Ep. 1189 - Audiences Tricked Into Watching The Adventures Of Man-Hating Feminist Barbie
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the new Barbie movie is a smash hit at the box office. It's also the most aggressively anti-man feminist propaganda fest ever put to film. But of course the movie studio was smart enough to hide that fact in its marketing materials. Also, in an interesting twist, the state superintendent in California was thrown out of a school board meeting while trying to protest against a policy that would require schools to inform parents if their children identify as the opposite sex. The New York Times warns that you should wear a mask if you go outside. Not because of COVID, but because of the heat. And Kamala Harris goes on a speaking tour denouncing Florida schools for teaching kids that slavery is good. The only problem is that this is a total fabrication.
Ep.1189
- - -
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
- - -
DailyWire+:
Become a DailyWire+ member to watch shows, documentaries, movies, and more : https://bit.ly/3JR6n6d
Shop all 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
Public Square - Join Public Square today by visiting http://www.publicsq.com or download their free app!
CarZing - Get pre-qualified and find the best deals near you: https://carzing.com/Walsh
Good Ranchers - Get $30 off with promo code WALSH at checkout. https://bit.ly/3UywSAT
- - -
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
Today on The Matt Wall Show, the new Barbie movie is a smash hit at the box office.
It's also the most aggressively anti-man feminist propaganda fest ever put to film.
But of course, the movie studio was smart enough to hide that fact in its marketing materials.
We'll talk about that.
Also, in an interesting twist, the state superintendent in California was thrown out of a school board meeting while trying to protest against a policy that would require schools to inform parents if their children identify as the opposite sex.
The New York Times warns that you should wear a mask if you go outside, but not because of COVID, rather because of the heat.
And Kamala Harris goes on a speaking tour denouncing Florida schools for teaching kids that slavery is good.
The only problem is that this is a total fabrication, obviously.
All of that and more today on The Matt Wall Show.
This is great news for new and current PureTalk customers.
PureTalk just added data to every plan and includes a mobile hotspot with no price increase whatsoever.
If you've considered PureTalk before but haven't made the switch, take a look again for just $20 a month.
You'll get unlimited talk, text, and now 50% more 5G data plus Their new mobile hotspot.
This is why I love Pure Talk.
They're veteran-owned and only hire the best customer service team located right here in the great USA.
Most families are saving almost $1,000 a year while enjoying the most dependable 5G networks in America.
Remember, you vote with how you spend your money, so stop supporting woke wireless companies that don't support you.
When you go to puretalk.com slash walsh, you'll save an additional 50% off your first month because they actually value you.
That's puretalk.com slash walsh.
Pure Talk.
Wireless for Americans by Americans.
Last week, we discussed the impending doom of Hollywood.
As the media was frantically warning us, the entire entertainment industry was on the verge of collapse, thanks to a writer's strike, an actor's strike, and a series of supposed blockbusters that turned out to be flops.
And this was, in some ways, an ironic combination of factors, given that the quality and performance of these movies would seem to indicate that the writers and actors had already been on strike for many decades.
The average viewer will come out of the latest Hollywood dud hear that the writers had been on strike or just went on strike and respond, wait, the movie had writers?
It already seems like these films are being generated by AI, and now they really will be, and I don't think we'll be able to tell much of a difference when that happens.
So it has been a gloomy time in Hollywood all around, but this weekend has given them a glimmer of hope.
False hope, I think, and a hope that will teach them all the wrong lessons, but hope all the same.
The Hollywood Reporter declares a box office stunner, a historic weekend for movies.
They report, quote, The summer box office just went nuclear.
Filmmaker Greta Gerwig's female-fueled Barbie opened to a historic $155 million domestically, a threshold usually reserved for male-driven superhero fare or marquee IP, such as the final Harry Potter movie.
It came in well ahead of an expected $90 million to $110 million and helped fuel one of the biggest weekends in history.
Barbie, which brings to life Mattel's iconic fashion doll, is also strutting to big numbers overseas.
The pic launched to an impressive $182 million from 70 markets for a global bow of $337 million against a $145 million production budget.
In North America, Barbie scored the biggest domestic start ever for a movie directed by a woman, solo or otherwise.
After gushing for several more paragraphs about Barbie, the article does mention that Christopher Nolan's film Oppenheimer also opened this weekend to an enormous haul, raking in $80 million.
This makes it Nolan's biggest opening weekend for any of his non-Batman films.
Especially impressive, far more impressive than Barbie's performance, as we'll see, because his movie is an original three-hour R-rated historical drama.
It is very difficult to make that kind of film into a smash hit.
People don't generally flock to theaters to watch incredibly long character studies about historical figures.
That is unprecedented, or nearly so.
There is, however, plenty of precedent for moviegoers crowding theaters to watch movies based on familiar brands.
It's not really historic.
Audiences are increasingly becoming bored with franchise films and brand films, as Indiana Jones and The Flash and Little Mermaid and many others have discovered.
But if there is a brand with a large and dedicated fan base that hasn't had its own film in a long time, then it'll probably do pretty well in its opening weekend.
And that's the story with Barbie.
The movie is a smash hit because Barbie, as a brand, is a smash hit.
The quality of the film doesn't make a difference.
The directing, the acting, the writing, none of that factors into the equation.
Okay?
It could have just been a movie where you're literally staring at a Barbie doll sitting in the corner.
And because it's called Barbie, it would have made $150 million.
Mothers and daughters did not file into the theaters over the weekend because they really wanted to see what Greta Gerwig cooked up.
Nor did they come because they were big Margot Robbie fans.
They came because it's Barbie.
It's a brand they like.
And American consumers are conditioned to salivate whenever their favorite brand rings the bell.
This weekend was not really a vindication of Hollywood or the filmmakers behind Barbies, but rather, if anything, a vindication of Pavlov and his dogs.
Barbie's box office performance is a result of conditioning and not much else.
Now, if anyone deserves the credit, though, for the biggest box office debut for any female director in history, it is not the female director, but the marketing department.
Because they're the ones who knew enough to lie about the true content and message of the film.
Because as we've now discovered, though it shouldn't really have come as a surprise to anyone, the Barbie movie is a preachy feminist screed about taking down the patriarchy.
It is a gender studies lecture in Barbie packaging.
And I know this not because I watched the film.
I'd rather jump feet first into a wood chipper than sit through that film.
I don't need to watch Barbie to know that it's bad for the same reason that I don't need to pull a rotten onion out of the garbage and eat it in order to know that I won't like the taste.
I've never thrown myself into a volcano, but I feel that I can safely say that the experience would be unpleasant and probably a little hot.
So, some books can be judged by their covers, absolutely.
Or at least by their back covers, where you find the description.
And we now have descriptions of the Barbie movie which make the themes clear.
Something that the marketing never did, and intentionally so.
Fox reports, quote, Hollywood movie critics are widely praising Barbie as the most unwavering feminist summer blockbuster ever to exist, giving the new film particular adoration for its messaging around the patriarchy and gender roles.
The film starring Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling boasts a strong 89% critic score at Rotten Tomatoes, with many reviews surprised by director Greta Gerwig's willingness to engage in extensive social commentary.
So surprising!
A Hollywood film director is engaging in political commentary?
No one's ever heard of such a thing.
Quote, once an equal parts fascinating and controversial Mattel toy, both loved and hated, a tiny-waisted vacuously smiling slender doll designed like a straight male fantasy, is now the complicated feminist symbol of empowerment in Gerwig's hands.
The rap wrote, quote, but we aren't talking about an empty you-go-girl kind of empowerment here.
That would be too simple-minded for Gerwig, whose articulate and accessible feminism has always been fiercely multifaceted and complex.
Barbie is both a master's thesis on feminism and an Austin Powers-esque romp, the Globe and Mail noted.
The rep also stated that the movie delivers a fierce feminist statement dressed in pink, while the Globe and Mail declared that the film, quote, is most captivating and unwaveringly feminist summer blockbuster ever to exist.
Meanwhile, IndieWire praised the film's outside-the-box and funny feminist fantasia, and Singled Out Gosling's performance of newfound male rage and patriarchal power as a particular highlight.
Funny, you know, they didn't tout this thing as a master thesis on feminism in the trailer.
I can guarantee you they didn't put that, they're not going to put that on the poster, okay?
A master thesis on feminism!
Come on, bring your kids!
They didn't title the movie The Adventures of Feminist Barbie.
No mentions of patriarchy or male rage, either, in any of the marketing.
It is, again, not in the least bit surprising that these themes dominate the film.
Not surprising to us, anyway, as people who pay attention and are aware of what's happening in the world and in our culture.
But the average Barbie viewer is, on the other hand, oftentimes not so aware.
And that's why the sleight-of-hand trick worked.
Dangle a funny and fun and nostalgic and family-friendly Barbie film in front of the audience, and then when you have them in the seat, whack them over the head with the feminist stick.
Sell them the Barbie doll and let them open the package and find Gloria Steinem inside.
Now, we know about the aggressive, male-hating feminist bent of this film, thanks in part to some brave souls like Ben Shapiro who actually sat and endured it so they could report on its content.
This is a form, I have to say, of journalistic courage far more impressive than reporters who cover war zones, especially the reporters in Ukraine right now.
But we also know about the movie's real message from the generally positive reviews of liberal movie critics.
The Review and Variety gets into some of the details that the film's marketing material smartly glossed over, quote, At the same time, Barbie is experiencing her rude awakening.
Ken is busy filling his empty head with all the possibilities that patriarchy entails.
In Barbie Land, Ken's job is a deliberately ill-defined afterthought, basically just beach, whereas in the real world, dudes rule, an idea he takes back to Barbie Land with pointedly absurd results, brainwashing all the women into behaving like obedient housewives.
This is apparently the major underlying theme in the movie.
Men in Barbieland are useless and stupid, but then men in the real world are useless and stupid, but also violent, predatory, and in control of everything.
Ken witnesses this dynamic and tries to export the patriarchy back to Barbieland.
And they actually call it the patriarchy in the film.
That phrase is used many times.
I should mention that the variety review is not entirely positive.
To their credit, they do have some criticisms of the film, including it takes issue with the movie and specifically with the way that men are portrayed.
But the issue, according to film critic Peter DeBugge, is that all of this time spent making men look terrible might risk taking the spotlight off of women.
So there's nothing wrong with sending the message that all men are dumb pigs, but you should give them less screen time in the process, Peter says.
Quote, it's upsetting in a useful way to see Barbie confronted with the overnight impact of rampant patriarchy, a concept that has rarely looked more off-putting than the frat boy fantasy caricatured here.
Think of it as the misogynistic alternative marketed by old-school beer commercials, the polar opposite of Mattel's mid-80s, We Girls Can Do Anything, Right Barbie?
campaign.
While the Barbies plot to take back the government, Gerwig gives all the Ken dolls an over-the-top musical number, I'm Just Ken, which is so amusingly self-involved it risks subverting the very point the movie's trying to make.
If Barbie is all about centering and celebrating women, why let Ken steal the show?
So this is the modern media for you.
The only problem with demonizing men is that it requires you to talk about men too much.
And that's the Barbie movie for you, too.
Thousands of moms took their daughters to see this thing over the weekend.
And, you know, it is certainly a wonderful movie to show your daughter if you want your daughter to be a vapid man-hating harpy.
If that's your great dream for your daughter, then by all means, show them Greta Gerwig's Barbie.
But this is not actually what most mothers want for their daughters.
So for comparison's sake, contrast this with the general public reaction when a movie wears its feminist credentials on its sleeve.
Take the upcoming Snow White remake, for example.
We've already seen how they traded in Snow White for Snow Brown, casting a Hispanic woman in the title role.
And for whatever reason, they decided that the most inclusive approach is to take casting opportunities away from actors with dwarfism by turning the seven dwarves into regular-sized carnies.
But they're also changing the whole arc and theme of the story to make it more feminist, as this interview with the stars revealed.
Watch.
You said you were bringing a modern edge to it on stage.
What do you mean by that?
I just mean that it's no longer 1937, and we absolutely wrote a Snow White.
She's not going to be saved by the prince.
She's not going to be saved by the prince, and she's not going to be dreaming about true love.
She's dreaming about becoming the leader she knows she can be, and the leader that her late father told her that she could be if she was fearless, fair, brave, and true.
And so it's just a really incredible story for, I think, young people everywhere to see themselves in.
It's not 1937 anymore, that's true.
More is the pity.
Now we're not going to focus on the point that the taller woman there, Gal Gadot, is playing the evil queen, and the shorter one is playing Snow White.
Now remember that in the story, the queen is supposed to be jealous of Snow White's beauty.
Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the fairest one of all?
And the mirror is supposed to tell her that it's Snow White.
So we're supposed to buy that, okay?
We're supposed to buy that Gal Gadot is asked who's the fairest one of all.
And it's not her, it's Rachel Zegler.
This is a real problem.
Kind of hard to pull off in this case, as the Evil Queen is significantly more attractive than Snow White.
But, you know, putting that aside, the point is that the clip you just heard has been roundly mocked by nearly everyone.
The movie is destined to be a worse flop than the woke Little Mermaid bastardization was.
I mean, it's guaranteed to be a flop.
Because nobody wants to see a fairy tale where the damsel in distress no longer needs saving and the central romance has been replaced with a dreary sermon about self-empowerment.
Nobody wants to see Snow White become a corporate middle manager and achieve true happiness by moving into a two-bedroom condo with her cat.
They want to see her get saved by the prince and fall in love.
That's what people want to see.
When you advertise ahead of time that your film is going to go the former route rather than the latter, going the feminist route rather than the classic route, nobody will see it.
So feminism has to trick you.
It has to smuggle itself in.
It can't walk in the front door announcing its arrival.
Because people will scream and run out the back door, away from it.
That's because, despite what Snow Brown claims, nearly all women innately desire a man to protect them and provide for them.
That's what almost all women want.
Women want to be swept off their feet by Prince Charming.
That's why these stories have lived on for centuries and resonated with each new generation.
The feminist fairy tale resonates with no one.
It's a vision of what feminism wants women to do, and what it wants women to think, and what it wants women to want, but it will always ring false, because it is false.
Now, that's not to say that feminism hasn't won many disciples in the modern world.
Obviously it has.
It has proven to be a devastating and lethal force far deadlier than the bomb at the center of the other blockbuster this weekend.
Feminism has killed 60 million babies, and that's just the beginning of the destruction that it has wrought on the world.
But it wins adherence through brainwashing, intense and constant indoctrination, especially in public schools, and by playing on a woman's resentment and hatred and self-pity and desire to blame others for her problems.
You know, this can work in the culture.
Unfortunately, it doesn't really work as a fairy tale, because fairy tales are aspirational and fanciful and whimsical.
Feminism, on the other hand, is base and vulgar and hateful.
And it also doesn't work in marketing materials for a film based on a beloved children's toy.
That's why they hid it away, tucked it under all the pink and plastic, and then came out with the man-hating sledgehammer when the audience was already sitting in the seats.
So the only question is whether those mothers who took their daughters to see this film, did they then spend the whole ride home explaining why all that stuff in the movie was wrong?
Better yet, as soon as they saw it was really happening, did they grab their daughter by the hand and leave the theater before the movie ended?
Or were they too obtuse to notice the toxic feminist message even when it was delivered with a sledgehammer?
Or were many of these mothers already man-hating feminists themselves, and so they didn't see any problem with it?
I suspect a mix of all these options has played out this past weekend, but I hope there were plenty in the first category.
And for any parents who hadn't yet taken their daughters to see this movie, but planned on going in the future, well, now you know better.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
Well, you know I love anything made For meat, that's Good Ranchers.
The only thing missing is a pork box.
Well, you asked for it, and they delivered.
Good Ranchers has just launched their Prime Pork, 100% American pork that is steakhouse quality.
This new pork box comes with bone-in and boneless pork chops, sausage, smoked brats, and more.
Plus, right now, you'll get $30 off with my code WALSH at GoodRanchers.com.
On their site, you can explore their all-American cuts of prime pork, prime beef, and better-than-organic chicken options as well.
If you've tried their beef and chicken before, then you know how amazing it is.
You have to try this prime pork at least once.
Trust me, they've got genuinely great products and top-tier customer service.
So, what are you waiting for?
Enjoy real meat and real service today with Good Ranchers.
Visit GoodRanchers.com and use my code WALSH for $30 off any box.
That's promo code WALSH at GoodRanchers.com.
GoodRanchers.com.
American meat delivered.
I want to begin with an interesting altercation at a school board meeting in California.
Here we will see the state superintendent escorted out of the room by police during a meeting discussing trans policies in schools in San Bernardino.
Fox reports, quote, the California state superintendent, Tony Thurmond, Was kicked out of a school board meeting Friday and escorted by police while protesting a policy to inform parents about a child's desire to change genders.
So to be clear, he was protesting against this policy.
That's what he was protesting.
He was protesting against a policy to inform parents about what's happening with their own children.
Continues, quote, The policy, which ultimately passed, stipulated that parents must be informed if their child expresses a desire to be identified or treated as a gender different from their biological sex, if the child intends to use the bathroom and athletic facilities of the opposite sex, or seeks a pronoun or name change, or if there are mental health concerns with the child.
So, this policy wouldn't even forbid the child from, you know, identifying as the opposite sex, or using opposite sex bathrooms, or competing in opposite sex sports.
It should forbid that, but it doesn't.
All it does is say, OK, well, the kids can do that.
But if they do, then the parents should know at a minimum.
And even that just very basic minimum level is too much for the left, of course, and too much for the California state superintendent.
And here we can listen to his objection that he conveyed at the meeting.
Listen.
Good evening, Madam President, members of the board, parents, teachers, and students.
I stand before you as a proud American, as a man of faith, the son of a veteran who served in Vietnam, who's buried not far from here.
I love this country.
And in addition to being the state superintendent, I am also a parent.
And I come before you as a parent tonight.
And we can debate all of the laws and all of the policies and practices.
I ask you to consider this, that nearly half of students who identify as being LGBTQ plus are considering suicide.
I ask you to consider this, that the policy that you consider tonight Not only may fall outside of the laws that respect privacy and safety for our students, but may put our students at risk because they may not be in homes where they can be safe.
Okay, so that's the argument that he tries to make, but he has, I guess it's a one minute time limit to communicate his objection.
And he goes over the time limit, he's told to leave, and that's when we get in exchange, they start shouting at each other, the police show up.
So before we talk about it, I really want to parse what he just said.
I want to get into what he just said, because there are a lot of problems with it.
Before we do that, let's watch what happens after what you just heard.
Let's continue.
Time.
And I learned something from a previous board president.
Guys, be respectful.
I am going to do a point of order, which I learned from a previous board president.
Tony Thurmond, I appreciate you being here, tremendously.
But here's the problem.
We're here because of people like you.
You're in Sacramento, proposing things that pervert children!
You had a chance to come and talk to me, Tony!
By all means, you had a chance to come talk to me.
Why was it so important for you to walk with my opponent?
You are the very reason why we're in this.
May I have, as a point of order, as the board president... Point of order.
This is not your meeting.
You may have a seat, because if I did that to you in Sacramento, you would not accept it.
Please sit.
Can I get a point of order?
You're not going to blackmail us.
You already sent us a blackmailing letter on previous meetings.
Point of order.
You will not bully us here in Chino.
Please sit.
Point of order.
In Chino.
Point of order.
We're gonna take a five minute break.
We won't go.
Sorry, then the police show up and they escort him out.
Okay, so, which I really appreciate, by the way.
I like seeing this.
He was upset he didn't have more time to speak, so he refused to leave the podium.
The police took him out.
He doesn't like that, then he gave a statement afterwards saying that they're a bunch of extremists and so terrible.
Well, welcome to our world, pal.
You know, I mean, I hope you enjoy this taste of your own medicine.
This is what parents have been dealing with for years.
The school implements some new policy, parents show up to voice their objections, and they're given six and a half seconds to speak, and then if they go over to eight seconds, then they're escorted out of the room by police.
This has been the case for years now.
Parents have been dealing with this.
And now the state superintendent gets to briefly walk in those shoes.
Gets to walk in those shoes for a few feet at least.
And I think that's a good thing.
But let's go back to what he said.
He said two things that I want to inspect.
He said that schools should not inform parents when their children transition into a new gender or pretend to have transitioned into a new gender.
Because, he says, these kids don't feel seen at home.
Quote.
Unquote.
And also he says nearly half of LGBT kids are considering suicide.
Okay, well let's think about this.
First of all, if these kids don't feel seen at home, Are we going to help that situation by ensuring that parents don't know what's going on with their kids?
If they don't feel seen at home, isn't that an argument for not hiding these basic facts about a child?
If they're not feeling seen, maybe it's because the parents aren't aware.
Okay, there are a lot of things going on with kids at school.
They spend a lot of time in school.
A lot of things happen.
A lot of things are said.
Kids act a certain way.
Parents aren't there.
They don't know about it.
Even very involved parents, no matter how involved you are, if you're sending your kid to public school, it's like a losing battle.
No matter what you do, the kid is spending the majority of his waking hours, at least in the fall, winter and spring, away from you.
And so that might be part of the reason why the kids don't feel seen.
Which again is a really good argument for telling.
Every argument for telling parents about what's going on with their kids in school is a good argument.
There are countless reasons to do it.
And there are no good reasons to hide these things.
But this is one of those arguments.
How can the parents see what is being intentionally kept from them?
This is what schools do to parents.
They deliberately hide crucial facts about children from their parents and then blame the parents for not knowing.
For not knowing what they weren't told.
Of course, the truth is that the left, when it says that kids don't feel seen, they are describing how they want things to work.
Okay, this is almost always with the left, almost everything that sounds descriptive is really proscriptive with them.
They're telling you how they think it should be.
So kids don't feel seen.
What he really means is kids should not be seen by their parents.
They don't want the kids to be seen at home.
They want the kids to feel isolated and alone and marginalized and so on in their homes.
So that that feeling of marginalization and loneliness can be exploited by the school system.
The not feeling seen thing is an intentional creation of the left.
And same goes for suicidality.
If half of LGBT kids, as he says, are suicidal, Isn't that all the more reason to tell the parents?
I mean, if a child falls into a category that makes it likely that he's suicidal, shouldn't the parents know?
Isn't telling the parent the very first thing you should do?
No matter how you feel about the parents, they are the ones caring for the kids every day.
The kids spend, you know, are going home to the parents every day.
And so the parent needs to know if the child is suicidal, obviously.
And if the child tragically goes on to act on those thoughts and does kill himself, it's your fault if you conceal these crucial facts from the parents.
The child's death is on your hands, on the hands of Tony Thurman and people like him.
How many kids have died because they were in crisis and the schools didn't knew about it and didn't tell the parents?
They are responsible for the deaths of countless children.
These people are murderers.
They are taking impressionable, emotionally unstable, desperate, suicidal kids, isolating them, and convincing them to conceal their feelings from their parents.
For the people that they live with, and who love them.
As parents, we love our kids.
The school system doesn't love our kids.
If you're a teacher, and you feel like you're a good teacher, and you connect with kids, and you bond with the kids, great.
You don't love any of those kids the way that we do as parents.
And then some of those kids, you know, do the most drastic thing, the worst thing imaginable, and that is directly the fault of people like Tony Thurmond.
These people are killers.
They really are.
Meanwhile, we haven't even dealt with the main point here, the primary point, which is that if identifying as LGBT means that a child has a 50% chance of becoming suicidal, then there is something fundamentally wrong With LGBT identification.
Okay?
And don't tell me it's because LGBT people are oppressed or whatever.
Because that's nonsense.
That's bullsh**.
LGBT people are not oppressed.
They are the opposite of oppressed in this country.
They are the least oppressed group in history.
They are relentlessly celebrated.
They are not oppressed in the slightest.
But regardless, as we've covered many times, many groups throughout history have been oppressed.
Truly oppressed.
And none of them had a suicidality rate of 50%.
None.
Ever.
LGBT are alone.
And when we say LG- well, we say LGBT, most of this is primarily the T, as the suicide rate, uh, or the suicidal ideation rate among trans-identifying people is the highest out of anyone in the alphabet cult.
Those sky-high suicide rates mean that there is something wrong with transgenderism.
Something deeply wrong.
Fundamentally wrong with transgenderism itself.
Transgenderism is self-destructive.
Which is why so many people who fall victim to it end up destroying themselves directly through suicide, and then many others destroy their bodies in other means.
This gender transition, quote-unquote, is really more of a slow-motion suicide.
It is an act of killing yourself piece by piece.
All the more reason to tell the parents.
This is from The Blaze.
The New York Times is being torched for publishing an article asking if it is safe to go outside during this cruel summer.
Is it safe to go outside when it's so hot out during this cruel summer, they're asking.
Reactions Online roasted the liberal news outlet for pushing fear-mongering content.
In its health section, the New York Times published an article titled, Is it safe to go outside?
How to navigate this cruel summer.
The article's sub-headline reads, quote, Heat, flooding, and wildfire smoke have made for treacherous conditions.
Use this guide to determine when it's safe to head out and when you should stay home.
The article is written by Alicia Gupta, who is a reporter focused on women's health, health inequities, and trends in functional medicine and wellness.
In other words, someone that we shouldn't pay attention to at all.
And they've tasked her with reporting on an actual health question about, you know, like, things like heat exhaustion and heat stroke.
But normally, she's talking about health inequities.
The article sounds the alarm about this year's summer of weather extremes in the United States, in which going outside can be riddled with perils.
Well, let me tell you something, first of all.
Going outside is always riddled with perils.
Like, this is what we try to explain to you during COVID.
Just the act of leaving your home means that you are taking any number of risks the second you walk outside your house.
There are millions of things that could happen to you.
Many of them bad.
Some of them good, many of them bad.
In fact, if you stay in your home, still, many things could happen to you.
There are perils.
This is how bad it is, actually.
There are countless perils in life, no matter where you go, and no matter what you do.
Those perils follow you around.
Your own death, your own impending death follows you around.
You can't escape it.
Walk around every corner and it's there.
Go to sleep at night, it's sleeping right next to you.
Your own death.
Because we're all going to die.
Every single one of us.
And there's nothing you can do about it.
Not one single thing.
You will be decomposing in the ground in the not-too-distant future.
That is a reality.
It just is.
I'm sorry, but it is.
So, going outside is riddled with perils.
Yeah, I mean, true.
It is.
It is.
But, you know what?
You just live your life anyway.
You live your life because what else can you do?
You live your life until you can't live it anymore because you're dead.
Which, again, will happen to all of us.
I don't know if you knew that.
The NYT cites flooding in the Northeast, heat waves across the country, and smoke from wildfires in Canada.
The NYT writer advises people to watch for flood warnings and check air quality levels before going outside.
The Times urges people, if you must be outdoors, consider wearing an N95 mask to help reduce your exposure to toxins.
The New York Times tells readers, quote, a heat index of 103 degrees Fahrenheit and above is dangerous.
You're likely to experience heat cramps and exhaustion and heat stroke as possible if you're outside for a prolonged period or doing something strenuous, according to the National Weather Service.
Well, yeah, this makes sense.
You know, I mean, this is a great idea.
Obviously, if it's 100 degrees outside, sweltering hot, you're worried about heat exhaustion, then the best thing to do when you go outside is to wear a muzzle.
You know, muzzle yourself with a face mask.
That'll help him feel a lot cooler, won't it?
Man, it's so hot outside.
Thank God I have this N95 mask.
Of course, it's true that very hot temperatures can be dangerous.
That's a fact.
That is true.
People can become dehydrated, they can get heat exhaustion, they can pass out and all that.
There's nothing wrong with pointing that out on the face of it, but for the media, they're trying to tie this into some kind of overarching tale of doom, some doomsday scenario.
They're taking something normal, which is hot weather in the summer, and attempting to turn it into Armageddon by folding it into their climate change apocalypse prophecy.
And part of that means trying to make this seem more complicated than it is.
So we get a lot of this all the time.
It's, well, here's what the experts are saying, but here's how the experts say that you should X, Y, Z. And it's something where you really should need expert guidance on this.
Here's what experts say you should do if it's really hot outside.
The experts and the scholars have looked at this and they've researched it extensively, they've done studies and everything, and they've discovered that when it's hot outside, you should stay in the shade and drink water.
$50 million worth of research went into that.
Not really sure we need the experts to chime in on this.
Yeah, drink water, be in the shade if you can, don't overdo it, maybe run on the treadmill instead of jogging around the neighborhood if it's 105 degrees outside, that sort of thing.
You know, we know, we get it.
The other point too, as The Blaze mentions in their article, is that cold weather is a lot more dangerous than hot weather.
It kills many more people.
But you don't usually see the same kind of panicking over cold weather because it doesn't fit the global warming branding.
It does fit climate change, which of course is why they changed.
They went from global warming to climate change so that literally anything that happens in the climate can fit under the umbrella.
But still, they like to focus on heat where they can, which is why they've made this the focus.
This is kind of funny.
When I was away for a couple of weeks in early July, I heard wind.
I caught wind of a new social media app, which was supposed to be a Twitter killer, they said, that would replace Twitter and destroy Elon Musk.
It was called Threads.
And it was a sensation.
A huge sensation, from what I understand, for about three days.
But by the time I got back online, it's time had already passed.
Nobody was talking about it anymore.
It destroyed Twitter.
Destroyed Twitter for about 45 minutes.
And that was it.
So here's the latest from The Daily Wire.
When Meta introduced its new social media site, Threads, to compete with Twitter, supporters dubbed it the Twitter Killer.
Now Threads is on life support as usage of the new platform is plummeting.
On Friday, The Wall Street Journal reported Threads' daily user engagement was around 13 million members.
That's down nearly 70% from its July 7th peak.
Furthermore, iOS and Android app users are spending on average just 4 minutes per day on threads.
For comparison, the report said Twitter's daily users hover around 200 million, with the average time spent on the app around 30 minutes per day.
Which is a whole lot in internet.
In internet time, that's a lot.
Liberals had high hopes for threads because, unlike Twitter under chief twit Elon Musk, the left felt confident that Facebook's new sister platform would censor certain information, chiefly any story or fact inconvenient to the Democrat media complex.
So, anyway, it's failing, which was really guaranteed from the beginning.
I mean, it was set in stone, basically, that this would fail.
And we knew that, really back on July 5th, When this happened.
Watch.
I don't think they thought of Twitter.
And that I am being facetious, but I say GameSet Matt Zuckerberg.
Because he's really learned his lesson.
He really understands that it does matter.
That you want to be committed to the community.
And Facebook is a very... Instagram is a really terrific product.
And Twitter is awful.
And my kids were saying, like, why are you posting on Twitter?
I said, well, it's free.
I said, well, that's just great.
The worst things in life are free.
As we know, when Jim Cramer gives you an endorsement, you're screwed.
delivery two threads?
I'll put some Twitter in just because I like being, I'm a masochist who doesn't mind
being hated, but that's been the way of most of my life since fourth grade.
As we know, when Jim Cramer gives you an endorsement, you're screwed.
If Jim Cramer says that things are working out well, and then it's gonna go, you're in
trouble.
If Jim Cramer was your doctor, and he sat you down in the office and said, hey, test
Good news.
You're fine.
Everything's fine.
Then you know you'll be dead by next week.
So Threads was doomed from the start, sadly, maybe entirely because of Jim Cramer or maybe because there are other problems with it aside from Jim Cramer.
Two big problems.
One is that it's just not a compelling pitch.
You know, you're making a social media site for people who think that Twitter is too conservative.
So it's a site for, like, leftists.
Ah, finally, finally a social media site where people on the left can go and express themselves and not have to worry about conservatives intruding.
But that already describes literally every other social media site in existence.
So leftists are not in dire need of a place to go where they can feel safe and conservatives will be censored again because they already have that on every single social media site that exists except for Twitter.
And second, the, um, You know, the conservative Twitter offshoots in the pre-Elon era didn't work either, even though they did have a market to serve, you would think.
In theory, they had a market to serve.
But they didn't work either because, well, they also didn't have a platform like Meadow that's worth $700 billion behind them, so that was a disadvantage.
But whether you have $700 billion or not, the point is that if you're making a version of Twitter, if you're making the fill-in-the-blank version of Twitter, it's going to fail because Twitter is already the best version of itself.
It may not be perfect, you may not even like Twitter, but it's the best version of Twitter is Twitter.
So if you want to, and this is a problem that we know conservatives have had, not just with Twitter, but across the board in the culture, and now we see it with the left too.
But for a long time, this was mainly a problem you had on the right.
Where people on the right were always trying to come up with the conservative version of this.
But you're not going to be able to do that because there's no innovation there, right?
There's nothing actually new that will attract people, especially when it comes to social media.
There has to be some kind of innovation, something different about it that will make people want to use it.
There's no innovation.
There's no innovation with this.
This was just, you know, pretty transparently a direct rip off of Twitter and putting aside all the copyright problems there potentially.
It also just, there's no market.
We already have to come up with something new.
Which very few people these days are doing.
All right, let's get to the comment section.
It's a stressful experience for anyone, especially if you're a first-time buyer or if you have no credit.
Before you walk into a dealership and spend the entire day with the crowds, the stress, the potential that you might not even find what you're looking for, you need to check out CarZing.
CarZing is completely changing the way you buy a car online.
By partnering with credit agencies, lenders, and over 25,000 dealers nationwide, CarZing provides you with everything you need before stepping foot into a dealership.
Once you find the right car at your ideal budget, all you have to do is bring your saved deal voucher with you to the dealership to finalize your next ride.
It is so simple.
Even if you're not in the market for a new car, you should check out CarZing anyway.
CarZing's online window shopping experience goes beyond mere images.
You can dive deep into each vehicle's specifications, features, and performance capabilities, zoom in on the craftsmanship of the interior, marvel at the cutting-edge technology, and admire the meticulous attention to detail that sets these automobiles apart from all the rest.
Carzing also helps make the experience faster, cheaper, and less stressful.
Visit Carzing.com slash Walsh today.
Find the best deals near you.
That's Carzing.com slash Walsh.
Okay, so on Friday we talked about therapy and I gave my, I explained my view in quite a lot of detail, I think, about why I think that therapy very often, probably most of the time, is a waste of time and actually does more harm than good for a lot of people.
And there are a lot of reasons why therapy is so popular these days and so many people are in it, but it's not because therapy is super effective.
In fact, as we talked about, you know, and I know there's a little bit of a chicken and egg argument here about which came first, but the fact that There's what we're told about this mental health crisis.
It's only getting worse and worse.
We hear every year.
It's worse.
It's worse There are more people yeah, but more people are in therapy So you would think that with the popularity of therapy if it really is effective that we would start to see that manifest in the culture Where you'd have mental health improving, but that's not happening because therapy so often Can can make your problems worse for reasons that I explained I wasn't really sure how this is one of those things there are some Plenty of topics that you talk about, and you kind of know how it's going to be received, and you know you have people on your side, quote-unquote, and people that are not on your side, and you know that your audience is mostly going to be with you.
Something like this doesn't really break down along ideological lines.
I honestly wasn't sure.
I thought there's a good chance that like 95% of the audience will hate this, but I'm going to say it anyway.
I'm going to spend 17 minutes on it anyway, because that's just what we do here.
But the comments for that reason have been interesting, have been not nearly as combative as I expected.
In fact, I'll read some of these.
One comment says, I spent seven years in therapy, no signs of getting better.
My dad picked me up every day to go on walks for a month, entirely changed and grew as a person.
Not surprised to hear that.
Not surprised to hear that, you know, therapy didn't work and then you started spending some quality time with your dad and that did work.
And well, why would that be the case?
It's because with therapy, you're sitting and talking to someone who is paid.
You're paying them to sit and listen and to care about your problem.
But although you can't really get them to care, so that you can't, you know, they're going to care, they're not going to care, but you're paying them to listen.
It's a mercenary kind of arrangement, right?
Or at least it's a consumer arrangement, let's call it that.
Or you are a consumer, and this is someone who's running a business.
And you're talking to them, you're talking things out, and maybe you find some benefit from that, maybe you don't.
As I said, I think oftentimes there's not a lot of benefit.
But on the other hand, if you're talking to someone, you're not paying them to listen.
But they're listening because they love you and they care about you and they know you, you know?
Like you don't have to give them your whole life story to begin with because they already know it and they know so much about you already.
You don't have to spend 10 sessions just like getting warmed up where they get to know you because they already do.
Yeah.
That second option is going to be a lot more effective.
When you have someone who loves you and cares about you and you're talking to them and G Gates says, I worked in behavioral health.
I used to believe that confronting one's own trauma was the way to go.
It's not.
Helping others is the way to go.
This is another one of the issues with therapy is that we have this idea we gotta, you gotta like dig down deep within yourself and find all the things that have traumatized you and find all the things that have upset you and confront those things and deal with them.
Cause we have this idea of like, we're carrying things around in the subconscious.
And I think, I think we also, the idea of like repressed memories, you know, you don't hear about that anymore, but that was really popular back 30, 35 years ago.
Everyone had repressed memories and there was this, there was a period of times like this mass psychosis, There was a period of a few years where everybody was going to therapy and discovering that they were like abused as children and repressed memories that came out and a lot of that stuff was just they were making that up in their heads.
So you don't hear about repressed memories anymore, but I think there's still kind of, there's the vestiges of that that you still find in therapy and therapy speak where they might not call it repressed memories, but they are saying, well, you might have things that traumatize you that are just like back there in your subconscious and you got to find them and pull them out.
And I think oftentimes what people do is maybe they're not so much inventing things that didn't happen, but they're taking things that happened that they never thought were a big deal.
And now they're discovering, oh, those really are big deals.
So they're, they're re kind of like, They're telling themselves the story of their own lives with the help of the therapist.
Things they already knew, but now they're seeing in a brand new light, and they're finding that, oh, well, when my dad missed my soccer championship when I was 11 years old, I'd always known about that, obviously, but I never thought, but yeah, you know what, that did lead to this, and that's the reason that this happened, and that's the reason why I'm unemployed at the age of 35.
What do you know?
So I think there's a lot of that going on, piecing things together, and you're piecing it together really to give yourself an excuse.
And all the while, the best and healthiest thing is to just, that is all in the past, and you can't do anything about it now.
Okay, whatever you're upset about that happened, time has moved on, you cannot do anything about it.
So you can dwell on it and talk about it and talk to your therapist and analyze all the ways that it's affected you and everything else, or you could just live your life and let the past stay in the past.
And very, very often that is not only the best way to deal with past hurt, but the only way.
Not always.
Now, there are times when things happen you have to deal with, but most of the time, like 99%, if not more, of the stuff that's happened to you in your life, If it upset you, it's best to just move on.
Walter Knitt says, if more therapists were like Jordan Peterson, things might be different.
I totally agree, but he's actually a perfect example of what I was talking about, that if you are going to go consult a therapist, and you are going to go talk to somebody, The only way that it could even remotely be helpful is if you're talking to someone who has a lot of wisdom and like a real deep insight into life and the human condition.
What Jordan Peterson does, but he's, but this is, that is rare.
It's rare to find somebody like that.
That is a rare quality.
And just because, so if you find someone like that, whether they're a therapist or not, that's someone you should talk to.
Someone who's got a lot of wisdom and a deep insight into life.
You know, best case scenario is it is like your dad or a grandfather or somebody like that.
But if you don't have someone like that in your life directly and you gotta pay someone to talk to them, and they fall into that category, they're wise and insightful, then yeah, it could be very useful to talk to them.
But just because someone has a degree and a license, that doesn't mean that they have that at all.
Which brings us finally, Kyle says, not everyone agreed.
Kyle says, I usually like your stuff, but you need to have a disclaimer before some of these segments admitting that you aren't an expert and you aren't qualified.
Therapists go to school and receive training to do what they do.
You dismiss them based on your own subjective opinion.
Therapists go to school and receive training to do what they do.
Well, what, to do what exactly?
See, that's what I'm trying to say, Kyle.
A lot of what a therapist does is they listen to you.
Well, like anyone can do that.
It's important.
It's important to listen.
Okay, they listen.
But it only becomes useful, and if all you're looking for is literally just someone to listen, doesn't matter what they say, well then, okay, fine.
But then again, like, anyone's qualified for that.
So you don't need a license.
I'm a licensed listener.
All that only matters if they then provide some real insight.
But that requires, again, wisdom, it requires an understanding.
That's why I'm always harping on this, you know, the human condition.
You just have to understand that, you have to understand the human condition, what it means to be a human.
How humans, how human beings are supposed to think and act.
As compared, you know, it's like you're thinking and acting a certain way.
If someone comes along, a therapist or a counselor, psychologist, and says, well, no, you shouldn't be thinking and acting that way.
Well, that requires them to know, they need to know how people are supposed to think and behave.
Um, just because there is no subject in school that teaches you that.
There certainly is no license that can affirm, I have licensed insight into life.
So?
So I would say that if there are therapists out there that have that kind of insight, and there are some, The fact that they're a therapist is almost like inconsequential because they would have had that insight even without that.
Companies are strong-arming their customers to support abortion, canceling customers for their political views, and making a mockery of women by supporting transgender models.
No government agency's institution or company is allowed to just be what it is anymore and focus on fulfilling the task that it was made to fulfill.
A beer company can't just make beer anymore.
Their primary concern is not with brewing and distributing beer, but with showing their support for the left's political and cultural agenda.
Well, Public Square offers a new solution.
Public Square is an app and website where you can get connected to tens of thousands of businesses from all different industries that share your values for life, family, and freedom.
Public Square also offers discounts to many high-quality businesses on the platform, so you can actually have an incentive to spend money with companies that don't hate you.
Whether you're looking for new athletic clothing that knows what a woman is, a banking partner you can count on, or simply a new restaurant in the area where you're not going to get lectured about You know, your political views as you're trying to enjoy a meal.
Whatever you're looking for, head over to PublicSQ.com.
Public Square is free to join as a customer or as a business owner.
You can get started at PublicSQ.com or download their app today.
That's PublicSQ.com.
Also, environmentalists are so hypocritical.
We all know that.
They tell you that, you know, you need to ride a bicycle and then they go and fly in their private jets.
They'll insist that you stop eating meat because of cow farts, but they'll happily chow down on wagyu beef at Davos.
I bet you'd do a better job of conserving the environment than the likes of John Kerry or even Greta, the Swedish Muppet, especially if you get Jeremy's new green tea and citrus hand soap.
It's free of parabens and sulfates.
It's also free of DEI and ESG for that matter.
It's not tested on animals and it's made right here in the USA.
That means you can feel patriotic and superior at the same time.
So do yourself a favor.
Wash your hands of a hypocritical leftist once and for all.
Go to jeremysrazors.com and order your green tea and citrus hand soap today.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Two years ago, you would often hear Democrats making the highly implausible argument that the state of Florida under Ron DeSantis would not allow teachers to tell students anything about slavery.
For example, the publication Phoenix, based in Tallahassee, complained that, quote, proposed civic standards for Florida schools don't mention the word slavery.
That same year, Miami Today ran a piece accusing Florida's government of, quote, rubber stamping a gag order on teachers that outlaws mention of some historic views of U.S.
racial issues, including slavery.
The piece went on to advise parents to take their kids out of public schools, which is a good idea in general actually, and put them into schools which face quote, no such restrictions and teachers are free to tell all sides of American history the good of which there truly is a vast amount, but also the bad and the ugly.
Now, this kind of commentary has been repeated in Florida for the past two years, incessantly.
In fact, just a few months ago, an official at one of the largest teachers unions in the
country went on PBS to explain that Ron DeSantis was blocking teachers from telling the quote,
"good, the bad, and the ugly of what happened during slavery reconstruction and Jim Crow."
Listen.
The governor says that because this course includes the study of queer theory,
because it talks about political movements that advocated for abolishing prisons,
because it focuses on the reparations movement, that all of that, in his view,
is political and that it shouldn't be pushed on students.
Can a course like this be taught without including those issues?
Listen, a course like this should be taught honestly.
A course like this should be taught with the truth involved.
History sometimes involves the good, the bad, and the ugly of what has happened.
But we deserve honest history.
And if you're talking about advanced placement African-American history, then you're talking about some of those things like reparations.
You're talking about some of those things like Jim Crow or slavery or the Reconstruction and the backlash to Reconstruction.
Now, the message, as conveyed by that teacher's union official, seems reasonable, at least if you assume that his underlying factual claims are true.
He says that he wants Ron DeSantis to allow discussion about the, quote, good, the bad, and the ugly of what happened during slavery and its aftermath.
But Ron DeSantis, this union official claims, wouldn't let that happen.
That was the position of the unions and Democratic Party for the past two years.
As a factual matter, it was always false.
The history of slavery was always taught in Florida schools that entire time.
But we don't have to get into that whole debate anymore, because now Democrats have abandoned all their claims about a gag order in Florida that supposedly prevents teachers from talking about the nuances of slavery, because Democrats' new claim is that, under standards that were recently established by Florida's Department of Education, teachers in Florida are actually being forced to talk about slavery now.
And moreover, these partisans say, teachers are being told to portray some aspects of slavery as an affirmative good, they claim.
No Democrat or media outlet making this claim appears to have any self-awareness about how it contradicts what they have been saying for years at maximum volume.
They didn't tell us over and over that they want students to hear about the good, the bad, and the ugly of various moments in American history, including the century before emancipation.
They did tell us that.
Didn't they go on television and write dozens of articles about this very subject?
Because Democrats are very worried about Ron DeSantis, and they're worried he might run for president, or that he is running for president and might actually become president, they no longer want that kind of discussion in the classroom.
And they've enlisted Kamala Harris to hammer home this new message.
So I want you to watch as Kamala Harris explains in a speech in Jacksonville that slavery was bad, that Ron DeSantis is telling students it was good, and that any form of nuanced discussion beyond that is totally forbidden.
Listen.
Adults know what slavery really involves.
It involved rape.
It involved torture.
It involved taking a baby from their mother.
So in the context of that, how is it that anyone could suggest that in the midst of these atrocities,
that there was any benefit to being subjected to this level of dehumanization?
[Applause]
In the midst of these atrocities, that there was some benefit?
Atrocities!
Now, put aside for a second Kamala's feigned outrage over the lives of children and the fact that her administration has done more to ensure that children are killed than any government in recent history.
What you just saw, beyond a highly emotional woman yelling and pounding on a podium, was a non sequitur.
The conclusion of Kamala's argument doesn't remotely follow from what she said beforehand.
She begins by saying things that no one would disagree with, which is that slavery is bad.
This is the kind of bold, provocative insight you get from Democrat politicians these days.
Slavery is bad!
It's bad!
I don't care what anyone says.
I don't care if you hear me say it.
Slavery is bad.
I'm going to take a stand right now and declare I don't like slavery.
It's not just bad.
In fact, I would say it's very bad.
You have to see things from their perspective, though.
Democrats these days, they don't get the opportunity to be morally right very often because their ideology won't allow it.
So, Kamala Harris is relishing this chance to say something that isn't, on its face, morally insane.
But then she finishes with this quote.
Quote, "So in the context of that, how is it that anyone could suggest that in the midst
of these atrocities that there was any benefit to being subjected to this level of dehumanization?"
Later in her remarks, she went on to compare Florida's curriculum to Holocaust denial.
Listen.
But let's be clear.
On this issue, this is not the first time in history that we've come across this kind of approach.
This is not the first time that there are powerful forces that have attempted to distort history.
For the sake of political ends.
Think about in the past how we have seen attempts to minimize and even deny the Holocaust.
Think about those who tried to rewrite the history of the Japanese internment camps.
Erase our nation's dark and sordid history and how we have treated the native people and in particular through educational systems.
She is so happy.
You can tell she's so proud of herself because she's finally giving a speech where at least people know what she's saying.
Usually she's babbling incoherently and she just has blank stares and expressions staring back at her.
But here it's like at least people know what she's talking about.
So she gets to be kind of right about something, at least that slavery is bad.
And she gets to say stuff that people at least understand, and she's so excited.
She's given multiple speeches about this, by the way.
They're going to send her around the country on a tour, the Slavery is Bad Tour.
She's going to go to every state in the Union to give a speech.
Slavery is bad!
It's so bad!
But notice what she said there.
She said, think about the past, how we have seen attempts to minimize and even deny the Holocaust.
That's Kamala Harris saying that Florida's new curriculum is akin to denying that the Holocaust happened.
Is that comparison reasonable?
Or is it as stupid and insulting as it sounds?
Well, let's see.
You could pull up the Florida curriculum right now if you want.
It's all over the internet.
A National Review, Charles Cook, has gone through the curriculum and posted every single reference to the words slavery, slave, and slaves in the curriculum.
He found 191 results.
So they're trying to erase and minimize slavery.
It's mentioned 191 times in the curriculum.
If you go through these 191 results, there's no possible way that any reasonable person could conclude that the curriculum is denying that slavery occurred in the United States or denying that it was a very bad thing.
The curriculum includes mandatory discussions of, quote, harsh conditions in the Caribbean plantations.
Curriculum also mandates discussion of the, quote, living conditions of slaves in British North American colonies, the Caribbean, Central America, and South America, including infant mortality rates.
It's also infant mortality rates are bad.
That's a bad thing.
So, I mean, that's all filed under the... Maybe they need to stipulate that in the curriculum so nobody accuses them of supporting infant mortality rates.
There's also a section on the ramifications of prejudice, racism, and stereotyping on individual freedoms, as well as the struggles faced by African-American women in the 19th century as it relates to issues of suffrage, business, and access to education.
Again, that's all in the Florida curriculum.
There are several sections that discuss the contributions of blacks like, quote, instruction including examining the roles and efforts of black nurses, soldiers, spies, scouts, and slaves during the Civil War.
This is what Kamala Harris is comparing to Holocaust denial.
Do the leaders of the Democrat Party agree with that?
Seems they do because none of them have publicly condemned what Kamala Harris said.
On what basis are they making this absurd claim that this curriculum amounts to denial that slavery ever occurred?
How can you deny it occurred when you mentioned it 191 times?
Well, here's their argument.
In the entire curriculum.
There is one, 191 mentions, one of those 191 mentions briefly mentions that some slaves learned skills that they applied later in life after being freed.
So here it is, quote, Instruction includes how slaves develop skills which in some instances could be applied for their personal benefit.
Now regardless of how that makes Democrats feel, the only relevant question here, if you care about the education of children and the truth, is whether that statement is true.
And obviously it's true.
It's an obvious fact that some slaves develop skills that help them later in life.
Why is that a bad thing to point out?
It's not a defense of slavery to point that out.
Only the dumbest person in the world, you know, Kamala Harris and everyone like her, could hear that.
But some slaves develop skills that help them later in life and think, oh, so you think slavery is good then?
You think everyone should be enslaved, huh?
It's also not the same thing as saying blacks benefited from slavery, as Kamala Harris claims and all the headlines claim as well.
Newsweek even ran a piece entitled, Ron DeSantis Accused of Being Pro-Slavery Due to New Florida Curriculum.
One NPR station reported, quote, advocates say that new Florida standards require slavery to be taught as beneficial.
That's what they're claiming.
They're saying that the curriculum states that slavery itself was beneficial to the slaves.
But to say that slaves benefited or that slavery was beneficial would be to argue that they were better off being slaves.
Like, if it was really a benefit to them, then that's what you would be saying, is that they were better off being slaves.
The curriculum doesn't teach that, obviously.
Now, personally, I have argued, personally, that black Americans today are, in many cases, better off because of slavery due to the fact that they're now here in America instead of being in Africa.
But that's a very different argument.
It's not the same thing as saying that the slaves themselves benefited from the practice of slavery, which is what they're claiming this curriculum does.
And anyway, I didn't write the curriculum.
So, we're left with the fact that these claims are just simply lies.
This is the don't-say-gay narrative all over again.
The left made up a piece of legislation back then, you know, I say back then, a couple years ago, that saying that they were banning the mention of gay people, and now they're making up pro-slavery curriculum.
These are the kinds of brazen lies you can tell when you have no soul and no capacity for shame, and also when you have all the fact-checkers, quote-unquote, on your side.
Florida education officials did their best to point all this out to news outlets.
They provided a list of slaves who developed, quote, highly specialized trades from which they benefited after being freed.
In response, left-wing media outlets and academics have flailed around trying to debunk that list.
Some of it's kind of amusing.
Mother Jones, for example, wrote that many of these slaves, quote, launched their professions only after gaining their freedom.
Well, no kidding.
I mean, that's exactly what the language is saying.
Obviously the slaves didn't log to their professions while they were still enslaved.
No one is saying that.
Then they argue that a handful of slaves on the list were actually born freed and not into slavery, which the Florida Department of Education has disputed.
But regardless, the underlying point that the DOE is making is obviously true, which is why they're trying to reduce the argument to a small number of individual slaves.
The point is that, while slavery was immoral, as a factual matter, some slaves did use skills they learned once they were freed.
No one disputes that.
And that's what should be taught in schools.
It shouldn't be suppressed because Kamala Harris and Mother Jones don't like it.
This point of slaves developing skills is also not the focal point of the curriculum.
They're trying to make it seem like that's the entire curriculum is about all the skills that slaves learned.
It's mentioned one time out of 191 instances.
The media has made it the focal point for obvious reasons.
The left wants to suppress any mention of slavery that goes beyond simply shouting that it's bad.
They want to do this for the same reason that they suppress data on climate change, that makes it clear that forest fires are getting less common, or pretty much any statistic whatsoever about demographics of crime.
If a leftist fears that you'll draw an unapproved conclusion from factual information, then you're not allowed to see the factual information.
If you ignore their restrictions, if you dare to make an inconvenient but accurate point about slavery, then you must be pro-slavery.
Just like if you talk about crime statistics, then you must be a racist.
Now, to their credit, in this case, Florida's government hasn't backed down.
In this country, you're allowed to believe in nuance, and for good reason.
Without nuance, you get the kind of discourse that makes everybody dumber, and it makes the world a lot more dangerous also.
And maybe that's why they're doing it.
So, good for Florida for fighting back.
That's also why Kamale Harris, the media, and everybody peddling this latest lie about Florida are all cancelled.
And that'll do it for this portion of the show as we move over to the Members Block.
