
Look, a shark is carrying a turtle on the sea, riding the wind and waves.
After seeing human ships from afar, the shark worked hard to escort the turtle over.
With the assistance of the shark, the turtle struggled to pounce on the steps of the ship.
This incredible scene happened to be discovered by the boy on the ship after confirming the discovery of sea turtles by humans.
The shark turned around and left gracefully.
The boy believes that the turtle must need help when it actively approaches humans, so he pulled the turtle out of the water.
So this turtle, oh there he is, he's got the rope around his neck.
Must be, it was a racist attack.
Some dolphin's got him, said this is MAGA country, put the rope around his neck.
It was a racist attack. Some dolphins got him, so this is MAGA country. Put the rope around his neck. Anyway, alright,
we can turn it off. So, that's what happened.
The turtle was struggling in the water.
The shark saw the turtle and then saw the boat and said, I gotta do something about this.
You know, this poor turtle.
And I would take the rope off, but I only have fins and flippers, so I can't do it.
And then the shark said, oh, there's humans.
They have opposable thumbs.
Let me bring the shark over.
And then he did.
Now that video is, I mean, obviously, I hope I don't have to tell you, is, of course, totally fake.
And they spliced together two different videos, actually, and then edited it to make it look like the shark brought the turtle in for help, when in reality, in the actual real world, the fisherman rescued the turtle from a shark that was about to eat it.
That's what actually happened.
Which, by the way, that doesn't make any sense.
And I don't like these videos that you see.
Like, the real video, I don't like either, where you see these videos of people, they're rescuing an animal from a predator.
So the shark is going to starve because you happen to think that turtles are cuter or something?
You have this weird hierarchy that you've established in your own head about animals, and so you're going to take food away from the shark?
Rescuing an animal from being eaten is another way of saying that you're forcing another animal to starve.
Or you're just ensuring that a different animal will get eaten.
So you took that food away from the shark, he's just going to go and eat some other animal that wouldn't have died if you hadn't intervened.
But that's not really the point.
My point is that thousands and thousands of people actually took this video seriously and they retweeted it and left there all these comments saying, oh my gosh, that's so heartwarming.
Taking it at face value, really believing that a shark rescued a turtle.
And this is the problem.
This is what we're dealing with in society, okay?
Not only are people incredibly gullible and stupid and willing to believe anything.
I mean, and I think there's research that shows this as well, the decline in IQ scores.
It's a real thing.
Idiocracy, you know, will go down as one of the most prophetic works of fiction probably ever made.
And we are getting dumber, as we actually are.
So it's not your imagination.
When you look around and it seems like, wow, people are really stupid these days.
You're not imagining it.
That's actually happening.
And it's not just a phenomenon online.
If you go on the internet, you see it.
You know, you're able to encounter stupidity, but it doesn't just exist there.
So that's part of the problem, is that people are very stupid and will believe anything.
And then also, adding to that is that in our society we have this insanely anthropomorphized, Disney-fied view of animals.
We think of animals as these rational creatures who engage in reasoning like we do, and have emotions like we do, and we can't wrap our heads around the fact that that's not the case.
People are different.
We are distinct.
And there's a reason why people have civilizations and cities and art and poetry and governments and, you know, even if the left is trying to destroy all that, we still have all of that for now.
And none of that exists among sharks or pigeons or lions or, you know, dogs or whatever.
Because we are different.
And we can think that way.
So we will see, you know, a struggling animal and we'll say, oh, I have to help that animal.
Animals don't think that way.
So, just wanted to establish that.
It's very important.
And debunking a little bit of misinformation is also, I think, an important thing to do.
Let's get to the comment section.
♪ Who makes a Twitter mob fly off the handle with rage ♪
♪ Who's to blame ♪ ♪ It's a sweet baby gang ♪
Did you know that our friends at GenuCell have upgraded their most popular package
to feature their top-selling, deep-firming vitamin C serum plus ultra-retinal moisturizer
with natural retinal alternative?
You probably didn't, but now you do, because right now you can take advantage of this limited-time package upgrade for 70% off.
Why waste time and money to go get work done on your face when you can get GenuCell skincare shipped right to your door?
GenuCell Secret is a family recipe for over 20 years that makes it safe for all skin types and perfect for both men and women.
Made by a compounding pharmacist in small batches, And it's always safe, cruelty-free, and natural as well.
You know, our show intern Holly is already starting to develop disgusting under-eye bags after working here for only a few weeks.
I told her if she doesn't get that horrendous flaw under control, I won't be able to trust her to work on my show.
I only accept people with perfect faces.
Like mine, working on this show.
So, Holly has done the only thing that can be done in this situation and has started using GenuCell.
Go to GenuCell.com slash Walsh and try GenuCell's most popular package for 70% off featuring both GenuCell's Ultra Retinal and GenuCell's Firming Serum.
Get a complimentary spa essentials box with every package order plus free upgrade to priority shipping.
Go to GenuCell.com slash Walsh.
That's GenuCell.com slash Walsh.
Kabir says Matt is right about the feminization of man, that is an issue, but his obsession about kids is a bit tiring.
I married at 25 and me and my wife had two kids because we simply couldn't handle more.
It's okay, we are very happy with two.
Yet he says people just have one or two kids because they marry too old and can't have more and he presents it like if you're crazy, if you just have one or two.
He's forgetting that some people simply do not want six kids like him.
Not everybody has to be a clone of himself to be okay.
In India, we have a huge problem with overpopulation.
Having kids just for the sake of it creates poverty and a lot of unhappiness.
Well, you say that you're happy with only two kids.
And I have, I don't know you, so I have no reason to think that that's not the case.
The only reason I have to think that's not the case is that you feel the need to justify it to me when I never said anything to the contrary.
I never said that everyone has to have six kids.
Of course not.
And, you know, we also, we did, like, the two-for-one deal twice.
So, we kind of, I was going to say that we got to six kids the easy way, but I'm not going to say that having two twins is the easy way.
But, I mean, the efficient and quick way.
And that's also not something we engineered.
It just sort of happened that way.
So, obviously, I don't think, like, if we didn't have multiples, then we would have four kids right now.
So, obviously, I'm not saying that everyone has to have six kids.
That would be an absurd point of view.
I do think that all married couples should be open to life and should be open to having kids.
My point about the number of kids, a couple of points.
One, in the monologue yesterday, was like, first of all, establishing that this is happening.
That the number of kids people have is decreasing.
The number of kids that couples have is decreasing.
And it may be the case for you that you got married at 25 and only had two kids.
But the average age of marriage is going up.
And for men now it's 30, and for women I think it's like 28, 29, pushing 30.
And with no signs of that trend stopping.
We are going to get to the point where the average age of marriage is like in the 30s.
And that's a big part of the reason why people are having fewer kids.
Like, you get married later, there's less time to have kids, that fertility window is closing as you get married later, and so you end up having fewer kids.
That's part of the way that we explain the trend.
And you're doing this thing, Kabir, where people, where, you know, I'm talking about, I'm talking in general, about general principles, and you're saying, well, I'm an exception to that general principle, therefore you're wrong.
Well, okay, then you're an exception.
Like, the fact that you're 25 and you only had two kids doesn't...
Prove that there's no connection between later marriage and having fewer kids.
You see what I'm saying?
Here's the thing, Kabir.
I'm not trying to pick on you, but this is something that just frustrates me.
I need to be able to speak in general terms about societal problems.
And the reason for that is because I don't know every single person on earth.
Okay?
I don't know you.
I've never met you.
So I can't talk about you specifically.
I can only talk in general terms about things that are happening in society.
And it's not just me, that's like anyone, when you're talking about things happening, you're talking in general terms.
And there are always going to be exceptions, there are going to be outliers and all of that.
And then we get bogged down in the exceptions and outliers because people, for some reason, are incapable of thinking in the abstract about general things, and all they can ever do is say, well, I'm an exception, I'm an outlier, and then we just get distracted dealing with all of these outlier scenarios.
And it's annoying.
And when it comes to the number of kids, so there's two points I said.
One is that people are having fewer kids and part of the reason is that people get married later.
And it's also true that on a general societal level, it is a problem for people to have only one or two kids.
And the reason why it's a problem is because now we're below replacement level.
And that's when populations decline and get older, and they become top-heavy.
And eventually you end up with a lot of old people and not a lot of young people, which means there aren't enough people to care for the old people.
There aren't enough young people to do all of the things we need done in society to keep it moving and functioning.
And so to have a declining, old, top-heavy population is bad.
It is never good.
It is always a sign that things are not going well.
And that's why, speaking in general terms, it is not good for the reproduction to be below replacement level, clearly.
And when I say that I'm against, that I don't want our reproduction rate to be below replacement level, what I'm really saying is I don't want the human race to go extinct.
That is my provocative point of view here.
Deeper Exegesis says, I feel like an alien in America when I act like my normal man self in America.
I even lost a little muscle mass because I got tired of being seen as a monster.
Well, you shouldn't feel that way, but that is precisely the goal, is to make normal people, especially normal men, but normal women too, feel like monsters and freaks.
To be normal is monstrous.
That's exactly how they want you to feel, and you should not give them what they want.
Obsessed Zendaya Fanatic Apparently we have some of those watching the show.
Said, did Matt Walsh do a review of The Little Mermaid as an excuse to bash Burger King?
LOL.
I did spend a lot of time on The Little Mermaid topic talking about Burger King.
I didn't originally plan it that way.
But I don't need any excuse to bash Burger King.
Nobody needs an excuse.
You don't need any time is a good time to bash Burger King.
And finally, Curtis says, Awkwafina has ruined everything she's been in.
What a horrific human being.
So she's been in other things?
What do you mean?
This person has been in other stuff, like other films?
She hasn't been in other songs, has she?
Please don't tell me, when you say she's ruined everything she's been in, please don't tell me that that means you're talking about songs, that she's actually... So she's responsible for that Little Mermaid song, which is potentially the worst song ever made.
And I hope you're not informing me that she has other songs out there, that she actually does this professionally, and that's what she came up with.
I prefer not to believe that, so I'm just going to ignore that.
You can never start thinking about Father's Day gifts too early.
And a gift of Jeremy's razors is dual purpose.
Not only are you helping your dad look his best each day, you're also kicking woke out of his bathroom.
There is no other razor that can do that.
Shaving is not just about grooming, it's about embracing masculinity.
And I don't know, shaving off your beard is embracing masculinity.
Well, anyway, we'll go with it.
And feeling like a real man.
Saving 30% off on Jeremy's Razor Select Bundles and Razor Starter Sets as part of our Father's Day sale.
You can go to Jeremy'sRazors.com today and help dad kick woke out of his bathroom.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
On the show the other day, we talked about the problem of plummeting testosterone levels in young men.
This is something that no major political figure in the country ever talks about, and with only one or two exceptions, no media outlet covers it either.
This is a potentially civilization-ending disaster unfolding in slow motion, and it's getting basically zero attention.
You're just not supposed to think about it.
Reproduction, as we just discussed, is fundamental to the survival of the species, but no one in power seems to care about it.
Whatever your position is concerning testosterone levels and all the studies on it, maybe you're really troubled by the data, maybe you secretly want civilization to die out, whatever it is, that total lack of interest is pretty remarkable if you think about it.
A core part of what makes us human, namely the ability to have children and raise a family, is in jeopardy and it's just being ignored across the board.
I mean, it's incredible really, but it is happening.
And given that it's happening, it's not hard to wonder what other issues which directly relate to the human condition and our most fundamental basic desires are off-limits or being ignored.
What else aren't we supposed to talk about?
Well, I mean, there's a lot in that category.
We'll talk about one of them now.
If you've had the misfortune of watching one of the big award shows recently, or you've paged through a clothing catalog at any point in the past few years, you probably already know the answer to that question.
But in case you're not sure, here's a little thought experiment.
I want you to take a look at this advertisement.
It's from Calvin Klein, and it was just written about a few days ago in the New York Post.
Here it is, and you can see it there.
Stare at that image for a few seconds, take it all in, look closely at the fat rolls and everything else, if you can bear it.
Remember, this is an advertisement that's going to sell you, trying to sell you on buying Calvin Klein underwear.
But what's your response to what you're seeing?
How do you feel looking at these obese, globular, gender non-conforming models as they desperately try to seduce you through the screen, hopefully to no avail?
What's your first reaction to what you're looking at?
You make a mental note of that reaction, whatever it is.
In the meantime, why don't you also look at this.
Here was the New York Post headline for a story covering this particular advertisement from Calvin Klein, quote, Calvin Klein ad with trans men wearing bra sparks comparisons to Bud Lights.
And the Post goes on to report that the ad, which features a, quote, bearded transgender man in a sports bra, has, quote, gone viral.
There's a few quotes in the article about how Calvin Klein is going woke, and now they're going broke, etc.
Calvin Klein's really stepped in it now, reports the Post.
Well, alright.
Now, compare that New York Post description to what you were thinking when you first saw those obese models.
How does the Post article match up to your initial impression of the ad?
When you stare at that image, Were you thinking about Bud Light?
Were you pondering the existence of transgender men, quote-unquote?
Were you thinking about going woke and going broke and the inevitable hit to Calvin Klein's stock price?
Probably yes, you're thinking about some of that.
But you were also thinking what a lot of people intuitively think, which is that the models in that picture are grotesque.
I mean, they're revolting.
It's ugly.
That's not a judgment of their worth as human beings.
It's not an attack on them personally, really.
It's just true.
It's an aesthetic observation.
It's really difficult to look at.
Now, we could focus on the non-binary trans stuff in the ads, but there's another point worth pondering, which is that those models are ugly.
And worse than that, they're part of a much larger effort, something we've talked about on this show before because it's important, even if it's not discussed very many other places.
And that is the effort to make everything ugly.
And you see this effort at scale.
This is a widespread phenomenon.
And it's okay to admit it.
And once you do admit it, you quickly realize there are many examples of this phenomenon across a variety of industries.
It's just never talked about.
You see it a lot in architecture.
You walk around the streets of Chicago, then take a trip to Budapest.
It's not much of a comparison.
As a country, we're not even trying anymore.
That's especially clear when it comes to popular music, where ugliness reigns supreme.
And I'm not just talking about Lizzo, though I am also talking about her.
So much of it is ugly.
The music itself is often ugly.
Sam Smith, the self-described non-binary Satanist, is another example.
Yeah, Sam Smith showed up to the Grammys with a red leather suit, along with his hat.
The hat, you know, featuring protruding horns.
Yes, his backup dancers wore devil costumes.
That's all been well-documented.
Seen a lot of coverage of all of that.
He did it precisely to attract a lot of media coverage, obviously.
The content and the messaging is all obnoxious and degenerate, but it's also very ugly.
This has been kind of a third rail for a long time.
People don't want to talk about what they know is true, which is that ugliness is now pervasive in this country.
People find indirect ways to complain about it instead.
A few years ago, for example, Abercrombie posted this image on their Instagram, and the Instagram replies and the media articles on all of this complained that Abercrombie was normalizing obesity.
Now, in truth, that's not all that Abercrombie is normalizing.
They're promoting ugliness.
And it's okay to say that, because it's true.
Now, what explains that?
Why is ugliness now ascendant?
In the past, I've offered various theories, and I think all of them tell part of the story.
But I think there's something happening on a psychological level that we need to think about.
Maybe we've gotten rid of beauty because beauty is aspirational.
We used to revere beauty as the ideal.
We admired it.
We liked to look at beautiful things.
And people.
And this gave way to lots of complaints about unrealistic beauty standards.
That was a thing people complained about in the 90s.
Beauty standards were unrealistic.
But those complaints miss the point.
Beauty is not meant to be realistic, necessarily.
It's an ideal.
And it's good to have an ideal.
A Michelangelo sculpture is realistic in the sense that out of stone he managed to carve figures that look like real human beings, so it's realistic in that sense.
But it's unrealistic in the sense that most people could never take a stone and turn it into that.
It is unrealistic.
Michelangelo sets an unrealistic standard for what constitutes artistic beauty.
And that is why it's great art.
That is why it's beautiful.
The same goes for human beings.
We used to admire great beauty in people, the kind of beauty that will be unattainable for most of us.
Most of us are not going to be, like most of us, when you see us, you're not going to think, well, that's an extremely beautiful person.
But now we prefer to elevate mediocrity.
And ugliness.
We find models who are overweight, obese.
And obesity, by the way, is always ugly because it is self-destructive.
You know, when you're looking at someone who is morbidly obese, you're looking at someone who's destroying themselves.
And if you call that beautiful, you're calling their self-destruction, their suicide, essentially.
You know, it's slow-motion suicide.
And you're looking at that and calling that beautiful.
That's what we find.
Our sculptures and our paintings are junk.
It's all dreary and hideous.
But it's attainable.
Anybody can be a model now.
Anyone can be an artist.
The beauty standard has been lowered all the way to the floor and beneath it.
You barely have to raise your foot to get over the bar anymore.
Again, there are many things motivating this assault on beauty, but I think the most prominent and powerful motivation is that potent modern combination of laziness and narcissism.
We celebrate mediocrity because it makes us feel better about ourselves.
I think it really is as simple as that in so many cases.
Everything now is filtered through the lens of self-perception, and the value of something is determined entirely based on how it makes us feel.
That's the only thing we think about.
And not just how it makes us feel, but how does it make us feel about ourselves?
That's how we judge everything.
You look at it, how does it make you feel about yourself?
Not how does it make you feel about the world, how does it make you feel about, you know, how does it make you feel about life, how does it make you feel, how does it make you feel about yourself?
And things are good if they make you feel good about yourself, and they're bad if they make you feel bad about yourself.
And that's how we end up in this inverted world where we find models who are obese and ugly.
Because they make you feel better about yourself.
Supermodels, the old-fashioned ones anyway, made us feel inferior, so we prefer fat and ugly instead.
If there was ever a sign that we're on the wrong track, that our collective ideology is failing, it's this.
You can judge cultures by what they produce.
It's always been true.
And we're not producing beauty anymore.
We're not even trying.
We're producing the opposite, and we're doing it on purpose.
And that is why, once again, the intentional uglification of society is and will always be cancelled.
