Ep. 1630 - Violent Black Mobs Beat Up White People In Cincinnati. The Media Remains Silent
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, videos have gone viral of violent mobs attacking random people in Cincinnati over the weekend. The corporate media has put a complete black out on the story. Can you guess why? Also, Donald Trump moves to make insane asylums great again. And the women-only gossip and doxing app called Tea was hacked and doxxed. Is this a legitimate case of eye for an eye? Plus a woman on TikTok says she’s considering divorcing her husband even though he’s perfect and does nothing wrong. I have some advice for her, and for all the young single men worried about ending up with someone like her.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4bEQDy6
Ep.1630
- - -
DailyWire+:
Watch Journey to the UFC: Joe Pyfer now—streaming exclusively on DailyWire+.
Ben Shapiro’s new book, “Lions and Scavengers,” drops September 2nd—pre-order today at https://dailywire.com/benshapiro
Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today's Sponsors:
PureTalk - Switch to PureTalk and start saving today! Visit https://PureTalk.com/WALSH
Grand Canyon University - Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University.
American Financing - Talk with an American Financing consultant today: (866) 569-4711 or visit https://americanfinancing.net/walsh Disclaimer: NMLS 182334, https://nmlsconsumeraccess.org
Balance of Nature - Go to https://balanceofnature.com and use promo code WALSH for 35% off your first order PLUS get a free bottle of Fiber and Spice.
- - -
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
- - -
Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy
Today the Matt Walsh show videos have gone viral of violent moms attacking random people in Cincinnati over the weekend.
The corporate media has put a complete blackout on the story.
Can you guess why?
Also, Donald Trump moves to make insane asylums great again.
And the women-only gossip and doxing app called T was hacked and doxed.
Is this a legitimate case of eye for an eye?
Plus, a woman on TikTok says she's considering divorcing her husband, even though he's perfect and has done nothing wrong.
I have some advice for her and for all the young single guys out there worried about ending up with someone like her.
All of that and more today on That Wall Show.
That Wall Show.
How many times have you told someone, if it ain't broke, don't fix it?
Now that's great advice most of the time, but not so much for a cell phone.
See, over time, the battery life fades, the processor can't keep up, and it's fallen in the toilet one too many times.
Fortunately, thanks to PureTalk, your cell phone is something you can replace without feeling guilty.
When you switch to PureTalk this month, they're going to give you a Samsung Galaxy A36 for free with a $35 qualifying plan, just $35 a month for talk text and data, and free Samsung phone with scratch-resistant Gorilla Glass and a battery that lasts all day.
All in America's most dependable 5G network.
I use PureTalk for work here at the Daily Wire.
It is fast.
It's reliable.
And I know the people behind it share our values, which is the most important thing, I think.
Look, supporting companies like PureTalk is a good thing.
You win by cutting your cell phone bill in half.
They win by hiring more Americans and helping more veterans.
And we win that way also.
Make the switch in as little as 10 minutes.
Go to puretalk.com slash walsh to get your free cell phone today.
Again, that's puretalk.com slash walsh to switch to my wireless company, America's wireless company, PureTalk.
Several decades ago, an academic named Scott Cummings wrote a book entitled Left Behind in Rosedale.
It's about the very rapid decline of a large area in Fort Worth, Texas during the 1970s as the black population exploded and white residents fled.
It's a very stark transformation.
From 1950 to 1990, Rosedale went from roughly 100% white to more than 80% black.
At the time, pretty much every commentator was describing this phenomenon, which was also taking place all over the country in hundreds of different cities, as quote unquote white flight.
And these commentators derided white people as bigots for fleeing the wonders of diversity.
But none of these commentators spent any time investigating what happened to the white people who, for one reason or another, remained in urban areas as this demographic shift took place.
And oftentimes, these whites were elderly and poor, so they had no choice but to remain where they were.
And what happened to them?
Scott Cummings asked.
What he found was that in no uncertain terms, the remaining white population was terrorized.
They were robbed, sexually assaulted, beaten, seemingly for sport.
Their homes were torched.
One elderly white man told Cummings he had been stabbed repeatedly by a black man while he was walking on the sidewalk for no apparent reason.
A white man in his mid-70s was working out his house using a ladder when a group of black adolescents approached.
They shook the ladder until he fell off, and then they beat him with a two by four.
From 1977 to 1982, the attacks intensified.
Elderly women were sexually assaulted repeatedly in their own homes.
As a result of these kinds of attacks, Cummings wrote, quote, the senior citizens of Rosedale lived in constant fear.
After documenting the extremely high rate of crime and anti-white violence in the area, Cummings spoke to a man named Lee Ellens, who served as the director of a youth program in Rosedale.
Cummings was hoping to hear at a minimum that civic leaders in Rosedale, people with influence and authority, were aware of the problem and concerned about it.
So Cummings asked, quote, what do you think can be done with the situation with old white people living in black neighborhoods?
But after about a minute, Ellens made clear that no one actually cared about what was happening and had no plans to stop it.
Here's how Cummings summarized the response he received, quote, in a couple of years, the problem would go away.
Pretty soon, there would be no elderly whites in Rosedale.
Consequently, it wasn't worth investing a lot of time and energy worrying about it.
Meanwhile, Cummings' colleagues in academia had a similar attitude.
They implied that the white victims deserved it.
As one professor told Cummings, quote, their ancestors were probably yucking it up when blacks were being lynched by Klamsmen.
Left Behind in Rosedale is available online.
It's in its entirety.
You can pull it up and read it in excruciating detail and see how the U.S. government left white people to fend for themselves as their communities descended into crime and violence, all in the name of civil rights and social progress.
And it's worth a look, if only as an antidote to all of the propaganda about white flight that you've probably been forced to consume in your life.
But really, you don't have to read Left Behind at Rosedale for the simple reason that not much has changed since the 1980s.
Ask the white farmers in South Africa, the ones who are desperately trying to flee to the United States at the moment.
Just ask them how safe they feel on their own property.
Or for that matter, talk to white people who are unfortunate enough to be living in Cincinnati at the moment.
These are white Americans who thought their city was distinct from South Africa because after all, South Africa is about 10,000 miles away.
And over in South Africa, they're much poorer than we are here.
They don't have jobs or a lot of infrastructure, at least since the end of apartheid.
So how similar could downtown Cincinnati really be as compared to South Africa?
Well, as it turns out, Rosedale is essentially South Africa, which is also Cincinnati, which is also every other city in this country.
That is to say, in every context, when you introduce mandatory diversity, life becomes much more dangerous for everybody, including white people.
That's a historical and statistical fact.
I mean, it's borne out by all the data over the past half century.
You can call that statement whatever label you want, but it just happens to be true.
And that's not just because crime goes up in general, although it does.
It's true because crime specifically also targeting whites become commonplace.
Early Saturday morning in downtown Cincinnati, near the city, the site of the city's ongoing music festival celebrating black culture used to be a jazz festival, and now it's, I guess, just a general kind of music Festival.
Several of these anti-white attacks took place on camper, camera.
And in one case, a white man was knocked to the ground by several attackers who continued to pummel his head once he was on the ground.
In another case, a white woman was punched directly in the head, knocked unconscious as she hit the pavement.
Blood starts streaming from her mouth.
And we can't show you all this footage in its entirety.
In fact, we can show you very little of it.
But I mean, you can find all of it online if you want to see it.
yeah help her up whoa oh oh oh oh oh He should be out there.
You know, it's funny because it was just a couple of years ago that Joe Biden and Merrick Garland informed us that white supremacy was the single greatest domestic threat this country faced.
But neither Biden nor Garland has to walk around American cities alone after dark without dozens of armed bodyguards.
They don't have to deal with getting sucker punched and brutally beaten and random assaults.
But that's the reality of what's happening in the middle of major American cities.
The police chief in Cincinnati and various politicians are willing to condemn these acts of violence in the abstract, at least.
They're saying that it's wrong for a mob to brutally assault innocent people.
So we appreciate their courageous moral clarity on that point.
But strangely enough, they're not willing to say a word about the race of the attackers or the race of the victims.
And of course, it goes without saying, but I will say it, if the victims were racial minorities and the attackers were white, then it'd be a very different story.
There'd be instantaneous Act Blue funded riots in every American city.
Not to mention relentless, constant media coverage.
But because the victims were white, most national media outlets aren't covering this at all.
I mean, it's as if the footage doesn't exist.
That includes CNN, ABC, MBC, MSMBC, New York Times, Washington Post, CBS, a near total corporate media blackout.
They will not touch it.
To the extent that local news is covering the violence, they're omitting race from the story entirely.
Watch.
Yeah, Council Member Mark Jeffries said this fight happened at 3 a.m. today.
We've got new video tonight as police piece together exactly how and why this started and state lawmakers take notice.
A massive fight between more than a dozen people in the middle of the street.
At Forthen Elm, just a block uphill from PACOR Stadium.
Videos posted online show punches and kicks being thrown continuing after a man is knocked to the ground.
As the fight goes on, videos show a man punching a woman, knocking her unconscious.
Chief Teresa Thigee called it a sudden dispute between individuals following a verbal altercation, saying, I am in complete disgust waking up to the viral video many of you have now seen.
The implication is that there was a vague verbal altercation and that there needs to be an investigation, you know, to figure out what happened here.
Meanwhile, the anti-white brigade on social media, they're desperately searching for a way to justify what happened.
We need context, they're saying.
But here's the problem.
Another thing that should go without saying, there is no context where it would be okay for multiple people to jump and pummel one person and continue beating that person even after they're on the ground.
There especially aren't any words that that person could possibly say that would begin to justify it.
The implication in the news coverage is that race is irrelevant to the story because really it could have been anyone doing the kicking, but we all know that's not true.
We all know these videos only go one way.
I mean, if you hear about a video where members of one race are stomping someone else while they're on the ground, you immediately know which party is which.
I mean, we all know that, but you're supposed to deny that reality, even when you're the victim.
Consider the story of white left-wing Ohio State University graduate student, Gregory Wheeler.
He was playing Pokemon Go in a park in Ohio with his friend Samantha Halb a few years ago, and they were surrounded and brutally beaten by a large mob of black kids, all of them under the age of 18.
And then for good measure, the mob shot Wheeler several times.
Now, you might think that if you were nearly murdered in a park in this manner, you'd conclude that you need to get out of this neighborhood immediately.
And then you might wonder, what went wrong with all these families?
Where are these kids' fathers?
I mean, I wasn't just attacked by white children or Asian children.
Why is that?
But Gregory Wheeler didn't ask any of those questions.
Instead, here's what he told the Columbus Monthly, quoting from the article, quote, Gregory Wheeler, who was shot three times during a late July robbery in Linden Park, detailed his feelings surrounding the incident, where he was attacked by a group of about a dozen children ranging in age of 11 to 17, by his estimate, before he was shot from behind as he sought help at a nearby house.
I'm not angry at those who attacked me, he wrote, though I am saddened.
Wheeler went on to express solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement.
His attackers were black, as well as some of the concerns that plagued him in those moments he lay bleeding on that stranger's front porch.
Was his friend Samantha okay?
She was.
Would innocent lives be lost in the drive to bring the guilty to justice?
Thankfully not.
Is locking any young person away for an extended period of time the best means of rehabilitation?
Yes, he's telling us that as he was laying bleeding on the sidewalk after being shot three times in the back, he was thinking to himself, would imprisoning my attackers be the best means of rehabilitation for these poor wayward youth?
That's what was going through his mind.
I don't know what's worse, if he actually was thinking that in the moment or if he's lying and pretending that he was.
I don't know what's worse.
Yes, even getting beaten and shot several times by a mob of black kids wasn't enough to prevent Gregory Wheeler from expressing solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement or lamenting whether the police would randomly kill innocent people as they investigated his attack.
On the left and in the center, the issue is completely firewalled.
You're expected to die before you're allowed to talk about it.
Remember this story from Baltimore just a few months ago?
Roughly 15 black teenagers brutally assaulted a 12-year-old white boy in an apartment complex, but police announced that there would be no hate crime charges and that several of the attackers wouldn't be charged at all.
Watch.
Police say charges have been filed against five of the eight individuals that police say were directly involved in this assault, all of the accused at least 13 years old or younger.
And tonight, a closer look at the alleged crime.
It's a dramatic incident caught on cell phone video, circulating now on social media.
A boy attacked.
Baltimore County Police say it happened at the Kings Mill apartments in Essex last Friday.
A violent disturbance that unfolded in this patch of yard at Hadwick Drive.
Neighbors who say they were not home that day are stunned now by what they see in the video.
It's not right.
It's disheartening.
Like, I can cry.
A boy seen in the video being punched, thrown to the ground, kicked.
Even at one point, his pants pulled down by a group of several other young boys.
Tony Longo, right at this point, he's very badly bruised up.
Says it was his son, 12-year-old Kason, beaten in that video, now recovering physically and mentally from what happened.
It's a group of several other young boys who committed this heinous crime, according to the news report.
But you don't get to know anything else about the boys, many of whom will get away with it.
Let's be honest, the juveniles they supposedly charge are also going to get away with it.
For beating and sexually assaulting a white child on camera, there are no consequences from the authorities or anyone else.
Again, this is a very established pattern.
It's not just the media that ignores anti-white attacks.
The police often ignore them too for political reasons.
A few years ago, there was a major protest in Philadelphia after several black women decided to wage a campaign of terrorism against white people.
It was about as open and obvious as it could have possibly been.
But the police didn't even take a report.
Watch.
Well, Jim officials now say an internal affairs investigation is underway into why third district officers failed to investigate racial tension said to be brewing in the South Philadelphia neighborhood.
The outrage spurred a large rally tonight, despite the rain.
We will no longer allow you to terrorize our neighborhood.
White Lives Matter.
150 to 200 people spewed under the middle of Forth and Wolf this evening to protest a rash of what they claim are racial attacks at the hands of four black women who live nearby.
These females have been terrorizing the neighborhood.
They have robbed, attacked, and beat others in our neighborhood.
This man who did not want to be identified says he and his 10-year-old son were among the victims.
Was attacked sitting on my doorstep basically for no reason at all.
For what reason, I still don't know.
That quick, I seen four women attacking a white man.
Another woman who also did not want to be identified says the women attacked her inside her home, calling her racial epithets when she tried to intervene.
And next thing I know, I hear, white, we're going to f ⁇ you up.
And I just went to shut my door saying, I don't even know you're.
I don't even know you.
Next thing I know, they're just inside spitting on me, pounding on my face, beating me.
The victims further claim responding officers from the third district did not even take a report or make any arrests.
This kind of official indifference, you know, to anti-white violence is fully effect, fully in effect today.
In the case of Cincinnati and the attack there from Saturday, the local police union has decided that the real outrage is that bystanders didn't intervene.
Here's Ken Cober, the head of Cincinnati's police union.
Quote, it's pretty disturbing.
I mean, I get that people want to film stuff.
They want to be able to put it on Facebook or TikTok or whatever else.
But the fact that nobody there was calling 911 is what's really disturbing.
No one really tried to intervene.
So never mind the fact that there were apparently no cops downtown at all while a mob beat several white people in the streets.
Never mind the fact that mob violence is now a fixture of black communities.
Forget all that, says the police union.
The real outrage is that someone filmed the attack and that nobody intervened.
Now, there's only so much of this lying and open race hatred that people can tolerate before they decide they've had enough.
And when that moment arrives, what does it look like exactly?
Well, we're going to increasingly find out.
And that's starting already.
In the Ozarks in Arkansas, hundreds of people have now paid to become members of a whites-only community.
And for more than a year, that community has begun to take shape.
NBC News recently profiled this new community very disapprovingly, as you expect.
Here's how that went.
No blacks, no Jews, no gays.
High up in the Ozark Hills in the state of Arkansas, dozens of people have been working hard, building houses and a new type of community.
It's called Return to the Land, and it is a town open to white people Only.
They are millennials and Gen Z, and this is a new update of age-old prejudice.
What we've done here is establish a place where we have control over who our neighbors are, and that is just for the sake of preserving, you know, our culture.
And that culture effectively was saying this is a white culture, a white zoning place.
White American culture.
But what this sounds like is bringing back segregation.
Is that a fair assessment?
It's free association.
So we're not trying to keep other people down.
This is a small settlement in the middle of the Ozarks.
But they are being kept out, even if...
Around 40 people live here.
Hundreds more from across the world have paid to be members.
And while the men do the physical labor, the women take care of the children who live here full-time.
It could be a very loving community if you're part of the community, but if you're black, if you're Jewish, or if you're gay, you can't be part of that community.
They can have their own communities, and they already do.
You might be wondering how any of this can be legal.
Return to the Land is structured as a private members' association, which they believe allows them to discriminate on the basis of ethnicity, along with other factors.
That has yet to be tested in the courts and may well fail.
The Arkansas Attorney General has said his office is now reviewing the matter as a result of our reporting.
Now, the position of MBC News, along with the rest of the corporate media that's covered this, that you can see in that reporting, appears to be that you don't have the right to exclude people from your property on the basis of race, but actually you do have that right.
You can exclude people from your home for any reason you want to.
It's not their property.
It's yours.
We're not talking about a public accommodation like a restaurant or apartment complex, nor are we talking about people who take money from the government.
This is their land.
They've established a private membership association.
They sell shares that grant access to the land.
And if property rights mean anything at all, it's that you have exclusive rights to control access to your property.
On the other hand, if you don't have the right to build a community on a private piece of land and live around the sorts of people you want to live around for whatever reason, for whatever the reason is, it's up to you, then in that case, you don't have any rights at all.
I mean, this is as basic and fundamental as rights can possibly get.
Freedom of association, private property.
But as you just heard, the Attorney General of Arkansas apparently doesn't believe in freedom of association or private property.
He's launched an investigation and condemned, quote, racial discrimination.
Now, strangely, though, there was no investigation or any media outrage whatsoever into something called Freedom, Georgia.
You may remember that after George Floyd's overdose in 2020, 19 black families purchased hundreds of acres near Macon, Georgia, as part of their plan to create a safe haven for people of color.
In other words, it's a blacks-only commune.
It's what we just saw in Arkansas, but for black people or quote-unquote people of color.
And here's how CNN reported on that effort.
You hear that?
That is the sound of freedom.
Feels really amazing.
I cry every time I come here.
Why were these two women interested in the prospect of buying a town in the first place?
We needed to create a space and a place where we could be a village again, a tribe again.
So Renee and Ashley reached out to family and friends, and together they bought what they intend to name Freedom, Georgia, a new black city.
The owners hosted the big black campout over Labor Day weekend.
Supporters drove in from across the country.
That is our vision, and to be able to pass this land down to my children and to the children that are represented by each of our 19 families as a piece of legacy.
We're hoping to create legacy.
So apparently it's very noble and appropriate when black people want to be around black people and ban all other races from the property.
The media will celebrate that kind of thing any day of the week.
It's only white people who aren't allowed to practice freedom of association, just like it's only white people who aren't supposed to, you know, supposedly don't have a homeland or a culture or anything else.
Are these identity-less, you know, ghosts just hovering over the land, calling nowhere their home?
That's what we're supposed to believe.
Of course, whenever there's an opportunity for race hustlers to shamelessly embarrass themselves with their own hypocrisy, Ben Crump isn't far away.
Here's his take on this new initiative, quote, wow, a whites-only group is trying to expand its community into Missouri, barring black, Jewish, and non-white members.
They claim it's about shared ancestral values and living among like-minded people.
I have no words.
Close quote.
I'm sure he'll have a lot of words in the future when he finds some way to file a lawsuit.
But meanwhile, this is very interesting.
Here was Ben Crump back in December of 2021.
Quote, Wayne Swanson and 19 other black families purchased more than 500 acres of farmland in Tombsboro, Georgia to invest in their Freedom Georgia initiative.
Their black-owned initiative and many others will greatly benefit from the farmer relief program.
And there's an applause emoji, just so we're very clear about his tone here.
He's applauding it.
Now, by the way, that last part turned out to be very false.
More than five years after it was launched, Freedom Georgia is about as dysfunctional as you'd expect.
Wikipedia reports that as of July 2023, the settlement consists of a dilapidated campground and its founders are working on establishing roads and utility services.
Then as of May 2024, quote, construction for permanent dwellings or vital infrastructure has not begun.
All land was sold in 2023 and no further plans have surfaced for the planned town.
In other words, Freedom Georgia has turned out a lot like South Africa.
The leaders banished all the white people, took whatever cash and media attention they could get, and then disappeared, leaving everything in ruins.
That's the model of anti-white governance that the media will celebrate as they demonize the white community in Arkansas and minimize the vicious attacks on white people in downtown Cincinnati and everywhere else.
Now, for my part, I'd say people have The right to build whatever communities they want to build on their own private property.
It doesn't matter how you or I or anyone else feels about it.
It's not our property.
We don't have to live there.
No one is being harmed.
When a group of people go and they buy some land, they say, We're going to live here on our private property.
It doesn't harm anyone else.
No racial minority is being deprived of anything.
Nothing's being taken away from them.
They're not being hurt in any way.
That's it.
Now, at any rate, at this point, no amount of media hackery is sufficient to hide the truth that everyone can clearly see.
And it's controversial, quote unquote, to say, but it's a plain statistical fact that, generally speaking, the whiter a community is, the safer it is.
The data demonstrates this very clearly.
It's just true.
It's just a true thing.
I mean, it's been an unspeakable truth in our country for a long time, but it's true whether we speak it or not.
Simply a fact.
And rather than yell at people for noticing these inconvenient facts, maybe we should start addressing the core issues driving this trend.
Maybe we're going to ask, oh, this is an interesting fact.
Why is that?
What can we do about that?
What's at the core of this problem?
Why is this happening?
These are all questions you could start asking.
You can start getting somewhere if we can get over this ridiculous hurdle of having to pretend that things we all know are true aren't true.
Or alternatively, we can keep screaming and trying impotently to enforce racial double standards, the kinds of racial double standards that have defined our culture for a very long time.
But that dam was never going to hold.
And now it's breaking.
People are just done with the double standards.
If tribalism is okay for every other group on the planet, you're going to find that white people will increasingly follow suit.
And saying, no, it's bad when you do it, just is not a persuasive argument.
People only pretended to be persuaded by it.
But one public act of mob violence at a time, as we're lectured about white supremacy while white people are beaten in the streets, those days are rapidly coming to an end.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
Grand Canyon University, a private Christian university in beautiful Phoenix, Arizona, believes that we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
GCU believes in equal opportunity and that the American dream starts with purpose.
GCU equips you to serve others in ways that promote human flourishing and create a ripple effect of transformation for generations to come.
By honoring your career calling, you impact your family, your friends, and your community.
Change the world for good by putting others before yourself to glorify God.
Whether your pursuit involves a bachelor's, master's, or doctoral degree, GCU's online, on-campus, and hybrid learning environments are designed to help you achieve your unique academic, personal, and professional goals.
With over 340 academic programs as of September 2024, GCU Meets You Where You Are, provides a path to help you fulfill your dreams.
The pursuit to serve others is yours.
Let it flourish.
Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University, a private, Christian, affordable.
Visit gcu.edu.
We'll begin with a headline, a story that's gotten some attention, but I think should get more than it has.
And I first saw this pop up from Right Angle News Network on X. The post says, President Trump's new executive order will essentially override the laws that closed the mental asylums in the 1960s, allowing states to once again involuntarily reinstitutionalize people deemed a danger to themselves or others.
And so that's the summary.
Here's the New York Post with more context.
President Trump signed an executive order Thursday calling on states and cities to end endemic vagrancy and rehouse homeless people, including drug addicts and those suffering from mental problems, in treatment centers.
The order redirects federal funding to prioritize shifting homeless individuals into long-term institutional settings for humane treatment through the appropriate use of civil commitment.
On average, more than 274,000 people were sleeping on the streets each night last year under President Joe Biden.
The order says, overwhelming majority of these people are addicted to drugs, have a mental health disorder, or both, according to the document.
Trump has complained for years about homeless encampments along major roads in Washington, D.C. and proposed reopening insane asylums to house the nation's most dangerous people.
And so that actually says to house the nation's most dangerous street people.
That's the phrase.
There's no way that's the politically correct phrase now.
Street people?
So he went from homeless to unhoused to street person.
Somehow I feel like we're going backwards in the effort to be politically correct.
Anyway, so first of all, I love the idea of addressing the homelessness problem this way.
I've been advocating this for years, as you know, and this is exactly the right thing to do.
Even to the point of calling it vagrancy, you know, as he does in this order, that's what it is.
That's what we should call it, and that's how we should treat it.
Our cities have become homeless encampments.
It's completely out of control.
There's filth and trash everywhere.
Druggies strung out on the sidewalk.
It's disgusting.
It's filthy.
It's unsafe.
And there's only one way to address it.
There's only one way to solve it, which is by force, which is by forcibly removing these people and enforcing the laws against vagracy.
And that's the important point here, that Trump is not inventing any new laws through executive order, which of course is not how laws can be made anyway.
These laws are already on the books.
It's already illegal to set up a campsite on a public sidewalk.
It's illegal almost everywhere to do that.
And it has been since forever.
It's just that the laws have not been enforced.
And this is the pattern.
All of these cities have become unlivable hellscapes for the most part, not because of changes to the law.
Now, there have been some changes, like legalizing marijuana, that sort of thing, that's contributed to the problem.
But for the most part, they have the laws on the books already to clean things up.
They just choose not to.
They don't enforce the laws.
Now, they would enforce them if you or I violated this particular law.
If you, as a normal person, tried to set up a camp on the sidewalk, you know, start grilling up some steaks, invite your friends over for an impromptu tailgate in the middle of a public walkway, right?
The cops will be on the scene in like five minutes or sooner.
And you would be given a citation, a pretty hefty one, and told to leave.
And if you refuse to leave, they just arrest you and put you in jail.
But if you're a mentally ill druggie and you and your friends are shooting heroin on the sidewalk instead of having a tailgate, suddenly it's tolerated.
But of course, if anything, it should go the opposite way.
Like we should have more, we should tolerate the former scenario more than the latter.
But this toleration is a choice.
And we can make a better choice and fix this problem.
Really, it's up to us.
And so I think that's what Trump is doing.
That's why it's good.
Now, on the other hand, I will say when it comes to reopening the asylums, if that is indeed the effect of this order, which it looks like that's what they're going to do, I support that in theory.
In theory, I think it's a good idea to reopen the asylums.
And I've called for the same.
I've talked about it on the show a bunch of times.
But I've also argued that it needs to be accompanied by massive reforms to the psychiatric industry.
Insane asylums and involuntary commitment give very significant power to the psychiatric industry.
And so the industry has to be fundamentally gutted and reformed before we do something like this.
And I don't see that happening, which also concerns me because the problem is that the psychiatric industry has labeled pretty much everything a mental illness at this point.
They invent new ones every day.
There's no check or balance on that.
They can just, if the psychiatric industry says, well, this is a mental illness, then it is.
That's it.
They don't have to prove it.
They don't have to demonstrate.
They don't have to provide any evidence.
They don't have to point to anything going on in the brain to show that, oh, this is defective.
They don't have to do any of that.
They just declaring this set of behaviors, this emotional state is now a disorder.
So without major reforms, this just enables psychiatrists to lock anyone away based on whatever nonsense diagnosis they come up with.
And what does that mean?
It means that, you know, get ready for in the, you know, when you follow the slippery slope, get ready for conservatism and other inconvenient ideologies to be labeled mental disorders, which must be treated for the patient's own good, of course, with involuntary commitment and all the rest of it.
So that's what I'm worried about.
So if we're talking about involuntary commitment in insane asylums, then we should be talking specifically, and it has to be very clear, specifically for vagrants sleeping on the sidewalk.
That's what this should be for.
And these are for people who are not capable or are unwilling to be functional members of society.
And it's like a pretty low bar for functional member of society.
Can you live in a dwelling and stay there?
And can you live in such a way that you don't end up on a cardboard box on the sidewalk?
And if you can't live that way, or if you're unwilling to, then those are the people that insane asylums are made for.
That's why you have those kinds of institutions or should have them.
Last week, we talked about the women's gossip app called T, the T app, which was a place where women went to, well, it still is a place for this, although I don't know how bustling it's going to be anymore after what happened.
But this is a place where women can go and gossip and spread rumors about the men that they go on dates with.
And this involves posting pictures of the men, other personal information, you know, where they work, all the rest of it.
And doing all this without the men's consent and oftentimes without their knowledge.
Now, the founder of this app is a guy, a guy named Sean Cook.
And in previous interviews, Sean has made it clear that he has no sympathy for the men who are defamed and whose privacy is violated on his app.
Here's what he's had to say about that.
We receive probably about three legal threats a day from different men that are disappointed that women have told largely true stories about them on these apps.
And so they are upset that they've done something bad to a woman and that a woman has told people about it.
And we have a full legal team that helps us navigate those situations.
And all of the way that we operate is well within legal guidelines.
And then, you know, there's also a whole men's rights activism community that doesn't like what we're doing.
And so they're constantly trying to tear us down and organize, you know, mass petitions to take us down and mass reporting of us on the app store to try to take us down.
So, you know, we have a lot of people that are unhappy about what we're doing.
And that's okay with us.
You know, we believe that women deserve to be able to share their stories and to be able to have safe, you know, relationships.
Notice the qualifier he uses there.
He says that the stories being spread about these men are largely true.
Largely true.
Which, first of all, how could he possibly know that?
I mean, you can't know that.
When a woman goes on the app to spread some negative story about a man, the only evidence we have that the story is true is simply that the woman said it, which is to say that there is no evidence at all.
So you cannot claim that this is largely true.
But even still, he says largely.
Largely is a qualifier that looms rather large over that sentence.
Largely true, which means he's admitting that at least some of the time his app serves as a forum for libelous claims and defamation against innocent people.
He's outright admitting it.
And he doesn't care because he's a bad person.
He has the moral sense of a lizard, you know, or of a rat scurrying around in the gutter.
I mean, that's morally speaking.
He's just a disgusting, terrible human being who founded an app for people who are just like himself.
And that brings us to the update.
CNET reports: quote, T, a women's safety dating app that surged to the top of the free iOS App Store listings this week, has been the subject of a major security breach.
The company confirmed Friday that it has identified authorized access to one of our systems that exposed thousands of user images.
According to T's preliminary findings, the breach allowed access to approximately 72,000 images, broken down into two groups, 13,000 images of selfies and photo identification that people had submitted during account verification, and 59,000 images that were publicly viewable in the app from posts, comments, and direct messages.
These images have been in a legacy data system that contained information from more than two years ago, the company said in a statement.
Now, and this was 4chan is where all this started, and then it spread over to Reddit.
So some mighty Avengers on 4chan went in and found the pictures and driver's licenses of the women who have used this app.
And they were able to find it because the app collects this data, collects their photo identification, their photos, and then apparently stores it somewhere.
And now, I don't know anything about this kind of stuff.
I fully admit that.
So I can't speak to this myself.
But from what I've read, this wasn't even really a hack because there was basically no security on this app at all.
All this information was apparently stored somewhere that could be easily accessed.
You know, they didn't have to, this wasn't not like some mission impossible thing where they had to, you know, break into a secure vault with laser beams and rappel down.
It was nothing like that.
If you know what you're doing and you have just a little bit of knowledge about this stuff, which would be more than I have, you could easily access it because all this stuff was stored publicly, essentially.
And the security on the app was non-existent and that's how it was accessed.
And now the names and faces of these women are circulating all over the internet.
I'm not going to share any of that here or put it up, but it's all over X at the moment.
And look, I don't condone hacking or any kind of criminal activity, if that's what this was, if this qualifies as a crime or hacking, which I'm not sure that it does.
Not something I would do or recommend.
However, that said, do I feel sorry for these women who are now being doxed, at least so far as that their pictures are all over the place and people are making fun of them?
Do I feel sorry for them?
No, I don't.
Not in the slightest.
I don't feel the slightest bit sorry for them.
Because very simple principle that we can find in the gospels.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Okay.
You live by posting pictures of other people without their consent, gossiping, tearing them down without their consent.
You live by that, you die by that.
Okay, this is what you did to other people.
Now it's happening to you.
And now their pictures are being shared without their consent.
Now people are gossiping about them.
Now people are tearing them apart.
And now they feel powerless to stop it.
And that's how the men felt when they ended up on the app.
And that's just how it goes.
And so I have no sympathy.
I've seen some people, some people on X on social media are saying, oh, I don't like this app, but I don't, you know, you got to have sympathy for these women.
I don't.
I don't really have sympathy for them at all.
Like, not even the slightest bit.
You decided to take part in this.
I mean, you decided to take part in this app that exists purely, purely for gossip and defamation.
And not only did you go to this app, you were dumb enough to give it your photo ID and a picture of yourself.
And you took part in this.
And so, yeah, this is what happens.
I believe very much in people being held to their own standards.
We've talked about double standards to start the show.
We talked about racial double standards.
There are also these sex-based double standards.
And all of these double standards have, again, defined our culture for decades now.
And I think we're just reaching a point where across the board, all these double standards, people just had enough of it.
People are just done with it.
And so now it's going to be, okay, well, look, if you want to play the game that way, here's what's going to happen.
And you might not like it.
It might be kind of ugly.
It's going to get uglier, honestly.
But as I said, the dam can only hold for so long.
People only put up with this for so long.
You can only say to certain groups, okay, we're going to treat you this way, but nobody else.
And we're going to allow all these other people over here to do stuff, but you're not allowed to.
You can get away with that in a society for a certain period of time, but not forever.
Eventually people say, no, we're not going to play that game.
Sorry.
They can do it.
We're going to do it.
You treat us this way.
We're going to treat you that way.
That's it.
And so you don't want that to happen, then we got to change the standards for everyone.
Now, I would love, by the way, for the standard to be that we're not going to gossip about anyone.
We're not going to defame anybody.
We're not going to post pictures of people without their consent to make fun of them.
We're not going to spread rumors about people.
I think that should be the standard.
I fully endorse that standard.
I don't agree with any form of that.
But it's got to be everybody.
It's got to be everyone.
That standard has to apply to everyone.
It's everyone or no one.
You know, it's the same thing with tribalism.
You want to have some kind of standard where we're not engaging in tribalism.
I don't think that's really even possible because human beings are wired the way they are.
But It's everyone or no one.
Those are your options.
Any standard you want to put in place, whether it's a good standard or bad standard, applies to everyone or it applies to no one.
And that is going to be the rule going forward.
Post-millennial reports: a newly published economic analysis has found that California's 2023 fast food minimum wage hike has led to the elimination of thousands of jobs across the sector.
According to a working paper released this month by the National Bureau of Economic Research, employment in California's fast food industry dropped by 18,000 jobs after the new $20 minimum wage took effect in April 2024, a 3.2% decline compared to other states.
And then it gets into more information, but that's the basics.
They put this in place, and then there's 18,000 jobs lost.
I mean, it's about the least surprising news you'll hear all week.
If you wave your magic wand and suddenly make certain jobs a lot more expensive for their employers, you're going to find that just as suddenly there are many fewer of those jobs.
And it's a very simple equation.
We've talked plenty about the minimum wage.
I've made my case against it.
I've explained why it's ridiculous for the government to just come in arbitrarily and declare that some minimum amount of money must be paid to all workers regardless of their job, regardless of their quality of their work, regardless of experience, regardless of anything else.
Anyone who has this position is worth X minimum regardless.
Even if they come to work every day and they just sit in a chair and don't do anything.
Still, their work, which is non-existent, is worth, that doesn't make any sense.
And I've been over that many times.
Now I just want to emphasize one other thing, which is that the minimum wage was always a stupid idea, of course.
But these days, now of all times, in 2025, for God's sake, it has never been stupider.
I mean, the minimum wage has never been stupider.
It's a worse idea now than it's ever been before.
And that trend will continue indefinitely in the future.
However bad of an idea minimum wage is today, it will be a worse idea tomorrow.
Okay.
That's the trend that will continue forever.
And that is because of automation and specifically AI.
We have long since reached the point where there's really no practical reason for a human employee to stand at a register and take your order or, you know, talk to you through a headset in a drive-through line.
There's really no reason for that.
AI can do that easily.
I mean, there's no practical reason why you ever need to talk to a person in a drive-through line ever again.
AI can handle that, not like an AI handle, can handle it better and quicker and cheaper and more efficiently than any than human beings can, generally speaking.
Now, the only reason why McDonald's and Burger King and Wendy's and all the rest of them have not automated all of those positions entirely is just because they're worried about the bad press.
I mean, that's really that's the only thing holding it back at this point.
And in short order, another few years maybe, we'll have robots that can be built and purchased at scale and which will be able to operate the frying machines and assemble the hamburgers and all the rest of it.
Again, we probably already have this technology, but I think it'd probably be hard to scale that.
But in a few years, you know, Elon Musk is working on that.
He'll figure that one out too.
And that's what's happening.
All of this is happening.
Not a matter of if.
It's only a matter of when.
And the answer to when is very soon.
Now, look, I'm not excited about this personally.
I don't like it.
You know how I feel about our incoming AI dystopia.
I'm not a fan of it.
I don't want AI to take any jobs.
I personally will take a less efficient fast food drive-through experience operated by people over one that's operated by robots.
Now, I don't think that my view there is representative of most customers, but that's how I feel, just because I'm so opposed to this stuff in principle.
I don't want millions of people to lose their jobs all at once.
I don't want to live in a world where as I go about my day, I'm only ever interacting with robots and algorithms.
I don't want that.
That's a sad, miserable prospect, but it's coming all the same.
I don't like it, but it's happening.
And these minimum wage laws will only succeed in causing all of this to happen much sooner.
And any chance of avoiding it, any chance of mitigating it, any chance of keeping a human presence in these kinds of jobs will be destroyed.
You know, these dumb leftists are destroying it right now.
Any chance we have, I mean, if you want any of these fast food jobs to still exist at all in five years, I don't know if it's possible, but if there's any chance you morons are destroying it right now by putting in $20 minimum wage, $30 is what Mom Donnie up in New York wants to do, you are guaranteeing, you are signing this down in cement that these jobs will not exist in five years.
They'll be gone completely.
You absolute morons.
Any chance of stopping this is, I mean, you have to be able to make the argument that it's good for business to keep humans in these jobs.
You got to be able to make the argument to McDonald's that it's good for their business to have a human being at the drive-through speaking to you through the headset when they can't even understand you.
You got to repeat it five times and they're surly and don't care about you and they're mad that you're there.
Like you have to convince McDonald's.
That's what anyone who cares about, you know, minimum wage jobs.
Anyone who cares about the working class.
This is the argument you have to make.
And now, really, it shouldn't.
The actual argument is that whether it's better for business to have humans in these jobs, it's certainly better for the soul.
It's better for human well-being.
It's better for society.
It's better in a lot of these kinds of ways.
But that is not going to be persuasive to mega corporations.
They don't really care about doing what's best for the human soul.
That's not what they're talking about in their board meetings and all the rest of it.
You got to convince them that it's better for business, that there's some kind of intangible thing that that human interaction ultimately helps the business.
And, you know, that's going to be a difficult case to make.
And I say that as someone who wants to make that case, but I think it's a difficult case to make.
Any chance of making that case goes out the window.
When you have states mandating $20 minimum wage or $30 minimum wage, it goes out the window.
Then the corporations are going to laugh in your face and say, really?
So you're going to tell me it's better for business that I'm forced to pay people three to four times more than what the labor is worth.
Like when I could just automate it and pay nothing?
I mean, you can wag your finger and all that at the greedy corporations.
You can do all that.
It doesn't matter.
Doesn't matter.
You have to be able to make some kind of practical case to these corporations and say, no, don't just automate all this and have robots doing all of it.
Yeah, I know you're going to save money up front, but here's why you shouldn't do it.
You got to be able to make that argument.
And I think with these minimum wage, again, these minimum wage laws being put in place, it's impossible.
Me, like as someone who wants to help lead the anti-AI revolution, I'm looking at this.
$20 minimum wage for someone to talk to you through a drive-through.
And I'm like, I got nothing.
I don't know what to tell you now.
I like to think I'm pretty creative when I'm making arguments and I can't come up with it.
Now, you allow companies to pay what the job, what the labor is actually worth?
Okay, now maybe there's a chance.
Maybe there's a chance.
What if you could delay your next two mortgage payments?
Well, that's right.
Imagine putting those two payments in your pocket and finally getting a little breathing room.
It's possible when you call American Financing Today.
If you're feeling stretched by everyday expenses, groceries, gas, bills piling up, you're not alone.
Most Americans are putting these expenses on credit cards and there doesn't seem to be a way out.
American Financing can show you how to use your home's equity to pay off that debt.
You need to call American Financing Today before you get to a point where you can't make those payments.
Their salary-based mortgage consultants are helping homeowners just like you restructure their loans and consolidate debt all without upfront payments.
And their customers are saving an average of $800 a month.
It's like a $10,000 raise.
It's fast, it's simple, and it could save your budget this summer.
Call now before it's too late.
866-569-4711.
That's 866-569-4711 or visit americanfinancing.net slash Walsh.
More than 90% of Americans don't get enough fruits, vegetables, and fiber in their diet.
We're all basically walking nutritional disasters.
That's where balance of nature supplements come in.
These aren't your typical synthetic vitamins with names you can't pronounce.
We're talking about 47 whole ingredients, 16 fruits, 15 vegetables, plus spices and fibers.
Real stuff like wild blueberries, kale, turmeric, and shiitake mushrooms.
I've taken these fruits and veggies supplements for a while now.
And honestly, it's nice knowing that I'm getting that variety without having to turn my kitchen into a produce section.
It's especially handy to have while traveling as well.
Plus, their fiber and spice blend is the only supplement on the market combining 12 spices with four whole fibers.
Look, I'm not saying this replaces eating actual vegetables.
I'm not a monster.
But when life gets crazy and your diet consists mainly of whatever doesn't require cooking, I've been there plenty of times.
It's nice knowing you're still getting healthy ingredients with Balance of Nature.
They're vegan, which is really important to me, kosher, gluten-free, and made with zero artificial anything.
Just nature doing what nature does best.
Go to balanceofnature.com, use promo code Walsh for 35% off your first order as a preferred customer.
Plus, get a free bottle of fiber and spice.
That's balanceofnature.com, promo code Walsh.
I'm pleased to announce a brand new original docuseries coming DailyWire Plus and give you the very first look at it.
It's titled The Pope and the Fuhrer, The Secret Vatican Files of World War II.
And yes, the title is as provocative as the truth it uncovers.
For decades, Pope Pius XII has been condemned for his silence, but now with unprecedented access to the Vatican's wartime archives, we uncover what really happened and why history may have gotten it all wrong.
Series premieres Wednesday, August 13th, exclusively on Delaware Plus.
Here's your first look.
History is written by the victors.
But what if the victors got it wrong?
For 80 years, the world has condemned one man as the Pope of Silence, the man who stood by in the face of shocking evil.
But can we trust the popular narrative, even after all these years?
This is not just a story about Hitler and the Holocaust.
One of the worst lies ever told about the Catholic Church is what she did or did not do in one of modernity's darkest hours.
Now, for the first time, the Vatican secret archive is open and the truth is far more shocking than the fiction.
Propagandists have peddled one story for decades, but now we can definitively know better.
Join me in this four-part series, where we will discover the true story of Pope Pius XII, Hitler, and the Second World War.
The Pope and the Führer, four episodes, nearly an hour each and not one second.
Ways to Daily Wire Plus members can start streaming August 13th.
Not a member yet?
Join today at DailyWirePlus.com.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Music.
Music.
For our daily cancellation today, we return to a very familiar genre of TikTok video, the genre where women, in an effort to be open and vulnerable, accidentally reveal themselves to be horrific, narcissistic, sociopath monsters.
This time, it's a woman who, she tells us, just recently informed her husband of 10 years and father to her three children that she wants a divorce.
Now, she hasn't actually decided for sure that she'll go through with it, she says.
She's hoping that she can be talked out of it, I guess, but she's strongly considering it anyway, even though her husband, according to her, is a perfect man.
He's awesome.
He's amazing.
He's a great guy, great father, great husband.
So naturally, she's strongly tempted to rip his life apart and destroy their family.
As a side note, I don't know this woman's name.
I briefly tried to Google it.
I never found her name because, and I didn't spend that long, admittedly, but I discovered, unsurprisingly, that when you Google wife divorcing perfect husband, you get thousands of hits.
I mean, thousands of videos and Reddit posts and message board posts and Cosmo articles about women and by women divorcing their perfect husbands.
So this is not an isolated phenomenon, which is probably why this woman felt so comfortable sharing this.
And so here's a clip.
Watch.
I don't know if I'm going to actually post this because this is super vulnerable for me and I'm a pretty open person.
But earlier this year, I told my husband I wanted a divorce.
And this would probably shock a lot of my friends and my family because I hadn't told anybody.
Okay.
I walked myself through the logistics of where would I live?
How would we split the time with the kids?
Who gets the dog?
All of those things.
Okay.
Had a full breakdown.
I feel like I have been searching for something in my relationship that we don't have for the whole time we've been married, which has been 10 years.
I there is not a single thing about my husband in and of himself that I do not love.
Let me be very clear about that.
He is the most self-disciplined, loyal, hard-working, good person that you could meet on this planet.
And that is probably the reason that is the reason why I have not left, okay?
Our relationship and what my expectations are for my marriage and what they always happen are not met, right?
Which I don't know if anybody's are.
The reason that pushed me to even bring up divorce and talk about it was the fact that I feel like I don't, I can't be myself with my husband.
And it's really confusing because I'm 32 years old.
I am a mom of three.
And I still don't know who I am.
So for me to be like, oh, I can't be myself or you don't love me for who I am, isn't really fair because I don't know who I am.
I'm figuring that out every day.
Well, I can clear that up for you, ma'am.
You are a fundamentally self-absorbed and shallow person who would inflict untold pain and suffering on other human beings just because you're bored and want to feel something, which puts you on the same moral plane as like a serial killer or school shooter.
The video goes on like this for another few minutes while she rambles about her life story.
I won't make you listen to any more of it.
Just to summarize, she and her husband are planning to go to Cabo for their 10-year anniversary in a few months, where they're supposed to renew their vows.
And she's having trouble writing her vows because it's difficult to write anything down when you have your head shoved so far up your own ass.
She doesn't say it quite like that.
I'm paraphrasing, but that's the idea.
Anyway, she's brought up this whole problem to her husband, but she's frustrated that nothing has changed.
Even though she doesn't know what should change or if anything at all should change or what sort of changes he could make in any case, considering he's already perfect, according to her, still she's unhappy and that must be his fault or someone's fault, just not her fault.
And she's not giving up just yet.
She's still in the marriage because her husband is perfect after all.
And he better stay that way.
God forbid he ever become like 1% less than perfect.
That would probably be the end of everything.
This man who has done everything right is on very thin ice somehow.
And that about sums up this woman's insufferable monologue.
Now, I want to respond to this with two pieces of advice.
Some advice for this woman and any woman like her, and some advice for men who are tempted to give up on marriage for fear of ending up with this woman or any woman like her.
Let me start by speaking to the woman in the video who says that she's contemplating divorce of her husband of 10 years, even though he's perfect and hasn't done anything wrong at all.
And I'll say to her, you know, I'm sure you've gotten a lot of advice from people close to you, friends, relatives, even your husband.
And I'm just as sure that all of the advice is really bad because they're all probably assuring you that your feelings are valid, that you shouldn't be ashamed of feeling the way you do, and that you should take some time to figure yourself out, et cetera, and so on.
Well, that is all wrong.
Your feelings, ma'am, are not valid.
And you should be ashamed of them.
The very last thing you need to do on this earth is spend even one more second trying to figure yourself out.
That's all you've done with your life up until this point.
And look where it's got you.
Besides, all this I don't know myself crap is all just cope anyway.
It's all, it's a cover story.
It's an excuse.
The truth, and you know this, we all do, is that you're actually just bored and you're looking for some kind of justification, rationalization to abandon your marriage and sleep around for a few years until you get bored of that also and marry somebody else until you also grow tired of that person.
And the cycle will repeat, getting sadder and more pathetic each time as you get older and grayer with age before dying in a nursing home and being memorialized At a sparsely attended funeral, where your children give you polite and perfunctory eulogies and then bury you under a tombstone they bought at a bargain to mark a grave they will never visit.
That's the rather bleak path that you are headed down.
And it's paradoxically both very well trodden and very lonely.
But there is a way off of it, fortunately.
It's simple.
It's not complicated, though it will be difficult for someone who is pathologically selfish like you.
But there's a word for this path.
It's called love.
And love is three things.
It's an act, it's a choice, and it's an obligation.
Love is not a feeling.
There is a feeling properly attached to love, which is called affection.
And that's the feeling that it sounds like you're missing, which doesn't surprise me.
I'm going to guess.
I'm going to read your mind here.
You probably don't have a lot of affection for anyone in your life.
I bet there are all kinds of feelings that you should feel, but you don't.
I bet you've already gone to psychiatrists and got put on a bunch of drugs and anti-anxiety beds for this problem, haven't you?
But it hasn't solved it.
I mean, you're probably the kind of person who somehow doesn't feel awe and wonder when you look up at the sky at night.
You probably don't feel the appropriate amount of anger and outrage that you should feel when you hear about criminals committing acts of violence against innocent people.
All of your feelings towards your husband or anything else or anyone else are numbed and deadened by your selfish preoccupations.
Self-absorption has that effect.
You never feel what you should feel because you're never fully present in any moment or fully invested in any relationship.
You're always just thinking about yourself.
Narcissism is a black hole inside you that sucks all the light and happiness into it so that nothing can escape.
But even so, you could still love your husband.
Love is a thing you choose to do.
It is also an obligation.
It is your duty to love your family.
You owe it to them.
You have a moral, they have a moral right to your love.
That's the promise you make when you get married and start a family.
You promise to love them, starting with your husband, which means staying faithful to him, serving him, caring for him, making sacrifices for him, respecting him.
You can and should do all of that regardless of how you happen to be feeling at any given moment.
Now, you may feel like you don't know yourself or whatever nonsense you picked up from self-help audiobooks you listen to while you do yoga, but you can still perform the act of love.
You can still serve and honor your husband.
You can feel however you feel while you do it, but you can still do it.
And here's the great thing.
If you get into the habit of practicing love, engaging in it, performing it actively, then you will find that without even trying, the feelings of affection will come.
They flow out of these acts.
Act like you love him, and you will love him because love is action.
The action, the act of focusing on and serving someone other than yourself will give rise to the emotions that you want.
Action before emotion.
That is the recipe.
Now, any happily married person and happy parent sees this recipe at work every day in big and small ways.
I love my family.
I also feel deep affection for them.
But there are times when I'm in a bad mood and I just want to be left alone, right?
I mean, everyone has those days.
And I was feeling that way recently when my son came into the room and he asked me if I wanted to play basketball with him.
And I really, I didn't feel like it at the time.
I didn't feel like it.
My emotions weren't, my heart wasn't in it, right?
But I said yes anyway, because I knew that he was looking for some one-on-one bonding time and I didn't want to deprive him of that.
And so I went out.
I didn't feel like it.
My feelings weren't there, right?
I didn't feel like doing it.
I went out.
It took about five minutes of playing before I was actually having a good time and not only doing something loving for my son by spending time with him, but also enjoying the time that I was spending with him.
So the action, then the feeling.
Now, if I had decided to go sit on the couch and brood, if I had said, no, I'm just not in the right headspace right now.
Give me some time.
Just sit there and kind of ruminate until I felt like spending time with my son, then I wouldn't have spent any time with him.
Because you can't generate feelings by just ruminating them into existence like that.
Go do the thing.
Act in a loving and devoted way and let the feelings come.
That's my advice to you.
Now, I have no faith that my advice will be heeded, but there it is.
That's the answer.
And what it tells you, by the way, is that if you still decide to get divorced, there's no excuse.
That was a choice you made.
You are not a victim here.
That you can't just say, oh, I can't do it.
I feel the love just left the love.
I fell out of love.
Love is not something that you fall into like a puddle.
You don't fall into it.
You can't fall out of it.
You choose to do it or you don't.
Now, moving on to the second group, I have heard from a number of men who've said that this woman is the reason why my pro-marriage takes are out of touch and irrelevant.
As one red pill influencer posted, hey, Matt Walsh or Jordan Peterson, what's your advice to hedge against women like this that just get bored and want to divorce rape a man for no reason?
There were a lot of similar questions in my inbox and mentions this weekend, all relating to this video, and I'm happy to answer them.
For any man who wants to avoid ending up with a woman like this, my advice, it's very simple.
I'm a simple man.
My advice is if you don't want to end up married to a woman like this is don't marry a woman like this.
Okay, this is a selfish and shallow person.
The chances are extremely high that she was like that when they met.
I know of very few people who have turned into narcissistic jerks out of nowhere.
Most narcissistic jerks have been that way their entire adult lives and before.
So, my primary answer is to look out for the profoundly obvious warning signs of a narcissistic jerk and simply don't marry that kind of person.
What are the warning signs?
Well, there are a bunch.
Does she only ever talk about herself?
Does she fail to show genuine interest in you and your life and your thoughts and ideas?
Is she rude and bossy and overbearing to you or to other people in her life?
Is she cruel?
Is she gossipy?
Does she seem to be locked in constant feuds with her family and friends and coworkers?
Is she incapable of having a conversation about anything substantive or meaningful?
Now, if she's checking yes on all those boxes, or most of them, or really any of them, frankly, then don't marry her.
Don't date her.
Don't waste any more of your time speaking to her or thinking about her.
Dump her and move on with your life.
These kinds of people, women or men, are in almost all cases, very easy to detect.
Most of the time, it takes about 30 seconds of conversation.
And if they manage to fool you for 30 seconds, they almost certainly aren't going to keep it up for an entire week or month or two months.
On average, couples date for over two years before they get engaged, which I mean, I think it's too long.
I don't think you need that long, but that's the average.
And then the average engagement is another 18 months.
So that's three and a half years.
Okay?
Like, if they can fool you for three and a half years and you never noticed that the woman is like this, well, then that means that you are extremely unobservant.
I mean, it would take a manipulative genius and a supremely talented Daniel Day-Lewis level actor to put up a convincing front as a deep, thoughtful, kind, and affectionate person for all that time, all the while concealing their true shallow and selfish nature.
Now, I have known maybe one or two people like that in my entire life.
Like the kind of person where, okay, I know this person is like a scumbag, but they're able to fool everyone forever, it seems like.
Rarely do you come across somebody like that.
They exist, but every other shallow, selfish person I've ever met, I could identify as such within about five minutes.
If it even took that long, usually five seconds.
Okay, if I ran into that woman on the street, talked to her for 10, 20 seconds.
I go, okay, I know what you're all about.
Now, I don't know the woman in the video.
I don't even know her name, but I've seen enough to say that she is no manipulative genius.
Now, she may be manipulative, but she's not a genius.
I put the chances at like 1% or lower that this woman wasn't incredibly shallow and self-absorbed when they were dating.
I don't think I've ever in my life met anyone who was like this woman at 32, but wasn't the same way or worse at 22.
Not saying it's impossible.
It's just very rare.
Human beings don't work that way generally.
So why do some men end up with horrible women?
Well, because in most cases, they choose to marry horrible women.
Why would a man make that choice?
Not hard to understand.
She's attractive.
He's lonely.
She's giving him attention.
He overlooks all the red flags.
That's like all there is to it most of the time.
It's understandable on a human level, but it's a bad choice.
And my solution for young single guys is that they shouldn't make that kind of choice.
Don't marry a woman like that.
And despite what you may have heard, they're not all like that.
Anyone telling you otherwise is selling you despair and failure.
And those people, along with this woman in the video, and any woman like her, are all today canceled.
