The Michael Knowles Show - ＂You Are HYPOCRITES!＂ Michael Knowles MANSPLAINS： Hot Women In Commercials

00:00:00.000 Okay, fellas, since Hollywood can't do anything right anymore, we did their job for them.

00:00:04.440 The Daily Wire's newest movie is an ode to the great funny action films of the 80s and 90s.

00:00:08.720 Good guys win, bad guys lose.

00:00:10.280 No one apologizes for it. 1.00

00:00:12.260 Check out Run, Hide, Fight Infidels, now streaming only on The Daily Wire. 1.00

00:00:17.000 Are you noticing your car insurance rate creep up even without tickets or claims? 0.99

00:00:21.000 You're not alone.

00:00:22.360 That's why there's Jerry, your proactive insurance assistant.

00:00:25.580 Jerry handles the legwork by comparing, quote, side-by-side from over 50 top insurers.

00:00:29.580 so you can confidently hit buy.

00:00:31.900 No spam calls, no hidden fees.

00:00:34.520 Jerry even tracks rates and alerts you when it's best to shop.

00:00:37.780 Drivers who save with Jerry can save over $1,300 a year.

00:00:40.780 Don't settle for higher rates.

00:00:42.220 Download the Jerry app or visit jerry.ai slash wire today.

00:00:46.520 Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile with your summer price forecast.

00:00:48.960 Now, unfortunately, we're seeing rising costs across the country

00:00:53.680 with possibility that big wireless hates you 100%.

00:00:57.380 Now, over here at Mint Mobile, we're seeing sunny skies and dropping prices.

00:01:02.540 Every plan to just $15 a month.

00:01:04.440 Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch.

00:01:07.280 Upfront payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months, or $180 for 12-month plan required.

00:01:11.040 $15 per month equivalent.

00:01:12.040 Taxes and fees extra.

00:01:12.840 New customer offer for initial plan term only.

00:01:14.320 Greater than 50 gigabytes may slow when network is busy.

00:01:16.020 See terms. 0.87

00:01:16.640 Am I misogynistic, leftist blondie?

00:01:18.780 I think you're misogynistic for many different reasons. 1.00

00:01:21.300 I like seeing hot white women. 0.99

00:01:24.120 I'm not going to cheer that people are watching more straight pornography than gay pornography. 0.99

00:01:28.180 It is fundamentally hypocritical of Michael to applaud a naked advertisement as a step toward a conservative America. 0.90

00:01:33.900 I got in big trouble the other day, and not just with my wife, with you, the beloved audience, because Sydney Sweeney made a sports commercial.

00:01:41.820 And in it, she was not wearing very much clothing, and she was covering various parts of herself with footballs and basketballs and things like that.

00:01:48.660 And I pointed out that the Sidney Sweeney half naked pro gambling commercial is actually probably on the whole a positive development in our culture.

00:02:02.400 I'm not saying it's perfect. I'm not saying that we're pro nudity or gambling or any of the like.

00:02:08.640 But given where the culture was, I said, there was probably a change generally in the right

00:02:14.740 direction. I was pilloried, ripped apart in the comment section. The libs are upset.

00:02:23.120 The feminists are upset. The conservatives and the trads are upset. So I decided I needed to

00:02:28.880 invite a bunch of women on to tell me why I'm wrong. And those women are Tilly Middlehurst, 1.00

00:02:36.840 Leftist Blondie, welcome back to the program. 1.00

00:02:39.240 Emily Saves America here as always. 1.00

00:02:42.280 And Justice Hope Keele. 0.95

00:02:44.720 Ladies, thank you for being on.

00:02:47.420 Wonderful to be with.

00:02:48.280 Thank you all for wearing clothing, by the way, because that's a big part of the controversy here.

00:02:52.320 I just want to go down the line.

00:02:55.740 Sidney Sweeney commercial.

00:02:57.960 Love it.

00:02:59.240 Hate it.

00:03:00.380 Think it's kind of bad, but generally good for the culture.

00:03:03.080 Right down the line, what's your opinion? 1.00

00:03:05.160 Leftist Blondie. 1.00

00:03:06.320 Sure. Well, I suppose you made this comment about thank you for wearing clothes. I think, however, your opinion would be that if we didn't, it would be some great move for conservatism. But I think that when we have to start out by saying my culture is not your costume, Michael, you don't get to, you know, co-opt sexual liberation just to own the libs. It goes completely against your Catholic doctrine, I think, first of all.

00:03:29.660 the left's job as far as the feminists and the liberals being upset is to critique systems that

00:03:34.920 they think are harmful and that's what they're doing now they're doing it for the wrong reasons

00:03:38.540 i believe and we can talk about that later um but i do think that the real harm in this that

00:03:42.960 people are overlooking is the um promotion and the weaponizing of women's bodies as objects

00:03:49.260 for class and for money and for gambling so i think that's the real issue and we can you know 1.00

00:03:55.660 The male gaze. Now, just one point in response to what you said. You said, Michael, I'm surprised, given your opinion of the Sydney Sweeney ad, that you aren't encouraging us all to be naked. No, no, no. That would be a bad change for my show. The Michael Knowles show, this is a PG show, a family program. We do not have naked women on.

00:04:14.200 So if I went from clothed women to naked women, that would be a change in the wrong direction on my show.

00:04:19.160 But for the pop culture, which is deeply pornographic and obscene all the time, to me, at least, this kind of attractive, little immodest advertising of a beautiful woman is better than the recent, what we've seen for the last 10 years, immodesty, where the advertising is all like gargantuan men of androgyny wearing dresses.

00:04:44.280 Anyway, let's keep going down the line.

00:04:46.560 What's your opinion of the Sidney Sweeney ad?

00:04:48.300 Yeah, I mean, I don't think it's fundamentally something different or unique comparative to what we've seen before in the culture. I do think that it is fundamentally hypocritical of Michael to applaud a naked advertisement as a step toward a conservative America when in his world, I have read your book, Michael, under blasphemy law, Sydney is not only shame, she's also fined and blamed for men's lust.

00:05:07.160 I mean, you can say that you're happy she's a registered Republican. You can say that you're 0.51

00:05:10.020 happy she's a naked registered Republican. Those are all fine positions. But I think the only 0.94

00:05:14.140 naked conservative woman you should truly be so happy to see is, of course, your wife. 0.93

00:05:19.240 Yes, I think that's fair. And you may have misspoken. In my ideal regime, 0.97

00:05:23.840 she would not have violated a blasphemy law. She would have violated an obscenity law. 0.98

00:05:28.260 But I do want the obscenity laws too.

00:05:29.740 Oh, sorry. It's against licentiousness.

00:05:30.860 Yes. Okay. All right. Next one. Bring it on. Come on. Hypocrite,

00:05:35.200 vile misogynist whatever you want to call me bring it on my take is a little bit less uh you know 1.00

00:05:42.640 i'm not gonna call you hypocrite um i i do i do slightly disagree with you i think i get what 0.93

00:05:47.700 you're saying incrementally this is like a better direction to be headed um but i think that the

00:05:52.980 principle of double effect applies here like doing something slight doing something wrong 0.98

00:05:58.820 for the sake of somehow creating a good outcome is still something wrong and she's still naked 1.00

00:06:03.840 on tv on our screens she's still presenting sexuality in a context outside of what it 1.00

00:06:10.400 was designed for which is in the context of marriage um our sexuality is powerful it is

00:06:15.120 beautiful it is eye-catching and it was meant and created to exist in a specific context and that

00:06:20.080 context is not um on tv for every man to come across online i'm a mother of a little boy i

00:06:26.120 don't want him going online and seeing naked sydney sweeney or naked anybody else um and so

00:06:32.260 But I also think as a conservative Christian, it's really important that we approach our

00:06:37.660 response to her charitably and with love, that we make sure that we are differentiating

00:06:42.680 between calling out a wrong behavior and putting a label on her as a person, like, this is

00:06:49.760 who you are.

00:06:50.600 I was Miss Tennessee USA years ago.

00:06:53.540 I was on national television in the bikini.

00:06:55.380 So some people could look at me and be like, this is really ironic that you're like here

00:06:58.700 saying this.

00:06:59.620 My heart has changed since then.

00:07:01.000 the Lord has done amazing work in my life since then. I knew him then, and I hope that I know him

00:07:05.320 better now. And I've grown and matured, and I was also in my early 20s, and I'm in my 30s now. And

00:07:10.960 so I think that we want to leave space for people also to grow and for the Lord to develop them.

00:07:17.020 And so I think that's a really important part of all of this, is having a charitable perspective

00:07:20.600 towards her as well. Yeah, I think that's true. And you bring up bikinis. I would go further,

00:07:24.560 even though I'm mildly defending the Sidney Sweeney ad, or I'm at least trying to look on

00:07:29.220 the bright side of it. I'm anti-bikini too. You know, the bikini didn't exist until the 40s 0.98

00:07:33.680 and it violated all sorts of public indecency laws. And I think it should. And I, it would be,

00:07:38.100 it would be better actually, if we did not have bikinis out today. Now, Sydney Sweeney, 1.00

00:07:42.780 she's half naked in this ad. It's not, she's not going the full Monty, but you know, it's pretty 1.00

00:07:47.780 suggestive. And yes. She leaves very little to be imagined. Imagination. There's very little 0.88

00:07:53.120 left to the imagination. Yeah. And it's not good. People who want to keep custody of their eyes,

00:07:57.140 It's probably not good to see that ad.

00:07:59.160 So, okay, incrementally, yes, okay, there's this issue.

00:08:03.240 Final thought, Emily Saves America, pro-anti-Sweeney ad.

00:08:08.360 I love it. 1.00

00:08:09.660 She's hot. 1.00

00:08:10.660 If anyone had that body, they would also be showing it. 1.00

00:08:13.460 It's sex and gambling, the two things that sell. 0.65

00:08:17.260 She got the exact reaction she wanted. 1.00

00:08:19.520 I like seeing hot white women back on top. 1.00

00:08:24.400 She looks amazing. 1.00

00:08:25.540 No one can argue that.

00:08:26.600 The only people are that are upset. And I understand, you know, the fake tribe can serve as, oh, no, this is so bad.

00:08:33.640 It's actually a net positive. OK.

00:08:36.640 And then the other people are upset are the women writing the articles who are unfortunate looking, usually overweight and jealous. 0.99

00:08:42.980 And you know what? If it was a fat black girl or someone trans or someone with one arm or an indigenous person, they'd be so excited for her. 0.97

00:08:52.080 hold that thought apropos of nothing go watch the daily wire's new movie run hide fight infidels 0.98

00:08:57.660 we cannot run or hide from what is coming we have to fight i will be rewarded 10 000 times 0.96

00:09:06.040 in the next life when you die you're nothing run i fight infidels only on the daily wire 0.99

00:09:12.440 okay so this i think is what what really motivates at least my reaction to the advertisement is the 0.99

00:09:18.720 fact that for the last 10 years, it's like fat, pygmy, multi-ethnic, androgynous, they-them men

00:09:27.860 who are wearing lingerie and a Victoria's Secret ad. And the popular culture tells us not just

00:09:33.620 merely to look at that kind of perverse obscenity, but to say that it's beautiful and to dare us to

00:09:39.260 in any way contradict the idea that that's beautiful when it obviously is not. So when

00:09:44.840 you get back to the critique that Leftist Blondie was just making, you say your problem with this

00:09:49.180 is that it attracts the male gaze, basically, that it uses women's physical beauty in order

00:09:55.620 to sell products. And so I see that feminist issue. The trad problem with it, which also was 1.00

00:10:02.540 just mentioned, is that it presents sex outside of marriage. Now, it's not actual sex, like she's

00:10:07.280 not bumping uglies on screen or anything, pardon the expression, but it nevertheless portrays this

00:10:13.260 sexual, uh, image and it appeals to the prurient interest. There's no question. But I guess my

00:10:18.420 point is advertising has always played on these kinds of things. One of the feminist critiques 1.00

00:10:23.800 of Sweeney's ad is that, uh, this is not what female sports is about. Women in sports are about, 1.00

00:10:30.060 you know, uh, physical prowess and excelling in games and whatever. I guess my point though is

00:10:36.320 sports is about the body. Uh, mathematics is about the mind. Sports is about the body.

00:10:43.260 But to leftist blondies point, when you say this is using women's bodies to appeal to this basic kind of male gaze, I guess that that is the part that I would defend as an improvement over the previous idea, because I want to return to a culture that is modest, that does not promote gambling. 0.89

00:10:59.740 We haven't even really touched on the gambling part of the whole thing, but I, where we are 0.82

00:11:04.380 right now is we're told that we have to lie about how even the base desires of human nature

00:11:10.500 work, even that appeal to the prurient interest, even what does appeal to our lusty aspects.

00:11:14.920 And so it seems to me that if we're moving from that culture of lies to the culture that

00:11:19.700 actually gets human nature right, that says that, yeah, men like pretty thin blonde girls

00:11:24.420 with large personality that, you know, that is an improvement because we're at least grounding 0.85

00:11:29.500 our advertising in the truth, and you can't move to the perfect world until you at least

00:11:35.520 get to that middle ground. Am I misogynistic, Leftist Blondie?

00:11:39.700 I think you're misogynistic for many different reasons, but I think you have

00:11:43.420 done a good job at misunderstanding the critique that I was levying there. The critique was not

00:11:50.680 that women cannot make themselves into sexual beings. It's not that they can't express

00:11:55.740 their sexualities in the ways that they desire. It's about the end goal of it being used as a

00:12:00.640 political bludgeon to say, look, we get to own the libs now and we also get to promote gambling,

00:12:05.000 this thing that disenfranchises young adults and teens. The younger men, especially, men are two

00:12:12.360 to one or about 3.4 to one times as likely as women to engage in gambling. People who are low 0.67

00:12:20.160 income. People who have substance use disorders are more prone to addiction and especially with

00:12:26.560 things like gambling. So if you want to say like this is the issue of the left is like it's

00:12:31.120 diminishing women's sports. I don't think that any reasonable interpretation of the ad is that

00:12:35.380 Sidney Sweeney is here to sell you women in sports. Sidney Sweeney is here to sell you sex 0.93

00:12:40.580 in order to get you to opt into gambling for sports. So it's completely uncharitable. 0.97

00:12:45.600 But hold on, hold on. You just said something. I see a contradiction. I want to clarify it. So

00:12:49.800 you just said, Michael, you've misinterpreted what I'm saying. I am not saying that women 1.00

00:12:54.340 shouldn't use their sexuality in any way that they choose. What I'm saying is Sydney Sweeney

00:13:00.340 should not have used her sexuality in the way that she chose because it advances things that

00:13:05.000 you object to. So isn't that a contradiction? No, it's not a contradiction. Unless you want

00:13:10.940 to point it out to me, you can syllogize it if you'd like to, but it's not a contradiction.

00:13:14.140 the point is is that the end goal is bad so i can say maybe i have a really charismatic personality

00:13:19.920 now we of course all in this panel probably disagree with that but if i use my charismatic

00:13:23.560 personality to oh thank you i appreciate it um but if i use my charismatic personality to sell

00:13:28.940 someone cocaine i think i'm doing something wrong no one is interpreting okay but hold on then i

00:13:35.880 want to just establish then it seems like your major premise is wrong because uh and there i

00:13:40.680 think I would agree with you. It seems like what you're saying is no, no, no. Women should not be

00:13:45.660 using their sexuality in any way that they so choose. There are some ways that are good and 1.00

00:13:51.020 there are some ways that are bad. And we might disagree over the good and bad ways, but you're

00:13:54.820 saying it's bad to promote it in a way that sells sex to normie men and sells gambling. And so what

00:14:00.620 you're saying, it seems to me, if you're critiquing Sidney Sweeney is, hey girl, you should not use

00:14:04.860 your sexuality in this way. You should use your sexuality in a way that I approve of.

00:14:10.680 of course i think that people should use their sexuality in ways that i approve of i don't think

00:14:15.540 that people who have certain sexualities that are um aggressive towards other people or sexualities

00:14:21.380 that are geared towards moral things should be doing of course not okay the thing is not to say

00:14:27.760 that a woman being sexual no of course not the problem was not about the autonomy it was about 0.79

00:14:33.980 the promotion of gambling which harms people and it's a tool to uphold class status okay 0.99

00:14:39.560 I think Suni Kari is far more about class than she does about, you know, sexualizing her body. 1.00

00:14:43.860 So the problem isn't the sex. The problem is the gambling. 1.00

00:14:47.820 Of course. Absolutely.

00:14:49.340 OK. All right. 1.00

00:14:50.100 The sex is a tool. The sexual appeal is the tool to the end goal of getting people to gamble.

00:14:54.720 So the sex isn't the problem. But I think the rest of the ladies on the panel, well, not Emily Saves America, but the other two ladies on the panel would say that the problem is the sex more than it is the gambling. Do I have that right?

00:15:03.560 i don't know that i'd say more than the gambling to be honest i haven't even thought about the 0.91

00:15:09.420 gambling part uh i saw the ad and i was like this is so offensive just her being naked i know that 1.00

00:15:17.580 she's got stuff covering vital areas she might as well be naked yeah she's she's basically naked 0.99

00:15:23.460 mostly naked um on screen and i think that is that's the problem with the ad if you will what 0.99

00:15:31.360 then comes from the ad, there's, there's more things, you know, gambling and who knows what

00:15:35.840 else will come from the ad. I don't know. But the ad itself, the problem that I have with it is

00:15:39.880 her nakedness. Here, I guess is my problem with that critique, which I agree with, you know,

00:15:46.540 I'm at a principled level, I agree with you, but it seems to me that given where we are in the 0.99

00:15:50.800 culture and given that our culture is filled with people who think exactly like leftist blondie, 0.91

00:15:55.120 which is that there should be absolutely no limit whatsoever to the use of one's sexuality as such, 0.55

00:16:00.880 that living in that culture,

00:16:02.940 we are not going to go from that to the Victorian age.

00:16:05.840 We are not going to go from that to like 0.90

00:16:07.360 the lady shouldn't show a little ankle 1.00

00:16:08.720 to sell bow ties or something. 1.00

00:16:11.360 You know, there has to be some kind of intermediate stage.

00:16:15.500 And so I'm willing to say,

00:16:16.660 just as Irving Kristol said,

00:16:18.040 two cheers for capitalism instead of three,

00:16:19.980 I'm willing to say two or even maybe one cheer

00:16:22.860 for the hot Sidney Sweeney ad

00:16:24.500 because at least it's,

00:16:25.740 would you at least agree it's moving us

00:16:27.080 in the right direction or no?

00:16:28.420 You think it's moving us further down the wrong direction of prurience and vice?

00:16:33.900 Yeah, I think that's a problem because people are just redirecting.

00:16:37.960 It's still sexual sin.

00:16:39.620 So we're just redirecting the sexual sin into a different sin. 0.96

00:16:42.380 It's like, I'm not going to cheer that people are watching more straight pornography than gay pornography, 0.66

00:16:46.580 even though I think that homosexual relationships are the biological norm and how God created us to function. 0.89

00:16:53.200 I'm not going to celebrate, oh, yay, like more people are watching straight porn. 0.64

00:16:56.860 Okay, but I'm not asking you to celebrate it.

00:16:58.180 It's an interesting thing to look at culturally.

00:16:59.880 But this is what I'm asking.

00:17:01.380 Let's say we say it's all bad.

00:17:02.820 You know, porn is just bad, and gambling is bad, too, in most cases.

00:17:06.560 Okay, well, I think about my main man, Dante Alighieri, who's listing all of the sins in the Inferno.

00:17:12.720 And there's the sin of lust.

00:17:14.440 There's Paolo and Francesca being blown around on the winds of their own lust and their inability to discipline themselves. 0.98

00:17:20.020 But then further down in hell, that is a more serious sin would be the sins of like homosexual sodomy and other kinds of even other kinds of sexual sins. 0.93

00:17:29.960 And then there are many worse sins than that. 0.58

00:17:31.380 So because a guy being attracted to a hot blonde chick holding a couple of footballs in front of her chest, because that is more natural, that is more in line with natural and potentially well-ordered desires than, say, homosexuality or throuples or trans or whatever, then I think you would even have to agree that is necessarily an improvement. 0.81

00:17:54.840 Even if it's all bad, it's still better than the alternative.

00:17:57.660 yeah and i would say it feels more conservative than uh what we're used to seeing like you guys

00:18:05.440 were talking about where there's this sort of forced um we're trying to force a narrative that

00:18:11.760 like everybody is equally attractive biologically everybody you know and you can just be attracted

00:18:16.940 to anybody or anything um yeah it's going to feel more conservative than that but it's still not

00:18:21.940 conservative okay but emily you're taking a different view not conservative emily your view

00:18:26.140 is she's hot she's blonde she's white she's all the things she's a woman she's all the things that 0.92

00:18:32.820 you're not allowed to be for the last 10 years let's just let's just dumb this down for everyone

00:18:39.280 that will be potentially listening we're going back to the og 90s when you used to see nascar 0.99

00:18:45.240 all the girls were hot blonde bombshells they had big tits they were nice to look at sorry no one's 1.00

00:18:51.480 arguing with that. So of course it's a win. If I'm going to watch someone on TV and they're going to 1.00

00:18:57.260 promote sex and gambling, God bless her. She's great to look at even as a straight woman. So

00:19:03.580 of course it's a win. Do I want to see her or do I want to see a trans indigenous person with their

00:19:10.180 balls hanging out on TV, promoting it? Yes. This is a win for all of us. At least it's not, you 1.00

00:19:15.020 know, burning our eyeballs off, which is what I've been used to being shoved down my throat for,

00:19:19.580 I don't know, 10 years now. It's a win across the board. They're going to promote sex and gambling, 1.00

00:19:24.680 whether we like it or not. No, though, it does occur to me as you're making this point, which

00:19:28.880 I'm basically inclined to agree with. It does occur to me if they had some big fat indigenous 1.00

00:19:35.120 man wearing lingerie, that would probably be better for my soul than Sidney Sweeney because 1.00

00:19:41.200 I'm not attracted to the big fat, ugly indigenous man. It doesn't arouse me in the way that a good 1.00

00:19:47.000 looking lady wearing very little clothing potentially could. So, but, but on your broader 1.00

00:19:51.060 point where you say, look, the nineties are back. I think you are totally right. You are hitting the

00:19:55.380 nail on the head here. What we are looking at is nineties liberalism and the left hates it because

00:20:00.420 they thought they'd moved past nineties liberalism. For them, Bill Clinton is basically Edmund Burke

00:20:05.440 at this point. They're, they're playing around with like Hassan Piker and all these radical

00:20:09.300 leftists. So they don't want to deal with that. And then the conservatives say, well, hold on,

00:20:12.900 We didn't really like 90s liberalism that much either.

00:20:15.120 You know, we did impeach Bill Clinton for sexual sins, and the 90s were not the peak of human civilization.

00:20:20.700 And I also agree with that.

00:20:22.080 I think there are some people on the right who say, we don't want to go back to the 50s. 0.98

00:20:25.540 We don't want to go back to the 1220s, which is what I would prefer to go back to.

00:20:30.300 We want to go just back to the 90s, leave it there. 1.00

00:20:33.960 It was all good.

00:20:34.760 is that your position? Or is your position that the 90s were a good intermediate stage

00:20:39.760 to go back to, say, I don't know, the mores of the Carolingian era?

00:20:44.240 I like the 90s. I miss supermodels. They're supposed to be skinny. They're supposed to be

00:20:48.760 pretty. They're supposed to be interesting looking. I like the Victoria's Secret Angels.

00:20:52.540 And by the way, as a woman, it gave me motivation to level up. And it should give all women

00:20:58.340 motivation to level up. The whole point is you're not supposed to look like everyone. 1.00

00:21:03.920 it's supposed to be almost unattainable that's what makes them special but we gave everyone 0.98

00:21:09.860 including all the fat ugly short women you know trophies for existing and we were like yeah let's

00:21:15.180 celebrate everyone let's not let's celebrate the people that are naturally gifted and sydney 0.95

00:21:20.660 sweeney's one of them and the only people like i said that have an issue with it uh are very

00:21:25.680 unfortunate people and i don't really care what they say and the women on the left no one hates

00:21:30.460 women more than other women and specifically women on the left. I mean, you talk about women 1.00

00:21:36.260 being exploited. It's women who exploit themselves. They're selling their vagina online. They're 1.00

00:21:41.780 prostituting themselves. They're posting naked online. We're blaming the men. It's the women 0.86

00:21:46.460 choosing to be prostitutes and exploit themselves for the most part now. Well, men are the consumers, 1.00

00:21:51.980 but it is true that all women hate each other. That's like a sociological fact, very well 1.00

00:21:55.840 established. So we've brought up Edmund Burke, we've brought up Dante, and now I think we need

00:22:01.560 to bring up René Girard, because you make another good point, which is that it's not just about the

00:22:04.540 effect of Sidney Sweeney on men, but also on women, that we're creatures of mimetic desire,

00:22:08.520 and so when a woman sees, like, you know, perversity and ugliness all around them, they're 0.79

00:22:14.460 going to make themselves more perverse and ugly, which is what a lot of the millennials did for 0.69

00:22:17.780 the 20-teens, and, you know, they just, like, would pierce themselves everywhere, get a bunch 0.92

00:22:22.060 of crazy tattoos. And so now if we have like really good looking women, maybe they'll start 1.00

00:22:26.760 to desire that and to shape themselves into that. Uh, what is your take Tilly is that we've now got 0.97

00:22:33.200 the fullest defense of Sydney Sweeney, which is, this is good for men. This is good for women. 0.98

00:22:37.200 Actually it's good for everybody involved. You disagree. Yeah. I mean, I sort of sit in the

00:22:42.880 middle here. I don't have a particular issue with the ad itself, but I do think this is ultimately

00:22:46.540 why both Michael and Emily are not real conservatives, right? I think you guys are

00:22:50.240 representative of a syncretistic reactionary movement that spawned very recently and ought

00:22:54.740 not to be trusted i'm much more interested in the discourse that sprung from the ad itself and i

00:22:59.420 think we can say something about asymmetry here for example sabrina carpenter we can probably agree 0.98

00:23:04.200 she's an attractive blonde white woman in sort of conventional terms as in she's objectively 0.99

00:23:09.120 beautiful i think that she does a lot more and absorbs a lot of hatred from the right for her 1.00

00:23:13.700 licentiousness because she is sexy liberally she is sexy leftistly she says that men are bad while 1.00

00:23:18.480 she takes her clothes off. Sidney Sweeney, she's been assigned this political value. And by all 1.00

00:23:23.180 accounts, she possesses that to some degree herself. So her body is read as ideological by

00:23:27.120 both sides of that spectrum too. And so her nakedness is nakedness conservatively, which is 0.84

00:23:32.840 in sorts. I think that this is ultimately an oxymoron. I think that there is no world in which

00:23:39.720 it logically follows to say that this woman is naked in an advertisement or even a white,

00:23:43.720 beautiful woman is naked in an advertisement. I don't think that leads to the West is becoming

00:23:47.580 more Christian or more conservative, because if a beautiful white leftist woman were naked in an ad, 0.99

00:23:52.100 you would probably raise the alarm bells about degenerate cultural Marxism or even suggest that 1.00

00:23:56.100 she's perverting the minds of men outside the West, causing them to view white women as promiscuous 0.98

00:24:00.480 and sexual. So I just see a lot of hypocrisy on both sides here. I don't think that we need any 0.99

00:24:05.400 help leading people to conclude that white women in the West are being promiscuous and obscene. 0.89

00:24:10.600 You know, I think there's been a lot of precedent for that already. The charge, though, that you're 0.99

00:24:15.200 leveling at me, I think you're misinterpreting because I am not in any way suggesting that the

00:24:20.500 advertisement is conservative. I am not in any way suggesting that I would promote it. In the

00:24:25.420 Michael polity, all of those advertisements would be illegal. They would be punished by the law.

00:24:29.840 So I'm not suggesting that at all. I am not a libertarian. I do not want to return to the 90s.

00:24:35.260 I want to return to the 890s or the 990s. I want to return to a period before William of Ockham,

00:24:40.720 Okay. However, I think where we disagree is not on syncretism of ideology. It's on the paramount

00:24:48.020 political virtue, which is prudence. It's the practicality of how things are actually improved.

00:24:53.120 So it seems to me, my only thought on the advertisement is that it represents a movement

00:24:58.680 in the right direction from a cultural position that is very, very bad and the hour is very,

00:25:03.640 very late. So do you disagree with that point? Do you think, in other words, that given where

00:25:09.060 we are at our depraved, decadent stage of culture, do you think that the ad represents a movement of

00:25:14.620 the culture getting worse or getting better, even at the most marginal level? Yeah. I mean,

00:25:21.260 I think that if I were to just accept those beliefs as they come, and if I were to argue

00:25:25.140 from your own turf, I would say that Catholic moral teaching sort of always forbids doing evil

00:25:29.700 so that good may come anyway. I mean, St. Paul rejects- But I'm not encouraging it. I'm merely

00:25:33.360 observing it. I'm merely asking your interpretation of it. Does that represent the culture getting

00:25:38.440 worse or getting better? I don't think it represents the culture moving in one way or

00:25:43.800 another per se, because I don't think that the ad is particularly unique. I think that we've always

00:25:47.420 seen beautiful women take their clothes off for advertisements in order to sell things. I think 1.00

00:25:50.940 that that's something that we can all find common ground on, using our eyes to understand that this

00:25:54.620 is something that continues to happen and happens even when fat people are also in advertisements.

00:25:58.580 Well, hold on. If this doesn't represent a cultural change, then why are people talking

00:26:02.420 about this ad in particular? If your point is this is just business as usual, there's nothing

00:26:06.760 interesting or novel about it, then why is it that this ad of a nice looking blonde lady wearing,

00:26:13.520 you know, very little, selling gambling, why has that dominated the cultural discourse for a week 0.99

00:26:19.220 now? Yeah, I mean, I think that what's unique about her is firstly, she's probably, and you

00:26:23.200 can correct me if I'm wrong about this, but I think she's one of the only new generation of

00:26:27.060 household names who is young, female, and also a registered Republican. I think that that's unique

00:26:32.540 about it. And I think it's also unique that she has the reach that she does. I think those two

00:26:36.740 things create this cocktail of culture war discourse that people regurgitate and argue

00:26:43.100 with and debate on those grounds. And I think that conservative commentators routinely condemn

00:26:47.120 sexualized pop culture as proof of Western decline. And really the principle that makes

00:26:51.400 this nudity redemptive for you and the other nudity degenerate is simply the fact that Sidney

00:26:55.500 Sweeney is a Republican, in which case I'm happy to argue about what is that she's beautiful. 0.97

00:27:00.660 Yeah, it's that she's beautiful. 0.67

00:27:02.040 She's not a Republican, I suppose.

00:27:03.360 Yes, because I'm not saying the ad is redemptive.

00:27:05.680 I certainly wouldn't say that.

00:27:06.820 But the reason I say that it's a change in the right direction,

00:27:09.080 the reason I say that it's implausible, I think,

00:27:12.060 that you say, oh, this is really business as usual.

00:27:14.080 There's nothing interesting about it.

00:27:15.320 Well, the entire internet disagrees.

00:27:16.900 The entire internet seems to think it's pretty interesting.

00:27:18.960 And I think it's really Emily's point.

00:27:20.520 I think what's interesting about it is we have not really seen

00:27:24.500 good-looking, non-feminist, blonde women just selling female beauty as such in advertising

00:27:33.560 for 10 or 15 years now. I think that is what's really dominating the discourse about it. And so 0.97

00:27:38.300 I would not say that that is redemptive, though beauty itself actually can be redemptive. So

00:27:42.400 that's an interesting conversation separately. But nevertheless, the reason that we're talking

00:27:47.580 about it is because something new has happened. And so if something new has happened, it's either

00:27:51.140 improving or damaging the culture. And I think Emily's right insofar as she's saying this is

00:27:58.040 an improvement to the culture. That's my whole claim. It has nothing to do with Sidney Sweeney

00:28:02.500 being Republican. Because we're missing a big point on Sidney Sweeney's reactions. She had

00:28:07.220 the interview that went viral that turned into the meme where she's like, when I want to speak

00:28:10.880 about something, you're going to hear my opinion. Because she shut it down with, I think it was an

00:28:14.820 anti-white comment. I would be shocked if it was anything else. And then this, she posted

00:28:19.180 on her Instagram stories, the photos of, you know, the lesbians naked, the black girls naked, 0.99

00:28:25.200 everyone else naked, and no one had a problem. What we like about her is she is shifting the 0.97

00:28:30.060 culture because she's doubling down. She's not apologizing and she's showing all the leftists

00:28:35.160 their hypocrisy of like, oh, you guys weren't upset about these things. That is a big shift 0.82

00:28:39.240 in culture. Yes. You know, let me liken it to another major culture war debate, which is the

00:28:43.180 abortion debate, because the people who are attacking Sidney Sweeney from the right here

00:28:48.180 and saying that this is actually a bad move for the culture, I think it's kind of like the

00:28:54.060 abortion abolitionists who attack the pro-life movement. The argument from the abolitionists

00:28:59.760 against the pro-life movement is that they're not going nearly far enough. They're not moving

00:29:04.180 nearly quickly enough. They're not giving us perfect policy. And they'll even make moral

00:29:09.600 arguments as the one that we just heard from Tilly, which is they'll say, well, look, we can

00:29:13.480 never cooperate with evil in any way. So if I were governor of a state right now, if I were on the

00:29:18.420 Supreme Court for that matter, and someone said, okay, we're going to overrule Roe v. Wade on the

00:29:22.660 grounds that we're going to send the abortion decisions back to the states, which in some cases

00:29:26.560 could even liberalize abortion. I guess from a purely principled perspective, I could say, well,

00:29:31.640 I'm not going to overrule Roe v. Wade then because I'm still cooperating with evil because

00:29:35.620 we'll still have abortion legal in the states. We might even expand abortion. So I'm not going

00:29:40.300 to do that. Or if I were governor and I got a pro-life law across my desk and it said,

00:29:44.860 we're going to get rid of 80% of abortions, but we're going to tolerate some abortions 1.00

00:29:48.880 in the early stages and with exceptions for rape, incest, whatever. And so it would reduce 0.61

00:29:55.100 the abortions tremendously, but it would still permit certain abortions. The purist would say,

00:30:00.580 well, I can't do that. I'm cooperating with evil in some way. You're still killing babies. It's

00:30:04.780 still fundamentally immoral, I'm not signing that legislation. Get rid of all the abortions or give 1.00

00:30:09.120 me nothing. At a less consequential level, I think that's what you're seeing with the Sweeney ad,

00:30:13.960 which is, okay, well, if someone's going to be jiggling around half naked on camera,

00:30:17.820 I'd at least have them appeal to natural desires rather than unnatural desires. I don't think

00:30:22.960 that's immoral or hypocritical or, I don't know, contrary to anyone's deep faith, is it?

00:30:30.060 i think i have a question about this actually okay um yeah my my question is is do you think

00:30:38.080 that encouragement of another's grave sins is a grave sin in of itself uh i no i would certainly

00:30:44.580 would never encourage sin but i would i would uh applaud if people move from a graver sin to a less

00:30:53.160 grave sin in other words if someone is caught in habitual vice and particularly grave vice

00:30:57.540 I would not immediately lambast them if, as they are moving from vice to virtue, they get caught in a little bit of incontinence or confusion over virtue and morality.

00:31:09.700 I would encourage a movement in the right direction.

00:31:11.840 Well, I don't suppose that the ad is doing anything like appealing to men who might not be heterosexual.

00:31:17.560 So, I mean, the ad is clearly intended towards young heterosexual men to get young heterosexual men to gamble.

00:31:25.680 So my question, once again, and I'll re-ask it,

00:31:28.800 is the encouragement of a vice or complacency with a vice,

00:31:33.400 like a mortal sin, is that itself a mortal sin?

00:31:36.400 That was the question, Michael.

00:31:37.540 No, well, you could fall into the sin of scandal,

00:31:39.620 which is what I'm arduously attempting to avoid here

00:31:43.020 by clarifying this position, which is you say,

00:31:45.760 okay, we got this advertisement that's promoting gambling

00:31:48.700 and appealing to lust, and so that's bad.

00:31:51.140 We don't want that.

00:31:52.020 It'd be better if we could get rid of all of that.

00:31:53.800 But given that condition, if we previously for the last 10, 15 years had ads that were appealing, that were selling gambling and appealing to lust by appealing to, I don't know, homosexuality or otherwise deviant sexual desires, and now we have one that is not doing that but is appealing to a more natural form of sexuality, I would have to conclude that that is an improvement.

00:32:14.880 So I'm not encouraging more advertisements like this. I'm merely observing and interpreting that that is a movement in the right direction. Now, Justice, you had a point.

00:32:26.060 Yeah, I think when we're talking about incrementalism as far as abortion goes, the way that you can look at passing an incrementalist law is that I'm reducing abortion by X amount.

00:32:37.640 So there is a reduction in evil that's happening that's actually measurable versus saying I'm okay with abortion up until this point.

00:32:45.320 For example, I live in a state where a heartbeat went into effect immediately as soon as R.P. Wade was overturned, and that wasn't to say we're okay with abortion up until the heartbeat.

00:32:56.480 It's to say we're limiting, we're placing limitation.

00:32:59.380 Of course, I want to ultimately see all abortion becoming legal across multiple nations.

00:33:04.760 But when we're talking about this ad, I don't think that we can like equate those two because it's still lust.

00:33:13.020 Lust is still lust.

00:33:15.060 And I think as Christians, I'm a Christian. 0.99

00:33:18.680 But killing babies is still killing babies. 0.99

00:33:22.440 Yes, but killing less babies.

00:33:24.560 Right, we're reducing the severity of it.

00:33:26.260 But I guess that's my point on the advertisements is if we live in a popular culture, which again spreads by my Mises.

00:33:32.480 So when you get a few big corporations promoting a ton of weird stuff, you get those same kinds of themes everywhere throughout the – all the small companies start promoting that too.

00:33:40.780 So I guess my point is if we've had advertising, which is objectionable on so many grounds, that has been promoting really, really unnatural stuff for the last 10 or 15 years.

00:33:49.880 And now you're seeing major advertisers beginning to promote less on actually natural stuff, albeit imperfect.

00:33:57.540 It seems to I would view that as a kind of a pie chart that the more natural, albeit objectionable advertising is going to mimetically crowd out the unnatural, weirdo, perverse advertising that we were that Emily was just describing for for the last 10 or 15 years.

00:34:13.140 And so it seems to me that those comparisons are pretty apt because you are getting a reduction of the severity and the gravity of the sins, even though you're still in a substantially vicious and sinful kind of environment. Am I misreading that?

00:34:27.960 I guess it depends on your take on the severity of different sins. I would say lust is a problem regardless of who or what you're lusting after.

00:34:36.160 and a measurable like number uh of abortions being reduced so if like you know let's say

00:34:43.920 instead of a thousand babies being killed pin that's better like we saved you know 990 babies

00:34:50.720 that way there's not that same um quantifiable like there's it's not like a reduction in lust

00:34:57.840 it's still lust well no i don't know i mean in other words not to be too uh not to be too evocative

00:35:02.880 about it. But if I have desires, if I willfully entertain desires about my wife that are contrary

00:35:10.560 to morality, the sort of thing that really I need to confess, even though it's my wife, but I

00:35:14.760 shouldn't be, you know, thinking of my wife and just as purely as an object of lust or something

00:35:19.000 like that. That's bad. And it's a sin and I should confess it. But that is much less bad than if I

00:35:24.680 were thinking about some other woman in that way or some man. And that would be way worse if I were

00:35:29.220 thinking about some man in that way, or a billy goat. And so that would be way worse than if I 0.79

00:35:32.740 were even thinking about the man. So in other words, we can't just say that all impure thoughts

00:35:39.080 are exactly the same. Some actually, it seems to me, are less grave than others. Would you disagree

00:35:44.080 with that? It's a good question. It's a good question. I don't know. That's why I asked it.

00:35:50.420 Okay. The producers are telling me I have to leave it there. Ladies, it's wonderful to be

00:35:55.500 with all of you. I think you've all been totally. One more minute. Yes. Okay. I would never say no

00:36:01.400 to you, Emily. We're not even touching on a huge aspect, which is of course, left-leaning women 1.00

00:36:06.440 who are always upset talking about, they're upset about sports. Okay. This is a mockery of women's 0.97

00:36:11.500 sports. When did you guys start caring about women's sports? I have saw you, I saw you guys, 1.00

00:36:16.280 first of all, can't even define a woman. And now you have men and women's sports whooping women's

00:36:21.140 asses, taking their trophies, literally crushing their schools. And little girls I've seen 0.98

00:36:26.820 interviewed in real life on Fox news being like, yeah, they're just coming in. And like, I just,

00:36:30.720 I don't know what to do anymore. Moms are crying. So I'm like, oh, so now all of a sudden they care

00:36:35.280 about women's sports and they want to take it seriously after letting men once again, dominate

00:36:40.340 us. I'm out. Emily out. I totally agree. I couldn't have said it better myself. And I certainly

00:36:46.460 wouldn't have said it as directly and evocatively. Women, ladies, always wonderful to be with you. 0.89

00:36:52.640 Thank you. I think I've convinced all of you of my point of view. Is that right? Before I get an

00:36:56.240 answer, we'll just say goodbye. I'm Michael and I'll see you next time. Oh yeah, sorry. I didn't

00:37:01.340 get you. Before I let you go, ladies, where can people find you? Down the line. Left is Blondie. 1.00

00:37:07.760 All social media. I'm Blondpraxis pretty much everywhere except Instagram where I'm Tilly

00:37:14.080 with loads of L's

00:37:14.960 because I won't change that one.

00:37:18.160 On Instagram,

00:37:19.020 I'm Justice Hope Keel

00:37:20.020 and I have a podcast

00:37:20.900 that's on all podcast platforms

00:37:22.840 and YouTube

00:37:23.360 called With All Her Mind.

00:37:27.040 At Emily Saves America,

00:37:28.580 absolutely everywhere.

00:37:29.720 Everywhere.

00:37:30.400 You see her everywhere.

00:37:31.480 And you can see 1.00

00:37:31.960 all of these ladies here 0.99

00:37:32.960 on The Michael Knoll Show,

00:37:33.780 for which I'm very grateful.

00:37:35.260 See you all next time.

00:37:44.080 Every significant movement in history has started with protesting. 1.00

00:37:50.280 You're a traitor! 1.00

00:37:51.040 Uncle Tom! 1.00

00:37:51.820 This is our generation's civil rights!

00:37:53.520 I have no idea what the protest is about.

00:37:55.520 Bingo!

00:37:56.080 Given the current climate, you should have figured as polarizing as Clay Saunders can even be allowed on Kansas.

00:38:01.480 Can you hear me okay?

00:38:02.740 Saunders is a close personal friend of Chancellor Friedman.

00:38:05.200 This is a decision I cannot find. 1.00

00:38:06.760 Islam will conquer the West. 1.00

00:38:10.040 Samo alaykum. 1.00

00:38:10.840 are we paying attention they've taken over the building they're downstairs and they've blocked 0.93

00:38:17.820 the doors i seek forgiveness from allah the almighty we cannot run and hide muhammad is 0.98

00:38:26.660 the messenger of god there is no god but allah what do you say we turn those SOBs 0.91

00:38:34.980 into a fine red mist. 0.99

00:38:38.320 As we move, one man will cover while the other guys go.

00:38:41.760 They call that leap project.

00:38:42.920 Stretch your mouth and listen.

00:38:45.720 You need a course in safe weapons handling.

The Michael Knowles Show - September 18, 2026

＂You Are HYPOCRITES!＂ Michael Knowles MANSPLAINS： Hot Women In Commercials

Episode Stats

People

Transcript