The Matt Walsh Show - September 14, 2022


Ep. 1021 - Public School Sex Ed Teaches 'Porn Literacy'

Topics
porn literacy in schools porn literacy federal abortion ban Jimmy Kimmel blackface controversy
Hosted by
Matt Walsh
Mentioned
Jimmy Kimmel Lindsey Graham Phil Paul John Poles Candace Owens Lila Rose Jason Jones Show Alfred Kinsey Katie Porter Astro Hans Christian Andersen Abbott Elementary Karine Jean-Pierre Mitch McConnell David Horowitz Quinta Brunson Chuck Schumer James Lindsay Brandon Gill Bruce Gilley and 8 more
Ep. 1020 - The Insane Racial Double Standards That Govern Our Society Ep. 1022 - The Most Insane (And Hilarious) Backlash I've Ever Received

Episode Stats


Length

58 minutes

Words per minute

172.58

Word count

10,080

Sentence count

733

Harmful content

Misogyny

28

sentences flagged

Toxicity

19

sentences flagged

Hate speech

27

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Sex ed curricula in public schools now includes lessons on porn literacy. We ll have to talk about that, unfortunately. Also, Lindsey Graham proposes a federal abortion ban right before the midterms. I ll tell you why, as a diehard pro-lifer myself, I do not support this move. Plus, Dr. Phil takes on the abortion issue. Also: Jimmy Kimmel is finally accused of racism, but not because of all the blackface he s done in the past. And in our daily cancellation, we have our most creative attempt yet to solve the What's a Woman Riddle?

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
Topics generated with Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct.
Hosts, guests, and mentioned names generated with spaCy (en_core_web_sm), reconciled against Wikidata.
00:00:00.000 Today on The Matt Walsh Show, sex ed curricula in public schools now includes lessons on porn
00:00:05.260 literacy. We'll have to talk about that, unfortunately. Also, Lindsey Graham proposes 0.92
00:00:09.420 a federal abortion ban right before the midterms. I'll tell you why, as a diehard pro-lifer myself,
00:00:14.540 I do not support this move. Plus, Dr. Phil takes on the abortion issue. Also, Jimmy Kimmel is
00:00:20.120 finally accused of racism, but not because of all the blackface he's done in the past.
00:00:24.040 And in our daily cancellation, we have our most creative attempt yet to solve the what-is-a-woman
00:00:28.760 riddle. All of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
00:00:40.760 Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out. And the team at the
00:00:45.600 Front Page Magazine has been unmasking these totalitarians since the earliest days of the
00:00:50.800 internet. Founded by David Horowitz, a former red diaper baby and a new leftist who ultimately became
00:00:55.940 an enemy of the left and a best-selling author. Front Page Magazine has spent over two decades
00:01:00.760 combating the radical left's efforts to destroy America. Their two new podcasts, which are called
00:01:06.140 The Right Take with Mark Tapson and The Jason Hill Show, offer riveting interviews and insightful
00:01:11.380 coverage of politics, culture, and current events. The Right Take with Mark Tapson offers fascinating,
00:01:16.980 in-depth cultural commentary, as well as interviews with well-known conservative thinkers.
00:01:20.400 The Jason Hill Show offers thoughtful, deep dives about the ideologies of the radical left and
00:01:25.540 interviews with renowned intellectuals like Peter Wood and Bruce Gilley. It takes a village to combat
00:01:30.300 the radical left's efforts to destroy America. That's why you, as a fan of my show, should check
00:01:34.540 out all of these guys over at Front Page Magazine by visiting frontpagemag.com. And while you're there,
00:01:40.400 support their cause by making a tax-deductible donation. Inside every progressive is a totalitarian
00:01:44.660 screaming to get out. And no one understands that better than the team at Front Page Magazine.
00:01:49.220 So go check out frontpagemag.com today.
00:01:53.040 Well, it's not always easy to live in a decaying society. Watching civilization fall to pieces around
00:01:59.400 you can really take a toll on your mental health, I think. And so it's understandable that we're
00:02:02.920 sometimes inclined to tell ourselves comforting lies. You know, we want to take solace in pleasant,
00:02:08.500 encouraging myths and superstitions. And one such fiction is that we like to tell ourselves is that
00:02:15.180 we can escape our cultural decay by just moving away from it physically. We like to pretend that 0.95
00:02:21.680 most of the really crazy and disturbing stuff happening in our country can be avoided by simply
00:02:25.920 living somewhere that isn't San Francisco or Seattle or Austin, Texas or anywhere in Vermont.
00:02:32.500 But that's not the case. Because the media, the internet, federal government, the education system,
00:02:37.820 they act as a delivery service for all manner of perversion and moral insanity. And they're
00:02:44.100 everywhere. You can't completely escape it no matter where you go. You cannot socially distance
00:02:48.940 yourself away from this contagion unless you're moving all the way into the unexplored regions of
00:02:55.140 the Amazon or somewhere like that. It is still certainly a good idea to stay away from the most
00:03:00.820 demented leftist hellholes. It's possible to find places in America that are much better and safer 0.85
00:03:05.980 than that. Well, they'll never be completely safe. And that's an important thing to realize
00:03:11.380 so that we don't let our guard down completely. For example, Idaho is about as red as a red state
00:03:20.560 can get politically. It's voted for the Republican candidate in every presidential election since
00:03:26.720 forever. I mean, at least for the past 40 years and longer. And yet, as Libs of TikTok reports today,
00:03:32.100 the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare is teaming up with an activist group to provide
00:03:37.560 porn literacy materials for children in school. The Idaho Freedom Foundation organization has more
00:03:44.080 details about this. Quote, Idaho's Department of Health and Welfare implements a sex education
00:03:49.340 curriculum endorsed by Planned Parenthood in its schools. The curriculum and training for sex education
00:03:54.280 facilitators is purchased from an interest group that promotes queering education and normalizing the
00:03:59.440 consumption of pornography. Idaho law requires sex education taught in public schools to reinforce
00:04:04.200 traditional family arrangements. IDHW promotes what Idaho law prohibits, however. IDHW takes funds from
00:04:11.100 federal programs like the Personal Responsibility Education Program and Title V Sexual Risk Avoidance
00:04:17.320 Education. Then IDHW acquires sex education products from nonprofits like Education Training and Research
00:04:24.260 Organization, which is ETR, whose curriculum is developed and endorsed by Planned Parenthood.
00:04:30.440 Yes, Planned Parenthood has taken a special interest in sex education, not just in Idaho, but across
00:04:36.580 the country for a long time. It's not difficult to see why. Sexualizing kids at younger and younger ages 0.96
00:04:42.360 means more and more customers for them in the long run. The earlier that they sexualize kids, 1.00
00:04:48.600 then the more reckless sexual behavior you can expect. And then the more, quote unquote, unwanted pregnancies,
00:04:54.760 the more STDs, and then you get the more people walking into Planned Parenthood clinics. So it's
00:04:59.740 from a business perspective, it makes a lot of sense for them. Here's a little more from the report. It
00:05:04.180 says, ETR's reducing the risk curriculum promises to teach abstinence, but instead, ETR delivers a variety
00:05:11.900 of approaches, including an LGBTQ inclusive curriculum that queers education with an emphasis on gender
00:05:18.680 identity, sexual orientation, and behavior. ETR also advocates for teaching elementary students
00:05:23.920 about porn literacy, which involves instruction on kink and power, pleasure, sexual identity,
00:05:30.180 sexual acts, and sexual exploration in relation to pornography.
00:05:33.820 Now, if you'd like to know more about porn literacy, or even if you don't, either way,
00:05:41.420 here's a video from ETR explaining. Watch.
00:05:44.820 We can promote a shame-free educational space by letting young people know that it's okay if they
00:05:49.560 are curious. It's okay if they have watched porn, and it's okay if they have thought about porn.
00:05:54.900 I always make sure to say someone being curious about sex and or porn does not make them a bad person.
00:06:00.000 It makes them human. It's so important we normalize that this is a natural human experience.
00:06:05.420 And I also want to point, make a point to share that not wanting to watch porn is also completely
00:06:10.240 fine. There is no judgment and shame for not being curious. That's okay too. And we want to create
00:06:15.360 environments in the classroom where students don't shame each other. So as an educator, my job is to
00:06:21.420 provide information about sexual health and have students critically think by exploring all sides of
00:06:27.280 an issue. Critical thinking skills are the largest component of porn literacy. It's the ability for
00:06:33.300 young people to analyze and ask questions about the media that they're viewing. Critical thinking
00:06:38.200 skills allow young people to understand the intention behind pornography. So much of sex education is
00:06:43.920 reflecting on our values and beliefs in relation to a topic, and porn literacy is no exception.
00:06:50.020 For facilitators, it's first important for them to reflect on their reasons for wanting to teach porn
00:06:54.260 literacy. Do they want to teach porn literacy because they believe watching porn and by extension sex
00:06:59.260 work is inherently bad and they want to stop young people from accessing it? That's unfortunately not
00:07:04.580 going to lead to good conversations because it's pushing one agenda that porn is mad. 1.00
00:07:09.820 No, we wouldn't want to give the kids a negative view of hardcore porn. You know, we don't want to
00:07:15.680 bias nine-year-olds against pornography before they've even had a chance to check out Pornhub
00:07:21.180 for themselves. We wouldn't want to do that. The real goal, they say, is to teach critical thinking
00:07:26.380 skills to the porn viewer. Yes, because pornography is famous for its ability to nurture critical
00:07:32.660 thinking skills. Everyone knows that the average porn viewer is only watching it so that he can hone his
00:07:39.340 skills of discernment, which is quite a euphemism. Now, however, if we leave the land of make-believe
00:07:47.360 and we come back to reality-ville, which is where I prefer to live, we can plainly see that the
00:07:52.660 opposite is the case. Porn actually destroys critical thinking. This is why porn viewers become
00:07:58.580 less discerning the more they watch. Porn manipulates the brain. It floods its reward systems with dopamine
00:08:05.500 and creates an effect similar to a drug. Research has shown that over time, this process results in
00:08:11.440 increasingly dire physical changes to the brain itself. I mean, porn changes your brain physically.
00:08:16.960 You can see it on a brain scan. It warps it and rewires it. Porn has an especially corrosive
00:08:22.640 effect on the prefrontal cortex, which is precisely the part of the brain most involved in critical
00:08:29.100 thinking and discernment. As an article in neurosciencenews.com says, porn use has been correlated
00:08:35.400 with erosion of the prefrontal cortex, the region of the brain that houses executive functions like
00:08:40.100 morality, willpower, and impulse control. To better understand the role of this structure in behavior,
00:08:46.100 it's important to know that it remains underdeveloped during childhood. This is why
00:08:50.540 children struggle to regulate their emotions and impulses. Damage to the prefrontal cortex in
00:08:54.940 adulthood is termed hypofrontality, which predisposes an individual to behave compulsively
00:09:00.360 and make poor decisions. Does that remind you of anyone? Like, everyone. Does it remind you of
00:09:07.820 everyone? You know, if it seems like people these days are stuck in perpetual adolescence,
00:09:13.540 their maturation stunted, lingering in a kind of juvenile state forever, that's not your imagination.
00:09:19.720 That is, in fact, what's happening. And rampant porn use in childhood has much to do with this
00:09:25.060 problem. It's not the only culprit. It's not the only thing causing the problem, but it's definitely
00:09:29.180 contributing to it. Kids are being exposed to material that corrodes the very parts of their brain
00:09:35.640 necessary for attaining intellectual maturity. If we want children to learn critical thinking,
00:09:41.700 the very last thing we should ever do is introduce them to pornography. Of course, there are many
00:09:46.880 other reasons to refrain from intentionally exposing them to sexual content, reasons both
00:09:51.500 scientific and moral, not to mention legal. It's against the law to do exactly what this Idaho sex ed 0.62
00:09:58.180 program has declared its intention to do, and what so many other sex ed programs across the country
00:10:02.620 do every single day. Now, the fact that this sort of insanity is happening in a sex ed program in
00:10:08.720 Idaho only goes to show, once again, that sex education is hopelessly flawed as a concept. There
00:10:17.500 is no rescuing it. There is no good version of sex ed. All sex ed traces back to Alfred Kinsey and is
00:10:25.360 structured on his theories of human sexuality. Even abstinence-only sex ed is absurd because it is
00:10:32.020 abstinence education fundamentally built on the work of a degenerate pedophile. None of these conversations 0.94
00:10:39.760 have any place in the school system, and no matter what you do, no matter what sort of sex ed program
00:10:45.320 you devise, it will always devolve into this sort of thing, always, every time. Porn literacy and all the
00:10:52.980 other varieties of perversion. That's always what it turns into, and that's because this is what sex ed was
00:10:59.160 always meant to be and to achieve. This is its natural and intended endpoint.
00:11:07.200 Alfred Kinsey, looking up from hell while roasting in the flames, probably takes at least a little bit
00:11:12.160 of pleasure amid his eternal damnation in the fact that sex ed has turned into exactly what he wanted it
00:11:17.740 to be. He's looking up from hell at sex ed and porn literacy and saying, yes, exactly. See, that's what I
00:11:24.600 wanted. And that's why he's where he is right now. And we might also ask why there would be such an
00:11:33.540 insistence on exposing kids to porn. I mean, it's not like anyone needs help finding it. We already
00:11:38.280 live in a porn-addicted society. Everyone is familiar with porn, certainly, and everyone is familiar with
00:11:44.620 the staggering numbers that places like Pornhub boast at the end of each year, the many billions of
00:11:50.720 collective hours Americans spend watching porn, the many and increasingly disgusting varieties and
00:11:57.360 genres they explore, and so on. And we're all familiar with that. And it's not just Pornhub
00:12:03.500 enjoying the windfall. The CEO of OnlyFans, who we know, by the way, almost nothing about,
00:12:09.900 okay, we know his name. We don't know anything else about this guy. He escapes media scrutiny despite
00:12:13.700 being the most prolific pimp in the history of the world, perhaps second only to Hugh Hefner.
00:12:18.120 But he has earned $500 million just over the past two years, half a billion in his pocket from
00:12:26.980 OnlyFans. Suffice it to say that people are watching lots and lots of porn already. So why do activists
00:12:38.460 and school teachers, but I repeat myself, want to get even more people sucked into this world? Because
00:12:44.800 here's the answer. When a person is addicted to porn, they are exactly where our culture wants them to
00:12:51.720 be and how it wants them to be. So as already established, porn tends to erode your critical
00:12:58.720 thinking skills, your powers of discernment and self-control. That is all advantageous to the left.
00:13:04.340 I mean, they love that. Porn isolates people, makes them lonely, emotionally and spiritually
00:13:09.820 desolate and desperate. Porn also obviously militates against all of the traditional values,
00:13:18.260 which we used to call virtues, chastity, temperance, patience, humility, all dwindle away through porn
00:13:25.040 consumption. So isolated, undiscerning, lacking in self-control, lacking in critical thinking,
00:13:34.040 lonely, intemperate, unchaste. That's how the left wants us. Because for one thing,
00:13:42.320 it makes us easier to control. Now let's get to our five headlines.
00:13:54.160 First of all, look, I'm not going to make a big thing of it. I've already talked
00:13:56.700 about this. I think we reposted my rant on this subject on YouTube over the weekend. So I'm not
00:14:03.140 going to belabor it. I'm not going to spend, but I just need to say, I have to say, all I'm going
00:14:08.200 to say is that yesterday I was driving home from work. I was on back country roads and I found myself
00:14:15.740 stuck in traffic, which is unusual because there's not a lot of, you know, it's usually not a lot of
00:14:20.480 traffic there. And I'm moving at a snail's pace and I'm stuck there for, you know, several minutes
00:14:26.400 and I'm thinking, what's going on? I thought there was an accident. And then I get to the source of the
00:14:32.620 problem only to find out that it's a gang of dorks on bicycles in the middle of the damn street, 1.00
00:14:39.520 holding up the lines of cars behind them and forcing everyone to go around them across a 0.99
00:14:45.520 double yellow line on a windy country road into oncoming traffic. So they, for the sake of their
00:14:54.460 recreation, don't tell me, oh, they're just commuting. It's a whole gang of them with their
00:14:58.420 little spandex outfits and everything. They're not, they're not all commuting to work. They're
00:15:02.480 just doing it for fun. They said, let's go, let's get together and go for a bicycle ride
00:15:05.540 in the middle of the street, right at the time, you know, prime commuting time. People are coming
00:15:11.580 home from work, the middle of the road, back country roads. You're holding everybody up and
00:15:16.220 endangering their safety for the sake of your recreation. Sociopaths. I don't know how we allow this. 0.88
00:15:24.280 I don't know how we allow it. This should be illegal. They should, there should be a paddy wagon
00:15:28.340 showing up and just cuffing all these people and throwing them into it and taking them to jail.
00:15:33.680 That's what should happen. How are you not, don't, don't you feel, I said I wasn't going to get into
00:15:38.900 it. It's my last point. How do you not feel uncomfortable at least? Like if I was on a bicycle
00:15:45.060 in the middle of the street and there was a whole line of cars behind me, I would feel uncomfortable
00:15:50.300 knowing that I'm inconveniencing all these people just because I want to have fun. It would make me
00:15:54.580 very uncomfortable. I would feel bad about that. I would be able to feel their glare, right, like on
00:16:00.140 the back of my neck. I would just know they're glaring at me and I would be forced to just move to the
00:16:03.920 side of the road because I don't like inconveniencing people if I can help it. But these cyclists are just
00:16:09.940 no self-awareness or either that or they want to cause these problems. It's these insidious
00:16:17.380 villains. Anyway, all right. So speaking of insidious villains, yesterday, Lindsey Graham,
00:16:25.460 normally a squish extraordinaire, made a surprise announcement. He was introducing a bill in the
00:16:31.540 Senate to ban abortion federally across the country at 15 weeks. So here he is making the announcement
00:16:39.360 yesterday. So here's what I think we will be doing about the unborn. We will introduce legislation. I,
00:16:46.940 along with a lot of my colleagues, to basically get America in a position at the federal level,
00:16:53.820 I think is fairly consistent with the rest of the world. Can we? We have charts. Shows you how serious
00:17:02.540 we are. All right. 15 weeks. A baby's at the 15-week period. What does that mean? Well, it means if you're
00:17:11.620 going to operate on the baby, which happens to save the child's life, to provide medical treatment,
00:17:17.440 the standard practice in medicine is to provide anesthesia. Now, why would you do that? You provide
00:17:23.640 anesthesia because the science tells us that the 15-week period, the nerve endings of the baby
00:17:29.320 are pretty well developed and the child feels pain. So here's our point, that if you have to provide
00:17:36.360 anesthesia to keep the baby from feeling pain to help save its life, should we as a nation be
00:17:42.500 aborting babies that can feel excruciating pain from an abortion? No, we should not. Absolutely, 1.00
00:17:49.840 we should not. He's right about everything he's saying there. Children can feel pain. They're human
00:17:55.540 beings. Killing them is a horrific crime. It is quite perverse, to say the least, that if you operate 1.00
00:18:05.480 on an unborn child, which he's correct, that that is also something that happens quite frequently,
00:18:09.340 that operations on human beings in the womb, and they use anesthesia. But through the process of
00:18:16.160 abortion, there's obviously no anesthesia because there's no recognition that this human being is a
00:18:23.680 human being. So if we're going to operate on the child, then we recognize the child as a human.
00:18:28.900 In abortion, we pretend that the child isn't. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
00:18:33.840 All of that is true. And yet, I disagree with what Lindsey Graham is doing here. I am against it. 0.97
00:18:43.500 I'm against this bill right now at this point in time, and I'll explain why.
00:18:48.220 Now, first of all, I don't need to go over my pro-life credentials here. I'm as pro-life as
00:18:53.320 they come. You know that. I'm radically pro-life. I am pro-life from conception. I've been fighting
00:18:57.680 against the abortion industry my whole public career and before that. So that's something that
00:19:02.600 you all know. Banning abortion at 15 weeks, definitely. I would ban abortion from conception.
00:19:07.360 That's how I want to ban it. I want a, my, you know, I think our ultimate goal, the thing we really
00:19:11.720 want is a constitutional amendment, a personhood amendment, which we shouldn't need because the
00:19:18.140 constitution already protects, you know, guarantees the rights of all human beings, which obviously
00:19:24.720 includes those in the womb. But we do need it, and that's what I would want to see. I'm in favor
00:19:29.900 of a federal ban also. I am in favor of a federal ban. I'm not one of these conservatives who says that
00:19:34.960 this is, well, it's a state's issue. This is a state's rights issue. Lots of conservatives say that.
00:19:38.940 I don't say that. That's not what I think. I don't think states have the right to legalize the murder
00:19:44.780 of babies. I believe in state rights, but obviously states' rights is not an absolute.
00:19:49.940 They don't have the right to legalize anything they want, and I don't think they have the right. They
00:19:56.560 don't have the moral right, and they shouldn't have the legal right to permit the murder of
00:20:02.460 babies. I don't think that the genocide of an entire category of people is something that falls
00:20:08.080 within the purview of states' rights. But I'm against the bill. Why? Well, because it's very
00:20:13.220 simple. And let's establish something from the outset. There is zero debate about this part of
00:20:19.900 it. The legislation that he's introducing will not become law. The bill will not become law. It is
00:20:26.660 literally impossible that the bill that Lindsey Graham is introducing will become law. Impossible,
00:20:32.380 okay? Congress and the White House are controlled by the Democrats, and they are not going to pass
00:20:37.520 a federal abortion ban. They won't even let it come up for a vote. It's not going to happen. 0.94
00:20:42.340 Never. Impossible. You'd have better luck jumping off of a 100-story building and using a napkin as a
00:20:49.460 parachute. It's not going to happen. And this isn't even one of those, well, it's worth a try.
00:20:55.640 No, you never know. No, this is not even a try. That's like putting a, I don't know,
00:20:59.920 putting a rock in a microwave and saying, well, maybe an elephant will pop out. It's worth a try.
00:21:05.460 No, that is not within the realm of possible outcomes. It just isn't.
00:21:10.760 So why introduce the bill? Well, it's a political play. That's all it is. That's all it can be.
00:21:14.780 It's its only function. So that's the only way that we should be judging this, is as a political
00:21:20.000 play, because that is all it can be. Now, I have no problem in theory with proposing doomed
00:21:25.940 legislation as a political strategy. When you're in the minority, you're the minority party. You
00:21:33.300 don't control Congress. You don't control the White House. You can't actually pass anything.
00:21:37.140 Does that mean you shouldn't propose anything? No. I think it could be a good strategy sometimes
00:21:41.360 to propose bills that you know will not pass, in theory. But it has to be a good political
00:21:48.200 strategy, because that's all it is, is a political strategy. So is this a good political strategy?
00:21:52.100 What is the strategy in proposing this legislation right now before the midterms?
00:21:59.540 All it does is give the Democrats exactly what they want. They want to talk about a federal
00:22:04.080 abortion ban. They want to distract from the economy, from crime, from the transing of kids, 1.00
00:22:09.880 from the education system, from the grooming that they're doing, all of that. They don't want to talk
00:22:14.620 about any of that. They want to talk about a federal abortion ban. It's very clear that they want to
00:22:17.680 talk about that. And so Graham is giving them exactly what they want. This is exactly what
00:22:23.080 they want to talk about. Now, it only makes sense to do something like this if a federal abortion ban 1.00
00:22:32.280 at 15 weeks is massively, enormously popular. Because then, if it's massively, enormously popular
00:22:38.460 for it to have a federal abortion ban at 15 weeks, then you can incentivize voters to vote for you
00:22:43.260 with the promise that you'll pass the law if you're voted in. Even if the Republicans,
00:22:48.880 there was a landslide, there's a red wave at the midterms, they still can't pass any laws because
00:22:53.280 it'd be vetoed by the White House. But still, as an incentive, it makes sense if you're proposing a
00:22:57.900 really popular piece of legislation. It also changes the conversation to focus on this popular piece of
00:23:04.860 legislation. But is a federal 15-week abortion ban that popular? No. I mean, not according to,
00:23:13.260 any poll, not by any metric. It should be popular, but it isn't. It should be popular,
00:23:20.140 but it isn't. There are varying claims about how unpopular it is, but the fact is that it's not
00:23:25.640 nearly, here's what we can say at a minimum. It is not nearly popular enough to justify this strategy.
00:23:34.440 If you're going to put up legislation like this right before the midterms, then it has to be an
00:23:40.440 absolute home run that's going to be like, you're going to get 60, 70 percent approval from the voters
00:23:48.460 for it. Then it makes sense to do. But that's not the case with a federal abortion ban.
00:23:57.760 I mean, at best, this is like, it's a split down the middle, you know, type of thing,
00:24:02.780 which is a sort of issue that you, that's the kind of thing that you do. It's the sort of thing you work
00:24:08.180 on. It's the sort of thing you push after the election, not before it. This is not the conversation
00:24:14.340 the Republicans should be having going into the midterms. It helps Democrats, not Republicans.
00:24:17.760 If you want to pass pro-life legislation, you need a pro-life government, and this makes that
00:24:22.440 less likely to happen. You have decreased the possibility of actually passing a bill like this
00:24:27.600 by proposing it a few weeks before the midterms at a time when the Democrats are desperate to change
00:24:32.200 the topic and to focus on something like this. That's why the Dems, they were practically crying 1.00
00:24:38.000 tears of joy when Graham announced this. They were ecstatic. All of them were in front of microphones
00:24:45.360 and cameras, and they had their fundraising pitches ready to go within 19 seconds. They were so excited
00:24:52.000 about this. Here's Chuck Schumer, for example. Now, that's total nonsense, of course. They're
00:25:11.160 focused on creating jobs and bringing the country together. That's not at all what they're focused
00:25:15.740 on, but that is exactly the talking point they wanted. Republicans are focused on this, and this
00:25:21.760 is what we're doing. Katie Porter in California had an ad ready to go within like 30 minutes. Here's
00:25:29.980 that. The Supreme Court has taken away our right to choose, giving politicians power to control women's 1.00
00:25:36.580 most personal health decisions. In Washington, they're planning a nationwide ban on abortion, 0.60
00:25:42.080 no exceptions, not for rape or incest. The word extreme gets tossed around a lot, but making it
00:25:48.240 illegal to have an abortion, no exceptions, truly is extreme. I'm Katie Porter. I'll fight any attempt
00:25:55.420 at a nationwide abortion ban. Okay. Now, I'd be the first to say that we don't decide what we're
00:26:03.720 going to do as conservatives based on what the left will say about it. We can't refrain from doing the
00:26:08.640 right thing because the left will be mad about it. That obviously is how I feel. But again, given that
00:26:13.160 this is just a political play, that's all it can be, you have to think, is it smart politically
00:26:17.640 to give the Democrats exactly the conversation that they want right now? Not to mention, as
00:26:25.600 Karen Jean-Pair pointed out correctly when she was talking about this at the White House press
00:26:31.420 conference, she quoted Lindsey Graham from a month ago on TV saying that he thinks abortion is a state's
00:26:39.360 issue and shouldn't be decided by the federal government. He did say that a month ago.
00:26:44.900 I don't even agree with that. I think that it should, again, I think the federal government does
00:26:48.060 have a role. But that's what he said. And now he's the one who's coming out with this? He's never been
00:26:55.660 a big pro-life advocate in the first place. Like Lindsey Graham? When does he ever show that he gives
00:27:00.340 a damn about the pro-life cause? In the past when Republicans have controlled the government,
00:27:07.060 Lindsey Graham wasn't leading the charge to pass pro-life legislation. 1.00
00:27:11.660 And there are things that could have been done even when Roe v. Wade was still active.
00:27:16.000 So when they actually have the ability to do something, he doesn't want to do anything.
00:27:19.780 And when the bill can't pass, that's when he's behind it.
00:27:25.560 It's almost like he wants Republicans to lose. That's the conspiracy theory that I would actually
00:27:31.800 subscribe to here. He wants Republicans to lose. This is a, this is sabotage. It's the only way to
00:27:39.820 explain it, given who it's coming from, especially. It's one thing if this is coming from someone in
00:27:46.860 Congress who's just been deeply pro-life, a pro-life activist for years, and this has been their number
00:27:51.340 one issue. And so, you know, and this is all they talk, this is one of their central things they
00:27:55.980 talk about all the time. And, and, you know, this is, they're just so excited about it that they
00:28:01.300 maybe put the cart before the horse a little bit and came out and proposed this right before the
00:28:06.380 midterms. That would be one thing. Now, I'd still say it's a bad political strategy, but then at least
00:28:10.260 I could believe that it's sincere. In this case, I don't even believe that it's sincere.
00:28:15.660 This to me seems like sabotage. Because there are Republicans who want to be the minority party.
00:28:21.520 They want to be the opposition. They want to be in the position of, of, of proposing laws that
00:28:25.720 they know cannot pass. You know what? If you want to pass a bill, or rather not pass a bill,
00:28:35.020 because you can't pass it. If you want to propose a bill right before the midterms
00:28:38.540 with the intention of changing the conversation or focusing the conversation on something that,
00:28:46.080 that's, that's politically good for you to be talking about. And with the intention also of
00:28:50.380 making Democrats seem extreme by their opposition to it, here's the bill that you should be proposing.
00:28:54.960 Okay. So what all the Republicans in the Senate should be getting together, Mitch McConnell and,
00:28:59.000 and Lindsey Graham and all of them should be coming out, holding the press conference saying
00:29:04.000 that they are proposing a federal ban on child castration and on cosmetic double mastectomies
00:29:12.560 for minor girls. That's what they should be doing. Not going to pass. No way it's going to pass, 0.95
00:29:19.760 but politically that's a winner because now you're putting the Democrats in the position right before
00:29:26.960 the midterms of having to defend castrating and butchering kids. Now that is a winning political 0.98
00:29:35.080 strategy. And, and we can guarantee the vast majority of this country, if they are made aware
00:29:43.180 that this is even happening, and many people don't know that it's happening, but if they're made aware
00:29:46.720 of it, of course, they're going to be against it. That's what you do if you want to win.
00:29:53.980 Of course, problem with the Republicans is they don't often want to win. All right.
00:29:59.580 Let's move to, so that was, that was someone ostensibly pretending to be pro-life who doesn't
00:30:04.960 want to win. Here's someone who does like to win on the pro-life side. Lila Rose of live action
00:30:08.860 appeared on Dr. Phil to talk about the abortion issue. And I want to play a little bit of this clip
00:30:14.380 because I thought it was pretty compelling. The predicate of your positions that life begins
00:30:22.380 at fertilization, that science is very clear about that. And you have to know science isn't,
00:30:29.160 there's no consensus among the scientific community. There is, Dr. Phil. 96% of scientists say that life
00:30:35.800 begins at fertilization. If you're an in vitro specialist, you're looking to create a single
00:30:40.160 cell embryo and then you know you have a new human life. So it is a scientific fact.
00:30:45.100 Well, actually it's not. When do you, when do you say human life begins then? There's, well,
00:30:50.040 it doesn't matter what I think. I, I don't care what I think. What I'm saying is the scientific
00:30:56.240 community does not have a consensus about when life begins. It's simply inaccurate. It's simply
00:31:04.500 inaccurate. That's not true. You can go to the body. A single cell embryo is a unique new human life.
00:31:12.720 You can go to the body of scientific literature and you can find neuroscientists who say that it
00:31:19.880 begins when there is a detectable brainwave. But Dr. Phil, in an abortion, if it's not a human life,
00:31:27.520 why do you have to kill it? I haven't spoken over you and you keep speaking over me. And I assume
00:31:32.900 that's because you don't want me to finish my thought, which is if anyone here wants to fact
00:31:41.500 check me instead of speak over me, you can go to the scientific literature and query what the
00:31:50.120 definition is of the beginning of life. Okay. So things got contentious there. I will say I do give
00:31:58.400 credit to Dr. Phil, even though we clearly are seen to be on opposite sides of the, of the abortion
00:32:04.220 issue. I give credit to him for this reason. And that is that he doesn't just talk about these kinds
00:32:12.560 of issues on his show, but he actually brings, this is the part that is unique. He brings people on from
00:32:19.260 the conservative side who are able and articulate defenders of the position, you know, and, and he
00:32:26.760 brings them on to defend the position rather than taking the CNN approach or the MSNBC approach and
00:32:34.720 finding some brainless, uh, patsy whose only role is to get, who's only, you know, there just to get 1.00
00:32:43.040 steamrolled the controlled opposition, you know, strategy. So he doesn't do that. Um, he was talking 0.93
00:32:50.980 about critical race theory back in the summer. He brought on James Lindsay to talk about it.
00:32:54.460 Talking about gender theory, brought me on to talk about it. Uh, wants to discuss the pro-life issue
00:32:59.300 brings on Lila Rose, you know, as a pro-lifer myself, if someone, if Dr. Phil had come to me and said,
00:33:07.640 who do you think is the best person to, to, to bring on my show to talk about abortion? I would 0.98
00:33:11.260 have recommended her. She'd be the one I would have recommended. Um, so I do appreciate that.
00:33:18.280 Of course, Lila Rose is correct though, in this discussion, um, life does begin at conception.
00:33:24.960 It's not really up for debate. It's the only logical point for life to begin. Um, and the reason is this,
00:33:34.080 now we could talk about the, you know, what the scientists say and everything in the, and always,
00:33:38.740 you know, always on the, on the pro-abortion side, they want to find, well, you know,
00:33:41.660 the consensus, scientific consensus says this or that. There is certainly no scientific consensus
00:33:45.620 that life does not begin at conception. Most scientists will tell you that it does because
00:33:50.780 there's no way around it. And then you might have other scientists that say, well, we don't really
00:33:54.080 know. But even outside of that, it's just, it's a, it's a matter of logic. The way that we know that
00:34:01.540 life begins at conception is that at conception, there is something, right? There's a, there's a
00:34:07.320 physical entity which exists. We can agree on that point. Uh, well, any physical entity which
00:34:16.280 exists must exist in a state, some kind of state. And there are really only three options. Every
00:34:24.360 physical entity is alive or dead or inanimate. So you can look around the room that you're currently
00:34:30.720 sitting in, look anywhere, look under a microscope and all you will see anywhere are things that are
00:34:36.620 living, things that are dead and things which are inanimate matter. Well, the physical entity at
00:34:43.100 conception must be one of these, right? So if you're saying it's not alive, then it has to be
00:34:48.760 something else. And what is it? Well, we know it's not dead. We know that we know it's not inanimate
00:34:54.700 matter because it's organic matter. It's growing, it's developing, it's, it's becoming, it has DNA,
00:35:01.400 it has a genetic code. It is in no way like a, like a, a chair or a rock or anything else that is,
00:35:10.400 that is, uh, that is inanimate. So what's left? Well, it's, it's living. It's, it's a,
00:35:18.000 it's a living physical entity. There's no real way around that. So if you're on the pro-abortion
00:35:25.180 side, what you really believe, now you might, you might, you know, I don't know if it's really
00:35:28.980 living or not. No, it is. It's just, there's no way it is. It certainly is. Um, but what you're
00:35:35.180 actually saying is that sometimes it is okay to destroy innocent, helpless human life.
00:35:43.460 That is your, whether you're, whether you'll say it out loud or not, that is actually your position.
00:35:48.820 But there's a reason why you don't want to say it out loud. Uh, and that is that it's a horrifying
00:35:53.180 position. All right. The Emmys were on Sunday. Um, I didn't know that this was happening, of course,
00:35:59.380 until I saw the outrage on Twitter. There's always, there always has to be some sort of awards outrage
00:36:03.240 that comes out of these things. And this time, sometimes the outrage is sort of fun to talk about.
00:36:08.020 The Will Smith thing, I mean, that was a classic, right? That was, that was, that was actually an
00:36:11.300 enjoyable awards show related outrage that was enjoyable to talk about and entertaining.
00:36:19.940 Um, the one from the Emmys, this is a little disappointing. It doesn't quite live up to
00:36:23.400 the hype. So Jimmy Kimmel did a bit. I don't know all the background on this. I don't care.
00:36:28.620 The bit, I guess, is that he was, he was up presenting the award for some category and, uh,
00:36:34.800 he pretended to pass out for some reason on the stage. And then they announced the winner
00:36:41.100 and it was an actress who was black and Kimmel kept lying there, still pretending to be passed
00:36:47.780 out, even as she came up to give her acceptance speech. Let's, uh, let's watch a little bit of
00:36:53.880 that moment.
00:36:55.340 Quinta Brunson.
00:36:56.660 Abbott Elementary.
00:37:04.800 Jimmy, wake up. I won.
00:37:34.800 Jimmy. Okay. Hold my phone. Um,
00:37:41.760 my goodness.
00:37:49.560 Okay. And then she, uh, could, she just gives her acceptance speech with the guy lying there. It is,
00:37:54.660 it's awkward and weird. Uh, and that's really all that can be said about it. But, but, but
00:38:00.800 as always social media and the news media, they're not satisfied to just say that because there's,
00:38:09.180 there are racial dynamics here. You know, it's Jimmy Kimmel's a white guy. This actress is a black
00:38:14.400 woman. And so now they're making it racial. And so all these headlines saying that it was racist.
00:38:20.240 It was racist for Jimmy Kimmel to, to steal the woman's shine like that, you know, as all these posts 0.89
00:38:26.460 on social media, white men are always doing this. Damn white men. This is something white men always 1.00
00:38:31.180 do. White men are constantly lying on award show stages while people are trying to give, uh, give their 0.97
00:38:38.220 acceptance speeches. It's just, it's a thing we always do. It's part of our culture.
00:38:40.940 Now, um, this just shows again, the problem with racializing everything because you, you, it's
00:38:51.440 guaranteed that you're going to miss the point. And also you, you end up distracting from valid
00:38:57.120 criticisms. In this case, this is like a small example of it, but there's a very valid criticism
00:39:03.320 you could make of Jimmy Kimmel. He's, he's an ass. I mean, Jimmy Kimmel is a jerk. He's a, 1.00
00:39:07.640 he's a bad person and he's arrogant and self-centered. And yeah, he wanted to make this 0.99
00:39:12.700 moment about him. I'd be annoyed too. If I, if I'm up there giving my acceptance speech when
00:39:18.080 I win an Emmy and there's just some jerk laying on the ground, you know, because he thought 0.90
00:39:23.340 of this bad comedy bit and he's, he's, he's doing it in the middle of my, I'd be annoyed 0.98
00:39:27.680 by that. I'd, you know, just like kick him in the ribs or something to make him move, but 0.83
00:39:33.420 it's not racial. Like the idea that he did it because she's a black woman, he said to 0.99
00:39:39.140 himself, Oh, this is a black woman. I gotta, yeah, I gotta do what I can to intrude here 1.00
00:39:43.900 is absurd. Although it is kind of a, it is kind of funny that Jimmy Kimmel to this point,
00:39:54.340 you know, with the racial outrage brigade out there searching for racism, wherever they
00:39:59.300 can find it often landing in places where the racism ends up being imaginary and invisible.
00:40:05.380 You know, they're over at BYU searching for an invisible racist who silently shouted the
00:40:10.440 N word. Meanwhile, Jimmy Kimmel has been a late night network TV host for years now. And
00:40:17.500 there are tons of videos of him out there in blackface. This is something this guy did all 1.00
00:40:22.240 the time back in the, in the nineties. He was constantly in blackface and somehow he has 0.85
00:40:28.600 escaped criticism for that. So it'd be kind of funny if this is what brings him down. Like
00:40:35.060 this is the racial controversy that brings him down where he wasn't even actually being
00:40:38.780 racist. It's a little bit of the, you know, the, the OJ Simpson thing where they couldn't
00:40:44.420 get him for murder. So instead they get him for stealing his own merchandise back or whatever
00:40:48.180 it was. So Bates, it's kind of the same thing here. They didn't get Jimmy Kimmel for the
00:40:52.120 blackface. So they're going to get him for this instead. All right, let's get to the comment 0.99
00:40:57.440 section.
00:41:11.720 I will tell you a little bit of good news from my own life is that my wife has finally come
00:41:15.740 around to the fact that we need to buy a van and, um, the SUVs aren't going to cut it.
00:41:20.500 I mean, I told you when we, when we first found out we were having twins, she, you know, has
00:41:25.840 been anti-van our entire marriage. And she still had this idea that even with six kids, we wouldn't 0.95
00:41:30.880 have to get a van. Now she's realizing that, um, that there's no way around it. We got to
00:41:37.120 get the van. The van is inevitable, except now she's looking up vans that are like $95,000
00:41:41.960 or whatever. Meanwhile, I go on Craigslist and I find vans for sale for under eight grand. I mean,
00:41:47.860 you can find that. I found, I found a van for $400 on Craigslist and I'm, I'm sending her all
00:41:51.820 these links. Astro vans. Now those are the real deal. They don't make them anymore. You can only
00:41:57.380 find them on Craigslist. You can only find them used, but my family had an Astro van growing up.
00:42:01.220 Our, uh, our, uh, our rear passenger door was falling off and was actually duct taped on.
00:42:06.260 That's true. And I got about six miles to the gallon. The engine sounded like a, like a,
00:42:11.280 a polar bear drowning or something. It was a great vehicle. It was great.
00:42:15.240 There were vomit stains on the third row seat because I had a car sickness problem and I didn't
00:42:19.580 have a, uh, my relief band back then. It's just a great vehicle. There were holes rusted on the side
00:42:26.740 panel. It's like big holes. My brother fell through one of them on the highway. We never saw him again.
00:42:31.940 It was a great, fantastic, a classic. And I'm looking forward to having something like that again.
00:42:37.620 All right. Max Winter says, a black actor playing the little mermaid really is a case of 1.00
00:42:41.280 white Eurasia. All forms of art, including fairy tales are meant to be reflections of the author's
00:42:45.560 experiences and observations. Hans Christian Andersen probably based a little mermaid based
00:42:49.420 on experiences he went through in his home country of Denmark. So it makes sense that most of his
00:42:53.140 characters would be white since that's the world and the people he was surrounded by.
00:42:58.660 Yeah. I'm given the way that we deal with these sorts of issues. I'm, I'm sympathetic to that. Now I
00:43:04.600 would be fine. Like we talked about yesterday, we don't have to rehash the entire thing, but
00:43:07.580 if we all agreed that race in, in films and TV shows, especially fictional stories don't matter.
00:43:17.060 And we're going to take a kind of colorblind casting approach and you know, it just, it doesn't matter
00:43:22.960 as long as the actor is good. If we could all agree on that, then I'd be on board. And as I said,
00:43:27.060 that's basically what it was for many years, what it was back in the nineties.
00:43:30.080 But what I cannot abide by is the double standard thing where we say, well, race, the race, the
00:43:38.940 casting, uh, the race of in casting matters only for certain races and not for others that that
00:43:44.160 no, no, we're not doing that. Also, by the way, with the little mermaid, can we also just mention
00:43:51.640 that just from a, from a scientific perspective, okay, it doesn't make a lot of sense to have someone
00:43:58.000 with darker skin who lives deep in the ocean. I mean, if anything, I mean, not only should the
00:44:03.080 little mermaid be pale, she should actually be translucent. If you look at deep sea creatures,
00:44:06.900 they're like translucent. They have no kind of pigmentation whatsoever. And they're just like
00:44:11.060 these horrifying, they look like skeletons floating around in the ocean. That's what the little mermaid 0.97
00:44:15.420 should look like. She should be totally pale where, and skeletal where you can see her skull through 1.00
00:44:20.580 her face. And that would actually be a version of little mermaid that I would watch.
00:44:31.280 Let's see. Dionysus voice says, Matt, I really have to express my outrage, disgust and offense at
00:44:36.540 your comparison with woke, wokesters and octopi. Unlike wokesters, octopi have been known to demonstrate
00:44:43.100 a significant amount of intelligence. Well, you pretend to be some sort of expert, but actually octopi,
00:44:47.740 this is like a misnomer that the plural of octopuses is octopi. That's actually not true.
00:44:53.140 It is octopuses. And because you lacked that knowledge about octopuses, you're banned from
00:44:58.760 the show. And finally, Brandon Kelly says, I was looking at a book of African fairy tales,
00:45:04.580 and I want to buy it because these stories are not as well known as the European ones. But what makes
00:45:08.540 it sad is that Hollywood refuses to adapt these stories because they rather have a Latina Rapunzel or
00:45:13.940 a black Cinderella than anything. Yeah. And that's another very good point that other people 0.65
00:45:18.640 brought up as we were talking about this. And that is, if we're making the decision,
00:45:24.740 if we're saying, if Hollywood is saying, okay, we need to have more black people who are leads in
00:45:29.300 these kinds of stories. We need to have more children's stories with black leads. We need to 0.99
00:45:32.580 have fairy tales with black leads. Just like they say, we need more female action heroes. 1.00
00:45:38.360 Well, then why not make new stories rather than taking the old stories and flipping them around
00:45:45.540 and say, oh, well, now we have, we're going to take this action franchise and now we have the
00:45:49.920 girl version of it. And we're going to take this fairy tale. We're going to make the black version 0.99
00:45:53.720 of it. Rather than doing that, how about just tell a new story? Then, you know what? Everybody wins.
00:45:59.200 That's a win for everybody. You get the representation that you want. And we also get new stories. We get,
00:46:04.100 rather than recycling the same damn thing over and over again. Okay. They're going to make another 0.97
00:46:09.840 Pinocchio in three years. And it's going to be a trans, you know, like trans, uh, trans Asian 1.00
00:46:16.260 pansexual Pinocchio. But rather than that, let's just look at, we've told that story. We've, we have
00:46:21.760 a million iterations of Pinocchio. How about just tell a new story? Crazy idea. Well, a big announcement
00:46:29.240 this week, maybe you've heard Candace Owens is back from maternity leave with a vengeance. Her brand 0.79
00:46:33.860 new show, Candace Owens is available now on Daily Wire Plus and takes on the big topics of the day,
00:46:38.220 uncovers lies and exposes the hypocrisy in news and politics. And you know, it's going to be done
00:46:42.820 in typical Candace style, fearless and resolute. This is everything you love about Candace. Only now
00:46:47.160 she is streaming five days a week. You'll not want to miss her explosive first episode,
00:46:52.460 which premiered this week. Trust me when I say this is huge. Watch Candace Owens' show now on Daily
00:46:57.360 Wire Plus or listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Now let's get to our
00:47:02.860 Daily Cancellation. So last week we looked at a couple of recent attempts to finally solve the
00:47:12.380 what is a woman riddle. As you may remember, they both failed in spectacular fashion. Their answers
00:47:18.660 didn't even make it past square one. They blew up on the launch pad and killed everybody on board
00:47:22.700 metaphorically. But at least they tried because we finally forced the left to confront this question.
00:47:27.960 They realized they cannot evade it any longer. They have to confront it. And so all of the best
00:47:33.160 minds in the gender ideology world have set to work. This is like the Manhattan Project of green 0.93
00:47:39.800 haired gender studies majors. They're all on the problem now. They've been brainstorming around the
00:47:44.460 clock. An all-star team of the smartest and most insightful gender activists in the world,
00:47:49.940 all with comparatively impressive IQs compared to the rest of them. Some reaching even into the high
00:47:54.600 double digits. And they've been digging into this problem, deliberating, searching desperately for a
00:48:00.140 solution. And yet so far, a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman is the best that any of them
00:48:07.920 have been able to do. It's as though the Manhattan Project spent years on research and development,
00:48:12.900 and rather than inventing the nuclear bomb, they came up with like a firecracker. Although at least a
00:48:17.740 firecracker is an actual thing, it exists, it makes sense. A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman
00:48:24.160 is nothing. It's not a definition. It's not anything. It's circular. It's incoherent. And yet again, it is
00:48:29.300 the best that they have been able to do until now. Here to meet the challenge or to die trying is a writer
00:48:36.480 called Paul John Poles. Paul is a self-identified feminine trans man, which I guess is a female who
00:48:45.000 identifies as a male and sees herself as feminine. That presents its own bundle of cords to untangle, 1.00
00:48:53.260 but there's not time for that today. It does mean, though, that the writer is coming at this question
00:48:58.720 from a pretty unique perspective. Because usually the gender ideologues who try to tackle the woman
00:49:03.580 question are males who wish to find a definition of woman that will include them. But in this case,
00:49:09.780 interestingly enough, we have a female who wishes to find a definition of woman that does not 0.94
00:49:14.880 include her. How will she do it? Well, PJP begins by acknowledging a few points that the gender 0.98
00:49:22.340 ideologues usually prefer to ignore. She points out that gender cannot rest on stereotypes and social 0.72
00:49:28.180 constructs, as her side usually has it, because that effectively excludes a lot of people from womanhood 1.00
00:49:33.280 that she doesn't want to exclude. It also includes her, but she doesn't want to be included.
00:49:39.680 Next, the writer recognizes that a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman, is circular and therefore 0.96
00:49:44.020 logically invalid. She does acknowledge that. She also points to another problem that I hadn't even
00:49:48.540 thought about with the woman who identifies as a woman definition. She says that hinging the
00:49:55.560 definition of woman on self-identification is a problem for her side because it excludes people 0.91
00:50:01.860 who don't yet consciously identify as women, but may at some point in the future. The trans community
00:50:09.200 creepily refers to people who they think might be trans or can be turned trans as eggs. That's what
00:50:15.700 they call them, eggs, right? Eggs that need to be hatched. And they may sort of home in on a boy who
00:50:23.080 they think could be made into a girl, a process that we used to call grooming before every social 1.00
00:50:27.780 media site. But the point is that they want to be able to say that the boy is already a girl and has
00:50:36.260 always been a girl, yet hasn't realized it. That's what they want to say. So when the boy is nine years
00:50:46.280 old and first says, I'm a girl, no, it's the trans side. They don't say that he just became a girl. Then
00:50:53.180 they say, no, he was always a girl, even before that. He just came to realize it now. Well, see,
00:50:59.520 that doesn't work if the very definition of womanhood or girlhood relies on conscious
00:51:04.600 self-identification. That's another problem. So what can be done about this? Here's the writer's
00:51:11.660 solution. I'm going to read now. Quote, this finally brings us to our definition. A woman is an adult 0.62
00:51:20.560 human whose subconscious sex is female. The beauty of it is that it doesn't include trans men or cis 0.83
00:51:29.280 men. Their subconscious sex is male. And it includes both cis women and trans women. Their
00:51:34.220 subconscious sex is female. And it also doesn't invalidate gender non-conforming trans and cis people.
00:51:39.660 And the best thing about it is that the person who is best qualified to know whether or not you are a
00:51:43.840 woman is still you, which means that we can still keep our beloved ethical guideline of respecting 0.67
00:51:48.440 people's self-identification. Except that now the word woman actually means something.
00:51:55.040 Well, no, it doesn't. In fact, it's never meant less if that's the definition. Now, I can appreciate
00:51:59.980 that you've made a valiant effort to avoid a circular definition, but unfortunately, your efforts have
00:52:04.260 driven you even farther off the logical path and deep into the woods where it's dark and confusing
00:52:08.720 and no light penetrates through the canopy. It's even worse now. So let's review all the problems with
00:52:14.200 this definition. Number one, your subconscious, by definition, is the part of your mind that you
00:52:22.240 don't have access to. You are unaware of it. Actually, the subconscious or unconscious mind
00:52:27.880 is a psychoanalytical theory invented by Freud. There are all kinds of logical and scientific
00:52:33.680 problems with it. It also has given risen to all manner of psychiatric fads and panics,
00:52:38.540 such as the infamous repressed memory hysteria back in the 90s, when a whole bunch of women in therapy
00:52:43.220 all realized all of a sudden that they had been abused as children, and then a whole bunch of
00:52:47.600 people got arrested based on that, and it turned out that they were imagining it. For that matter,
00:52:52.820 the concept of transgenderism wouldn't exist either without these Freudian concepts of the unconscious 0.57
00:52:58.380 mind and so forth. So there are problems, is what I'm saying, with the whole idea of the subconscious,
00:53:04.060 at least as it has traditionally been understood. But that takes us off on a tangent about how the
00:53:09.460 entire field of psychoanalysis is built on nonsense fabrications and wild theories invented by a bunch
00:53:14.960 of weirdos a hundred years ago. We're going to leave that to the side and stay focused. The point
00:53:19.900 is that the term subconscious means, I mean, this is what it means, the part of your mind you aren't
00:53:25.840 aware of. So if someone is subconsciously female, they wouldn't know that they're female. If you know
00:53:34.000 that you're female, then you are consciously female, not subconsciously. But of course,
00:53:37.520 saying a woman is anyone who is consciously female is just another way of saying that a woman is
00:53:42.820 anyone who identifies as a woman. You're trying to avoid the endless logical loop, which is why 1.00
00:53:47.540 you've introduced the subconscious into the equation, but you can't really do that. The
00:53:51.360 subconscious cannot save you. In fact, its entrance into the conversation creates far more problems
00:53:56.480 for you than it solves. Also, your subconscious cannot have a sex. Your consciousness also does not
00:54:03.820 have a sex in and of itself. By definition, sex is a physical category having to do with reproductive
00:54:10.820 organs and chromosomes and DNA. You are here positing a scenario where a person with a physical sex of
00:54:18.820 male could have a mind, even an unconscious mind, with the physical sex of female. So you have turned the 0.92
00:54:26.900 mind into its own physical entity, literally contained inside the physical body and which has
00:54:32.860 its own DNA. This is what you're doing, not to the brain, but to the mind. Essentially, you're imagining the
00:54:40.280 human body as some sort of fleshy shell with a whole other person inside it, steering it around. That makes
00:54:46.840 for a good plot point in a science fiction film, but it's not how things work in reality. In reality, you can cut a
00:54:53.040 person open and inspect every part of them, including their brain, external and internal, and all you will
00:54:58.720 find are physical body parts, and every physical body part has physical DNA, which will attest to the
00:55:04.080 physical sex of that person. And that's why your definition doesn't work and makes no sense. And in
00:55:09.940 the end, it's even less coherent than the definition that you were trying to avoid giving. That's really
00:55:14.980 the problem, isn't it, though? What you're trying to avoid, that's the issue. See, it's very clear,
00:55:20.780 has never been more clear. That the gender ideologues, really, what they actually want to 0.99
00:55:27.340 talk about is the human soul. Every day, they move closer to the precipice, inching toward it step by
00:55:34.060 step. They talk about self-identity, and inner awareness, and gender identity, and subconscious
00:55:39.500 sex now. But what they mean, what they want to say, is that humans have a soul, and sometimes the soul
00:55:47.520 doesn't match with the body. They stop themselves from saying that because they don't want to admit
00:55:52.720 that gender ideology is, through and through, a religion. It's a religious, spiritual claim. It's a 1.00
00:55:57.880 matter of faith. This is the secret they're trying to keep hidden, but they're coming closer and closer
00:56:02.900 to dropping the scientific mask and admitting the truth, that this is religious. This is a
00:56:08.460 religious claim. They believe in the soul. And when they say that a man is really a woman,
00:56:14.340 they mean that he is spiritually a woman, that his soul is that of a woman. That's what they mean.
00:56:22.060 Of course, understood that way, it still is nonsense. It doesn't make any sense at all.
00:56:26.960 You cannot talk about souls without talking about God. I mean, he's the one who makes the souls and the
00:56:32.840 body. And it's absurd, obviously, to claim that God would make some sort of mistake on the spiritual
00:56:38.880 assembly line and accidentally plop a female soul into a male body. That doesn't make any sense.
00:56:45.400 I mean, what sort of vision of God are you now postulating? Some sort of bumbling fool up there 1.00
00:56:52.540 in heaven that's just like, you know, throwing different souls into mismatching bodies, has no 1.00
00:56:57.280 idea what's going on. Besides, this concept of souls is built on, this concept, the concept that
00:57:03.720 the gender ideologues have, is built on this weird kind of dualism where the soul is seen as, once
00:57:09.160 again, an entity located inside the body and steering it along, like the body is some sort of
00:57:15.200 two-legged SUV. But in reality, our souls and bodies exist in harmony with each other.
00:57:20.760 It's not that we are bodies and we have souls, or that we are souls and have bodies.
00:57:25.760 We are souls and we are bodies. We cannot be one thing spiritually and the opposite thing physically.
00:57:35.280 That's a contradiction. You might as well say that you have the body of a human and the soul of a
00:57:41.580 raccoon or an oak tree. It just doesn't make any sense. So retreating into the spiritual realm will
00:57:48.340 not actually save gender theory. It actually makes it even more absurd than it was when it was judged
00:57:53.060 purely on a scientific basis. But at least if we are talking about it spiritually, at least then the
00:58:00.380 conversation is being had in an honest way. At least the gender ideologues would finally be saying
00:58:06.000 what they actually mean. And that would be progress. Though again, it will not save them or our friend
00:58:14.240 Paul John Poles from being today canceled. And that'll do it for this portion of the show as we
00:58:19.980 move into the members block. Hope to see you there. If not, talk to you tomorrow. Godspeed.