The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1033 - Gay Romantic Comedy Bombs Hilariously. Hollywood Blames Homophobia.

Episode Date: October 3, 2022

Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm  Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Hollywood released a historic, groundbreaking gay romantic comedy, that nobody went to see. Does this mean we’re all going to be accused of homophobia for not supporting the film? Yes of course it does. Also, an investigative report from the Daily Wire reveals that the pro-trans student walkout in Virginia last week was not exactly what it appeared to be. Plus, Kamala Harris wants to provide hurricane relief to all the people in Florida who need it, except the white ones. In our Daily Cancellation, at long last, David French finally pens the conservative case for transitioning minors.  - - -  DailyWire+: Join the Jeremy’s Razors Contest For The Car at https://www.jeremysrazors.com/play. See terms and conditions for complete details at https://www.jeremysrazors.com/referralterms Become a DailyWire+ member to watch movies, shows, documentaries and more: https://bit.ly/3dQINt0     The Daily Wire is looking to hire a Senior Front End Web Developer and a Senior Vice President of Marketing Analytics, Data, and operations. To view open positions and to apply, go to https://www.dailywire.com/walsh   - - -  Today’s Sponsors: David Horowitz Freedom Center - Frontpage Magazine has spent over two decades combating the radical Left’s efforts to destroy America. Check out Frontpage Magazine at https://www.FrontpageMag.com   - - - Socials: Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF  Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA  Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA  Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today on the Matt Walsh show, Hollywood released a historic, groundbreaking gay romantic comedy that nobody went to see. Does this mean that we're all going to be accused of homophobia for not supporting the film? Well, yes, of course it does. Also, an investigative report from the Daily Wire reveals that the pro-trans student walkouts in Virginia last week were not exactly what they appeared to be. Plus, Kamala Harris wants to provide hurricane relief to all the people in Florida who need it, except the white ones. In our daily cancellation, at long last, David French finally pens, conservative case for transitioning minors. All of that, and more today on the Matt Walls show. Inside Every Progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out, and the team at Front Page Magazine

has been unmasking these totalitarians since the earliest days of the internet, founded by David Horowitz, a former red diaper baby and new leftist who ultimately became an enemy of the left and a best-selling author as well. Frontpage magazine has spent over two decades combating the radical left's efforts to destroy America. There are two new podcasts, The Right Take with Mark Tapsin and the Jason Hill Show offer riveting interviews and insightful coverage of politics, culture, and current events. The right take with Mark Tapson offers fascinating in-depth cultural commentary as well as interviews with well-known conservative thinkers like Heather McDonald, Michael Walsh, and Mary Grabber. The Jason Hill Show offers thoughtful deep dives about the ideologies

of the radical left and interviews with renowned intellectuals like Peter Wood and Bruce Gilly. It takes a village to combat the radical left's efforts to destroy America, and that's why, as a fan of my show, you should also check out these guys over at Frontpage Magazine by visiting frontpagemag.com. And while you're there, support their cause by making a tax deductible donation. Inside, every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out, and no one understands that better than the team at Frontpage Magazine. So go check out frontpagemag.com today. Well, you may not have noticed it. In fact, it seems certain that you did not notice it, but over the weekend, a truly historic moment occurred. A movie called Bros. was

released by Universal Pictures. Bros. is historic because it is gay. And I don't just mean that it has gay actors. I mean, in that sense, it's like literally every other Hollywood film. And I don't mean just that it has gay characters. Again, in that sense, it's like every other Hollywood film. Hollywood is very gay, and Hollywood movies have a lot of gay characters and themes. But this movie is a trailblazer, we're told, because it's the first gay romantic comedy to be produced by a major Hollywood production company. And in case you're at all confused about this fact, the film's marketing material, especially its trailer,

make sure to beat you over the head with a tire iron of gayness just so that you don't lose sight of how historic everything here really is. So here it is, watch. Hey guys, it's Bobby Lieber coming to you from the future home of the LGBTQ Plus Museum. Everyone is really excited and totally getting along. This happens to be. by Sexual Awareness Week, and no one has acknowledged it.

Lesbian History Month was in March. Nobody said a goddamn thing. Of course, lesbians get a month, and we get a week. So what's happening? Didn't you guys have an announcement? This is a little unexpected, but we are in a thruple situation. You're in a thruple?

Let me tell you what's progressive now. Being alone. I love my life, I love my freedom, I love my independence. That's kind of sad. That I don't want to be in a thruple. I don't even want to be in a couple. Freedom. Bobby, I had sex with that 65-year-old.

Jesus, he's ripped. I know. It's like they injected steroids into Dumbledore. Oh, my God, that's Aaron. He's very hot. Gay guys are so stupid. I know. But we've been smart enough to brand ourselves as being smart.

It's our little secret. You're... Never mind. You saw enough of that. You'll be shocked to hear this, but that was a flop. Not just a flop, but a full of... on fat guy jumping off a diving board belly flop type of flop. They were right. It turns out the

movie is historic. It made history by how poorly it performed at the box office. It's the gayest comedy of all time and also the brokest. And there's a brokeback mountain joke in there somewhere, but I'm not going to go there. I'll let you make the punchline. Despite tons of media hype and a $40 million marketing campaign, the film made less than $5 million on its opening weekend. it generated that paltry sum on 3,350 screens, which is a humiliating average of $1,500 bucks per theater. The theaters, you know, they could have made more money just by like sending a few employees to panhandle in the parking lot, just an abysmal failure.

But on the bright side, I will admit at least that the comedy did get a laugh out of me by bombing in such a hilarious way. We must also note that this film failed so badly in spite of the evangelical efforts of the media, you know, who sometimes commanded and sometimes begged us to go see this film. Kevin Fallon, The Daily Beast, for example, wrote an exhortation a few days ago, headlined, straight people, I beg of you, go see bros in theaters. Calling us to allyship, Fallon declared that the film is both historic and, quote, miraculous, and informed us that it is our duty, is our responsibility as straight people to support it.

He warned that if the movie doesn't earn a respectable return, we may never get to see Billy Eichner make out with a dude on camera again, a terrifying prospect, he says. But Fallon also assures us wary heterosexuals that it's a very good film on its own merits, he says. The good news, he says, is that the movie is crude, raunchy, and sexy, because those are obviously the adjectives that are going to motivate straight people to see a gay film. And best of all, Fallon says, bros, quote, jokes about life as a gay male over the age of 30, over the age of 40 even, in New York City in a way that feels authentic. A part of that authenticity, apparently, is a four-way gay sex scene, which the writer promises rings true. I can just hear some average straight guy in Ohio, one of millions across the country saying to his wife, hey, honey, let's go check out this gay romantic comedy called bros tonight. Yeah, apparently it jokes about life as a gay male over 30 in New York City in a way that feels authentic. Yeah, Kevin Fallon, the Daily Beast, he says so. He says that we should see it so

we could be good allies. Also, it's super raunchy and sexy with all the gay orgies and everything. Doesn't it sound great? We can go to Olive Garden afterwards. You can imagine these types of conversations, but you can only imagine them because they don't happen in real life. Kevin Fallon of the Daily Beast may or may not understand that, but the real point, I think, of of trying to emotionally blackmail straight people into seeing a gay film is so that when we don't respond, the film's failure can be blamed on, you guessed it, homophobia. So the rest of this, I don't even need to tell you because you knew this was going to happen. Right on cue, the star of the film, Billy Eichner, was ready with this excuse.

He was just right away Sunday night, he was tweeting, tweeting up a storm, this is all the fault of homophobia. So he tweeted, quote, last night, I snuck in and sat in the back of a sold-out theater playing bros in Los Angeles. The audience howled with laughter from start to finish, burst into applause at the end, and some were wiping away tears as they walked out. It was truly magical. Yeah, sure, they did. This has very sort of my girlfriend goes to a different high school vibe to it. Oh, yeah, the audiences, they loved it. I mean, they were, I just, I promised you, I saw one.

audience that loved it. I really did. Anyway, he continues. Really, I am very proud of this movie. Rolling Stone already has bros on the list of the best comedies of the 21st century. That part, I believe. I bet they did do that. What's also true is that at one point, a theater chain called universal, called universal, and said that they were pulling the trailer because of the gay content. America, F yeah, et cetera, et cetera. That's just the world we live in, unfortunately. Even with glowing reviews, great Rotten Tomatoes scores, an A-cinema score, etc. Straight people, especially in certain parts of the country, just didn't show up for bros. And that's disappointing because, but it is what it is. Everyone who isn't a homophobic weirdo should go see bros tonight. You'll have

a blast. And it is special and uniquely powerful to see this particular story on a big screen, especially for queer folks who don't get this opportunity often. I love this movie so much. broads. All right, so you're a homophobic weirdo if you don't spend too much money and several hours of your time going out to watch a romantic comedy about men who meet at a gay bar and then proceed to have group sex with other gay men. You are a homophobic, you're not just homophobic. You're a weirdo. It is weird that you didn't spend, you didn't go, you didn't hire a babysitter and take your wife out to watch that movie. It's actually a weird thing. How weird is that? A pretty stark pivot in terms of messaging, we must say.

Because the trailer, if you watch it all the way to the end, which we bailed so you didn't see it at the end. But this is in the trailer. The trailer goes out of its way to insult straight people. It says, you know, straight people are over. They're irrelevant. They're stupid. They're terrorists. That's in the trailer.

They're irrelevant and terrorists. That actually says it in the trailer. And then the movie bombs. And suddenly it's, hey, why didn't straight people come see this? Hey, you irrelevant idiot terrorists. Come watch our movie, dumbasses. You owe it to us. A slightly schizophrenic marketing campaign. But there is an important lesson, I think, that we can learn from this whole fiasco. And there's a reason I'm talking about it. And it's not just to make fun of this movie for doing so poorly.

That's like, that's 80% of the reason. 20% is because there's a lesson. So some have speculated that Hollywood knows that films like this will bomb. and yet they put the film out anyway. And I've seen that a lot on Twitter. Oh, Hollywood knew that this would happen. Because they don't care. It's just about the message. But that's not true, okay?

Because Hollywood is still a business. And you don't make a film and release it on over 3,000 screens and spend $40 million marketing it if you don't think it will perform. Now, maybe you put it out, put it in a couple independent theaters, spend no money marketing it, and then you could just say, look, we made it, see, we're woke or whatever. Maybe you do that. but you don't put the money and support behind it if you don't think it's going to do well.

And so they did think it would do well. They really expected it to be a hit, which only goes to show how terminally out of touch Hollywood has become. I mean, because there is in fact, this is the great thing about this, there is no genre of film less likely to succeed than a gay romantic comedy. You have just combined things in such a way as it is. is a perfect storm in terms of like making a movie that will bomb. It is, it's the sort of film seemingly designed to appeal to the smallest possible subset of potential moviegoers. So heterosexual women are the normal audience for romantic comedy. But they want to see a romance they can relate to or aspire to, right? They want to be able to relate to it or they want to be

able to dream of themselves in a similar situation. They could do neither of those things with a story about two men hooking up at a gay club. Okay, when you got a bunch of guys meeting each other on Grindr, that is not the sort of romance that women have in mind. Meanwhile, straight men are loath to see romantic comedies of any type. My wife has convinced me to watch maybe five total in 10 years of marriage. And it took a sustained, emotional and psychological pressure campaign to extract even those concessions out of me. So she gets like, she gets like one every two years, okay? So if we're already reluctant to watch heterosexual romantic comedies, why would you think you could get us to watch a gay one? It's a, it's a pretty bold strategy.

So you're already having trouble selling something to someone. So then you go and, and, and, and, and, make the product less appealing and expect better results. Oh, you didn't want to buy this car, sir? Well, here, let me have it painted hot pink, and then we'll see how you feel about it. This is the kind of tactic that made sense in the minds of Hollywood producers because they exist in a solar system 50 million light years from the planet the rest of us are living on, which is why their output is so atrocious. But the good news, the real good news, is that,

as they relegate themselves to irrelevance, opportunities arise for other people to tell stories and make films and create content that actually connects with the average person. Now, I didn't mean for this all to lead to a sales pitch for the Daily Wire, but that is something we're trying to do over here, such as my film What is a Woman, which is better and funnier and more relevant and more important and far more successful than Hollywood's historic gay romantic comedy. And the other piece of the good news is that I'm taking the film on the road, touring college campuses across the country. My first stop is tomorrow when I'll screen the film at Catholic University in D.C. So I hope to see you there.

I guess this was all leading to a sales pitch, but what can you do? Let's get to the five headlines. Another act of shameless promotion here, not self-promotion. This is something that needs to be promoted. I need to start by telling you this. and I am calling on the sweet baby gang to mobilize. I need you out here. I need your support.

Because on October 21st, which is a Friday at 4 p.m., we're going to have a rally at the Capitol building in Nashville. And as a rally, we're calling it the rally to end child mutilation. Why are we calling it that? Because we're trying to end child mutilation in the state of Tennessee. And then beyond, right? So we're mobilizing and put a stop to what Vanderbilt is doing. And not just Vanderbilt, by the way.

Vanderbilt's not the only. Now, they're the, they are the gender clinic in Tennessee, but there are other clinics that, and, you know, medical establishments, alleged medical establishments that perform these gender, so-called gender affirmation procedures on children, including plastic surgeons, even plastic surgeons in our city, or perform top surgeries on minors. So we're putting a stop to it across the state,

and that's what this rally is, is about, is about calling for that and making sure that, not just lawmakers in our state, but people across the country, the powers that be realize that this is something that we're serious about. And we're obviously hoping for a big crowd. I'm expecting a big crowd. I think we're going to have a great turnout. Though I also have to say that as far as I know, no one's ever done anything quite like

this on this topic before. Now, there have been, and there are small. you know, events and people mobilizing across the country, which is great. But I'm not aware of a big rally with thousands of people on this specific topic. So this perhaps will be the first, and that's what we're what we're hoping to do. I am expecting, of course, I would be shocked if the opposition doesn't show up, so they're going to be there too. And they're going to be screaming and probably making a fuss because they want more children to be mutilated. And so I want to make sure that we have enough to drown them out.

And I am asking, if we got a few weeks to prepare for it, if you're able to drive out, if you're able to fly up, you know, it'll be worth it. Because like I said, even if you don't live in Tennessee, this is the beginning of a national movement. All right. Speaking of rallies, so you heard about ours, which is a real rally and a real demonstration. Now, let's hear about a fake one. It's from the Daily Wire. It says national media covered walkouts by students supposedly objecting to transgender policies from Virginia governor,

Republican Governor Glenn Juncker's administration. But an internal video of the, quote, student group shows that it's led by an adult former Democrat staffer and that the group knew that a large portion of students had no interest in the cause and simply wanted to skip school. Now, we talked about this last week, and I did say this. You don't have to be in Ostromo since I don't have to be a profit to predict it. But I did say that, number one, this is, although it's being sold as a student-led effort, I guarantee you that it is not. There are adults behind this.

People in politics who know how to organize these kinds of fake grassroots efforts, and they're the ones doing this. And I also said that a vast majority of the kids walking out are only doing it because they to leave school. And you can hardly blame them, given how miserable school is. And they want to get out. And so they're told that, oh, you just go stand outside, pretend that you care about this issue, and you're allowed to stand outside for 45 minutes. Most kids are going to take you up on that. Then when you start to understand it like that, you begin to see that the walkouts were actually a failure because it's kind of amazing they couldn't get all.

Why didn't every student, given that they could leave class and stand outside and get some fresh air, have a kind of impromptu recess, why weren't they all out there? Some of these schools is only a few dozen kids. So even with the incentive as a kid, that, number one, you can virtue signal to your peers that you're awoke and progressive and all that. But more importantly, with the other even greater incentive that you can skip class, that still wasn't enough to get all the kids out. and maybe because the cause that they're rallying for is so horrific and incoherent and insane, which is specifically they were rallying. When I say they, I get, I mean, I really mean the adults who put all this together, but they were rallying to oppose rules that would protect especially young girls in school and give them privacy and safety.

So they were rallying to oppose the privacy and safety of girls. Basically what it came down to. Continu, it says, in video of an internal Zoom call obtained by the Daily Wire, the Pride Liberation Project bragged about having tricked the media. The group's leader claimed, we had at least 12,000 students walk out. We were the reason Joe Biden was asked a question on this issue. It boasted of coverage from USA Today, the Richmond Times Dispatch, the Virginia Piled, the Washington Post, AP News,

even some international outlets, but in a debrief after the walkouts, one student asked, quote, I want to know if anyone else had this problem. Yesterday at the school walkout, we had about 200 kids participating. Most of the students were just there to skip class. Most of the flyers I handed out got handed right back to me because most of the people weren't there for the cause to walkout. They just wanted to skip class. Another activist replied, I definitely had a lot of those people at my school. They're bolstering our numbers. We can count them as people who walked out for the Pride Liberation Project. They're still helping, and they don't even realize it.

A top organizer, Rivka Vizkardo Lichter, replied, When helicopters are recording your school, they're not seeing which ones care and which ones don't. They're just seeing the numbers. So y'all slayed. Following the group's extensive coordination with media before the event, a local TV station dispatched a helicopter to capture a small group of students congregating.

Oh, yeah, because that's the other thing, right? When it's really a student-led demonstration, that's something that students know how to do. Like your average high school sophomore knows how to get in touch with news stations and coordinate helicopter flyovers. Yeah, that's something that a kid can do that, right? It's not like that indicates clear as day that it was really adults pulling the strings here. Aaron, Arion, Arrian? I don't know. Rawell, a college student and former legislative staffer for a Virginia Democrat who led the group on call, told participants the goal of mass mobilization is not necessarily to make people care about an issue.

The primary goal is to give us credibility in the eyes of lawmakers. For the 30 people who actually know what the policy is and who actually know how they're going to advocate, those people suddenly have a lot of credibility when they talk to our Virginia lawmakers. Now, let's see, a couple of things I want to mention here before we talk about it. It says some of the core group of activists on the call seem to have little grasp on the policy that they were disputing. One asked, if this bill does end up getting passed, would that stop us from being able to have a gay student association? Which, of course, it wouldn't at all. In an internal message board, Rawell shared a talking point document that told people what to say.

including repeatedly invoking suicide. If someone asks if walkouts jeopardize learning, he told them to say, quote, how can my friends possibly learn about photosynthesis and biology class when they're worried about whether they'll be able to come home to a safe place that night? The Talking Points memo said to tell reporters that, quote, I've had to talk friends out of suicide at 2 a.m. in the morning, and I've not met a single queer student who isn't depressed. So this is a talking points memo that doesn't just give them arguments,

or arguments to use, points to make, little factoids and all that, it actually tells them. It gives them false personal information they're supposed to share. They're supposed to tell false personal stories about friends they talked out of suicide at 2 a.m. And then another part of this is that the people organizing this and coming up with these media talking points, they're counting on the media not noticing that all the kids are saying the same thing. And suspiciously, like 60 kids all have a story about talking to first. friend out of suicide at 2 a.m. They're counting on the media not noticing it, or if they do noticing it, notice it to not say anything about it. And as far as that goes, it's a pretty

safe bet. But all of this is just perfect in how it is emblematic of the left's approach, especially on this issue in general, because this is exactly why they use kids to advance their message. Okay, the kids don't understand. They don't understand the issue. Most of them don't understand at all. They're not clued in. They're thinking about other things. As well, they should be.

Right? Kids shouldn't be thinking about this issue at all. They're thinking about other things. So the kids don't understand it. And even most of the kids who are a little bit clued in, who are more knowledgeable than average about these issues for a kid, even most of them are actually when it comes down to it clueless. That's why you had one of the actions.

who thought that he was marching to make sure that they don't ban the gay student alliance, which is not in the cards to do? I'd be in favor of banning that because I don't think that there should be any, there's no reason to have any conversation or any organization around sexuality or sexual orientation in the classroom or in school at all. But that's not what anyone is trying to do in Virginia. So they don't understand, they're completely ignorant. they don't really care about it, but they are just pawns.

All the organizers and activists care about, and they say they're on the call. They're very clear about it. It's like, we don't care if these people actually understand what they're doing. It doesn't make a difference. We just need the body count. We need the numbers. Okay, we need to use them as pawns so that we can get what we want. All right. Hurricane Ian wreaked havoc in Florida, though the devastating toll could have been worse

without the excellent leadership of Ron DeSantis, who did a lot. everything possible to get people out of harm's way and is now organizing relief efforts for those affected. The Biden administration is also organizing relief efforts, but their focus is a bit more well, targeted, I guess. It is our lowest income communities and our communities of color that are most impacted by these extreme conditions and impacted by issues that are not of their own making and so we have to address this in a way that is about giving resources based on equity understanding that we we fight for equality but we also need to fight for equity understanding not everyone starts out at the same place and if we want people to be in an equal place

sometimes we have to take into account those disparities and and do that work do that work she had to throw that in there at the end only thing she's missed She got all the cliches and the only thing she was missing is lived experience. I don't, maybe I've missed it, but I zone out whenever she's talking like anybody else, but maybe she should have thrown something in there about, you know, the, it's also the lived experience of the BIPA community. Their lived, their lived experience of hurricanes is, is worse, like, is worse than a white person's experience of a hurricane. I mean, a white person, a black person could be in the same hurricane standing next to each other, but for the member of the, for a person of color, that that lived experience is going to be even more severe.

And so that's why we got to make sure that we give them relief first. Now, thankfully, this really ultimately comes down to Rod Sandus and his administration to make sure that the people who get relief, who need relief, get it. And he is not going to provide relief to everyone who needs it. And he's not going to do it based on race. but this is what the Biden administration would like to do. Even when it comes to hurricane, they find a way to racialize hurricane relief. You know, natural disaster relief is a racialized issue to them. And she found they never come out quite out and say, but what she's actually saying there, of course,

is that we're not interested in helping white people. That's it. We're not interested in helping them. And they're never meant to it. They're never required to defend this idea. This idea that hurricanes affect black people more than white people? What? Can you explain that?

Can you spend, if I gave you even 60 seconds to elaborate, can you spend even, can you give me a couple more sentences elaborating on that idea that hurricanes impact people depending on the color of their skin? Of course, the media is not going to require them to explain that because it's totally indefensible. She also says, of course, she contradicts herself in the usual leftist narrative because she says that, well, they're being impacted by something that's not of their making. Now, I agree with that. That's true. When a black person is harmed by a hurricane, when their house is washed away by a hurricane, that is something not of their own making. But that also

applies to white people. Now, I can say that I believe that. But according to Kamail Harris, no, we do cause the hurricanes. So what, do black people not contribute to the CO2? They don't contribute to the warming of the earth, according to her? Actually, the hurricane is of their own making. We all did it. Oh, no, but there's a, see, there's an intersectional relationship between systemic racism and climate change. And so actually, white people are more guilty of causing hurricanes than black people. I don't know how. I can't explain it, but maybe Camilla Harris can't. Well, she can't explain it either, but she would assert it anyway.

All right, lives of TikTok has this report. It says Barbara Bush Children's Hospital in Maine has a gender clinic, which offers puberty blockers to kids, cross-sex hormones, guides for boys on tucking and guides for girls on chest binding. They also promote their services and helping young children fully transition. And then she posted this local news report. Let's watch a little bit of this. Like so many nine-year-old girls, Lucy Tid loves to dance.

I love that I'm very flexible and that I can do a bunch of stuns and stuff in my dancing and that I'm very athletic. She also loves to play the keyboard. But Lucy's life wasn't always this easygoing. That's because Lucy wasn't always Lucy. When my child Benjamin was born back in 2006, I was He was born Benjamin Thomas Tidd. Bridget says Benjamin was headstrong from birth and struggled with behavioral issues. But she says there were other things that were different about Benjamin.

We noticed at a young age there was this tendency to want to dress up and want to do what I do every day. And he used to love if I had high heels on, he would love to hear the sound. He said, I love that sound, mama. I love that sound. Okay, I'll pause it there. So there it is. That's how, that's science. That is just science right there, isn't it? Because that's how they knew that their young boy was actually a girl deep inside. A girl trapped inside him. And the way they knew that was that he liked the sound that high heels made when they hit the floor.

And the reason we play audio like this for you is because you'll notice that, you know, this is not cherry. picking. It's not like I'm looking for the parent who makes the worst possible excuse for transitioning their child. Every excuse is the worst possible excuse because this is every single parent, every single one who has been profiled by the media in this celebratory way for transitioning their child. Every single one, this is what they say. It's almost this exact story over and over and over again. Well, my son, when he was four years old, he was interested in dresses. Oh, so he's a girl. We had to permanently change his body forever because when he was four, he liked high heels. There does not exist a family out there with a transitioned, quote-unquote, child that had a

better reason to do it. Okay? This is it. That is all you're ever going to hear. This is what it all comes down to always 100% of the time. You have a child, a young boy who makes the mistake, you know, at the age of three or four, being like interested in whatever, women's clothes, because they're bright and colory, you know, and the high heels are interesting because they just look different than other shoes. And so that's why at the age of three or four he's interested in them. And she even says he likes the sound they make. That's what interested in about the high heels. is that he likes the sound they make, which is a very innocent, childlike reason for being interested in a particular shoe style. But she takes this as evidence of some deep internal truth.

And little did that boy know when he was three or four years old in simply being interested in this style, you know, and being curious as a child, in his childlike curiosity. because of that, he's now going to be condemned to a life where he is deprived of his own boyhood and eventually his own manhood as he grows older. Let's keep watching a little bit of this. At first, the Tids thought it was just a stage he was going through. That was until a moment that altered their lives for good.

He said to me, Mom, I wish I could die, and God could bring me back as a girl. And that was the moment we said. We would rather have our child be with a different name and identify as who she wants to be than a child that isn't here at all. I sprang from my bed to see what was the matter. That's when the Tids sought help with the gender clinic at the Barbara Bush Children's Hospital. Dr. Gerald Oshan, a pediatric endocrinologist, is the medical director. You know, about one and four will attempt suicide.

About half will consider suicide during adolescence. And so our big goal and what got me interested is how do we help this population do better in the long run. This isn't a choice in most individuals. This is probably biologically programmed. Maybe make some suggestions. Oh, biological program. That is such. Okay, we can turn itself.

That is such. And he knows that it's the guy in the beard there? He knows it. Oh, it's biologically programmed. Really? It is, huh? Doctor. So where were all these kids for the whole history of the human?

civilization. Where were they up until five years ago? Where were they? So you're positing a vision of human history where there were cumulatively billions of trans people who just never came out of the closet because they weren't being affirmed. Well, if that's the case, then why weren't there, why wasn't there a mass epidemic sustained over centuries of suicide? Because what you're telling us is that it's biologically programmed, all these kids are trans, and half of them will kill themselves or at least attempt it if they aren't affirmed. Well, then, we should have just millions and millions and millions of suicides over just the last century alone. Kids mysteriously killing themselves all over the place. And yet that wasn't happening at all, at all. No, the child suicide epidemic

is happening now in direct correlation with gender ideology taking hold of their generation. So you might start to connect some dots. The other thing you always notice in these videos, because again, they're all the same. And so you'll be excused for thinking if you watch this and think, haven't we seen this already? You have, because they're all the same. And it's the same story over and over again. The lamest possible excuse is for doing this to a child. But the other thing that you notice in these videos,

single time, right? Either there's no father in the picture at all, so we're just hearing from the mother, or the father is there and he's sitting there, he's this hen pecked, pathetic little worm just sitting there all frail, saying nothing. But either way, the father's always silent. Not a big surprise. When you've got a boy who's literally, or not literally, but when they are literally attempting to turn a boy into a girl, that could only happen if the father is absent. Be it physically absent, he's just not in the picture at all, or he's there, he's a warm body, but in every other sense,

emotionally, spiritually, psychologically, he's absent. He's just a nothing, a big nothing of a man. All right. Let's see. A couple of things I wanted to mention. And all right, so I've had this for a few days. I wanted to talk about it briefly. Yahoo News has this David Simon, who's the creator of the classic HBO drama The Wire,

which is one of my, I know I'm not very original in saying it's one of my favorite shows, but it is bristled on Tuesday in defense of the show after it was called, quote, the best piece of conservative art ever made. Simon reacting in a lengthy Twitter thread that ran to 30 posts seem to suggest the show could in the same vein represent police in a positive light as it related to the fight against violent crime and homicide while also highlighting the wasted resources they inhabit in the wider war on drugs. Simon wrote, quote, when an S-bird mangles an opponent's language into his own rhetoric, you can be assured of one thing. He's stuffing a straw man weak enough so he can wrestle with it. Two things can be true at once, and in this case they are, and then he goes on from there.

So, and it is a really long, I can't read the whole thing. He goes on and on and on about it. But we could summarize it by saying that he, as the creator of the wire, is very upset that anyone is claiming it has conservative themes. He just doesn't agree with that, and he's upset about it and he doesn't like being accused of creating a conservative piece of art. Because to him, that's the worst thing that you could be accused of in the world. He'd rather be accused of being a serial killer than to be accused of creating something that conservatives can relate to. Or that even the worst of that actually has conservative themes and a conservative message. Now, I bring this up because I think it relates to this story, which was just put out by the Daily Wire.

It says the nation's largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, is fuming mad over abortion-related scenes in the latest Marilyn Monroe movie, Blonde. The controversial Netflix film humanizes the unborn on numerous occasion and includes the depiction of a violent, forced abortion that haunts the actress. Karen Sprook of Planned Parenthood Federation of America said, as film and TV shapes many people's understanding of sexual and reproductive health, It's critical these depictions accurately portray women's real decisions and experiences. While abortion is safe, essential health care, anti-abortion zealots have long contributed to abortion stigma by using medically inaccurate descriptions of fetuses and pregnancy. Andrew Dominic's new film, Blonde, bolsters their message with a CGI talking fetus depicted to look like a fully formed baby. And then she goes on. She's very upset that this abortion was depicted. Now, I haven't seen this movie blonde.

I don't plan on it. I know it got a lot of hype because I believe it's NC17, but you don't see those kind of films very often. And I don't, from what little I understand of the film, I don't think it has a necessarily conservative, explicitly conservative message, and I doubt that was the point the filmmaker was trying to make. However, it just brings us to this,

that movies or shows, which depict real life and speak to real experiences will inevitably have conservative themes. That's all we really mean. When we say that a movie has or a show has conservative themes or it's conservative, it's just real. It speaks to real things, and it has a, it also has a grasp on good and evil.

So if you've got that going for you in your film or your show, then in that sense it's, quote, conservative. which should tell you something about conservatism versus leftism and where you want to align yourself. And this is especially the case when it comes to depictions of abortion. Because really any show or film that depicts abortion or that centers itself around abortion or has abortion as abortion as part of the plot, it ends up coming off like an anti-abortion film, even if that's not what's intended. and it rarely is intended. But it just, it can't help but come off that way because abortion is, is in reality, so grotesque and abominable and horrific.

And so if you deal with it in any kind of real way at all, I mean, your only hope is to go about it in a really glossy sort of way, and there have been movies that have attempted that, there have been comedies, you know, abortion-related comedies that they try to dress the whole thing up as somehow sort of quirky and funny. Even that ends up failing. If you were to sit and watch those movies, you'd still come away from them thinking, this is just horrible. This is depressing.

It's terrible. But if the filmmaker, whether he's pro-life or not, it doesn't matter, if he actually shows the reality of abortion, then we say that we don't necessarily mean. It doesn't have to show the actual procedure, quote-quote, procedure itself, but just shows what it is. And then also, crucially, the effect it has on the woman after the fact. If it does that, it's going to end up being pro-life, just by default, inadvertently, but still. Similar thing with the wire. I mean, that's why you could accuse the wire, accuse it of being conservative.

Now, it doesn't have anything to do with abortion. I don't think abortion factors in, but it does have a pretty firm sense of good versus evil. Now, that's not to say that the characters in, you know, there's lots of shades of gray in the actual characters and in their own motivations and their own moral guilt for the things that they do. So that's where you have complexity, and that's true life. But there is good and there is evil in the world of the wire. All right, this is finally from Yahoo. It says it's been nearly 100 days since Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade,

but some black women aren't letting decades of reproductive rights slip away quietly. On Friday, black women from several reproductive and racial justice organizations are challenging Americans to put down the United States. their work and come together for a collective day of action that they're calling a day without us. The event which is being organized by advocates at the frontline Netroots Nation and several other national advocacy groups also marks the 46th anniversary of the Hyde Amendment. As for how the day is actually going to work, the general idea is that folks would skip work and their routines to attend an all-day digital teach-in session starting at 1130 a.m.

Eastern Time. And so this is what they want. I guess this is focused especially on black women, but not just them. I think anyone could join in. This already happened, by the way. It's happened on Friday. So what they were saying is we want you to drop out of everyday life for a day. And I think it's no matter what your race is, if you're pro-abortion and you really

believe in, quote, abortion rights, drop out of life for a day. And don't go shopping. Don't go to work. And we'll show everybody. We'll let them see what it's like to not have us around. But this was on Friday, and nobody noticed. I'm not trying to be mean here, but no one noticed at all. So the pro-abortioned women dropped out of life for a day, and literally no one noticed.

Everything continued as normal. It was not even the slightest inconvenience to anyone, which is not the point you want to make. Okay, that's why you've got to be really careful. if you're going to organize an event like this, you have to have some idea ahead of time of how many people are going to participate. And it's also important that, you know, if you're trying to mobilize a certain group of people, that they actually have sort of a pivotal role in society and they have important jobs. And so then if they stop doing that job for a day, people will notice. But, you know, like pro-abortion feminists, I mean, most of them don't even have jobs in the first place. So it doesn't work out.

It's kind of like if you, you know, you go on vacation for a week and you tell yourself that, oh, my job is. Things are going to fall apart without me. And then you come back and everything's working. Actually, things are working better than they were. It's like things work better without you. Then you're in bad shape. And see, this is why I would never organize a day without podcasters event. I would never try to do that for a similar reason.

Let's get to the comment section. Stan Thompson says Jordan Peterson literally saved my life. If it wasn't for him, I wouldn't have. gotten over my debilitating crystal meth addiction. I suffer for 15 years from homeless and everything. A huge reason I am who I am today is because of Jordan Peterson. He's one of the most amazing human beings of our generation, truly a rare gem of a human being. People like him are extremely extremely rare and should be protected and cherished at all cause. He wants nothing but the best for all people. The man has a true heart of gold. Honestly, when the liberals all began hating on him,

that was what began waking me up to what was happening to the Democrat Party and pushed me to leave that party. Jordan Peterson is demonized, yet a man who assaulted a pregnant woman during an armed home invasion, has a statue built for him and is worshipped by all on the left. Yeah, well, that's, and that's not by accident. There's a direct connection there that essentially on the left, if you actually care about the well-being of human beings, and you try to make people's lives better, actually better, then they're going to hate you. And really as simple as that. And if you have actively worked to harm people or at the very least done nothing to help anyone ever in your life, then you've got a much better chance of being

hailed as a hero by the left. But this is basically the number one sin that you can commit as far as the left's concern, is to help people. Because that's all that Jordan Peterson is doing. It's if you didn't know any better and you weren't clued in at all and you saw this, you'd be baffled by it. That how much they hate Jordan Peterson. It's like, why? Why do you hate him so much? What did he ever do to you? He's just offering his insights and he obviously really cares about people. That's why he gets emotional when he talks about it. So whether you agree with everything he says or not, that just the hatred is almost

baffling. Until again, you realize that on the left, they're really anti-human. That's what it comes from. Brittany says, I saw this clip of JP last night and the, I thought the marginalized were supposed to have a voice line brought a tear to my eyes. I honestly had never thought of young men identified as in cells like that. And that exactly, that shows how effective the marginalization campaign has been. You put a label, there's a certain group of people you don't like. And in the case of the left, they really hate young men, young white men in particular. and so you just put a label on them.

In this case, you say, oh, they're insoles. We're going to call them all insoles. And then that becomes your excuse to hate them. And when anyone defends them and says, well, you shouldn't hate this group, they say, no, they deserve it. They actually deserve it. Of course, tyrants through history, that's what they always say. They have their group. They're demonizing.

And they always say that, well, in general, I wouldn't treat a group this way, but these people deserve it. And Obie Ken Ken Kenobi says, as evident by the Frat Boys ad, Matt clearly just reads whatever is on the prompter for those segments with no prep beforehand. Sean, the producer, this is a perfect opportunity to troll him with an I'm Ron Burgundy type moment just saying it wouldn't even be funny because of course I'm going to, yes, it'll work every single time. I'd read what's on the prompter. Okay, this is how this is my programming. I can't help it. Jake says, Matt, what did you? you and Michael decide for your bet? Yeah, we talked about this in the members block on Friday.

We were going to have, because we're facing off against each other for fantasy football this week. We were trying to figure out what our bet would be, so the loser would have to do something. And we never decided on it. So I don't think we ever decided what the bet is, which is good, because I believe I lost. And we never decided on what the bet is. I don't have to do anything. I'm off the hook. Procrastination and laziness pays off yet again, folks. The Daily Wire is hiring. Oh, good, another one of these. Good. senior front-end web developer to join our streaming platform and e-commerce team. You need at least three years of real-world software experience, but you do not need a college

degree, just big league coding chops like me. In Big Bang Theory speak, I don't even know what that means. That's the show. You got to be adept in HTML 5, CSS3, JavaScript, React Native, and Restful APIIS. Is it APIS or APIs? Okay. And be adept in that as well. In front-end web development, if front-end web development is if front-end web development is your love language, apply to join us in Nashville where you will upgrade the user experience and beauty, not just of our streaming platform, but more importantly, of my sections on the website. So go to dailywire.com slash careers to apply today. Also, the DailyWire is hiring a senior vice president of marketing analytics data.

and operations. I'm told that this is a high-profile executive role with paid relocation to Nashville. This innovator will design, hire, and oversee a world-class marketing data and analytics team that is built atop the marketing data stack from CRM platforms to multi-touch attribution tools to propensity targeting models. This leader will, for example, study which DailyWire shows in films most interest the fans, and also which DailyWire host is most annoying. So if you understand what a full marketing data and analytic stack is, then you should head over to DailyWire.com slash careers now to apply and please someone do this so they stop making me read this ad. I beg of you. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. Well, David French is a name

famous, you might say infamous, among conservative media types on Twitter, though largely unknown outside of that, admittedly somewhat insular circle. French is one of those self-professed, reasonable and principled conservative pundits who proves his reasonableness by focusing his criticism almost entirely to the right. He likes to focus especially on attacking what he views as far-right extremist evangelicals. He believes that the biggest problem in the Christian church is that Christians are too militant and two right-wing, which is to say that David French is, just based on that alone, totally clueless, because the actual problem in the church is quite the opposite of that. But up until this point, French had not spent much

time applying his brand of cluelessness to the debates over gender ideology, which is a rather noticeable evasion, especially because he lives, I believe, in Tennessee. Yet he has said nothing about the Vanderbilt scandal, and still has said nothing about it, actually, but he has finally chimed in on the broader topic. And what he had to say is somehow even more vapid and incoherent than I even expected. So I'm going to read from his piece on the dispatch, and he begins with what seems to be an encouraging note. He says this. I'm a person who believes in the traditional Christian doctrines of marriage and sexual morality. I don't believe in sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman. I don't agree that trans men are men or that trans women are women.

And while I strive to treat every person I encounter with dignity and respect, I don't use preferred pronouns because their use is a form of assent to a system of belief to which I do not subscribe. So I will say that David French not using preferred pronouns is a curveball that I didn't see coming. Maybe I misjudge the man, or maybe not, because he continues. That makes me pretty far right, correct? Well, not when the right gets authoritarian or closes its mind and heart to the legacy of real injustice. Ah, well, see, there's the David French we know and love. He goes on to rightly condemn California for its recent legislation making itself a sanctuary state, quote unquote, for child sex change operations.

It's a place where minors can now come and be mutilated and sterilized without parental consent. French says that that's wrong. And he's right, that it is wrong. But of course, he can't just leave it there. Now comes the classic David French false moral equivalence. He says this.

This wouldn't be 2022 if the story ran only one way. Just as California has escalated the culture wars by potentially severing the parent-child relationship when parents object to various methods of gender reassignment, Texas now threatens to break families when parents consent to those same treatments. In February, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton wrote to Texas Representative Matt Krause and argued that certain sex change or gender reassignment procedures, including various

surgical procedures and the prescriptions of puberty blockers, can legally constitute child abuse under several provisions of Texas law. The Texas directives and DFPS investigations are currently subject to litigation, and I have little doubt that California will face its own lawsuits. But this is where we are now. It's not enough to disagree over important matters. Now, the culture war requires a direct attack on the most fundamental American liberty interests. Okay, but how is protecting children from grotesque physical and sexual abuse a direct attack on liberty? Whose liberty is being attacked?

The abusers? I mean, is he worried about the abuser's liberty? Well, yes, precisely. Reading on it says, in an excellent comprehensive piece at public public, discourse, Catholic University professor Melissa Mostcello outlines the stakes well. After outlining the risks and side effects of popular gender-affirming measures like puberty blockers, she writes, quote, it is clearly untenable to claim that parents who are hesitant to rush their children into risky controversial medical treatments of unproven efficacy are guilty of medical neglect.

But that's not the entire story. A similar admonition applies to the right. Again, here's Moscella. Given current divisions and medical opinion, loving and responsible parents may be convinced that such treatments are necessary for the child's health. Thus, it is clearly within the parent's sphere of constitutionally protected child-rearing authority to seek a legal medical treatment for their child following the advice of the child's doctors. And French agrees with Mocchella saying, quote, yet as serious as the constitutional deprivations are, outside of criminal law, it is difficult to think of an exercise of state power more raw, immediate, and devastating than the use of state power to sever the bond between parent and child. It is a power

to be exercised sparingly in the most extreme cases. It's not a power to enlist in the culture war over one of the emotional and contentious contests of our time. At a time of profound public division and deep moral conflict, pluralism suffers from a serious disadvantage compared to the illiberal extremes of far right and far left. States should pass age restrictions prohibiting dramatic medical interventions for children at an absolute minimum, they must require parental consent, but they can express their values and pass the regulations while still remembering a singular moral and constitutional command. Leave loving families alone. Okay. So we must congratulate Mr. French. I mean, he noticed how the left has staked out an incoherent and morally insane position

on this topic, and he endeavored to one-up them by adopting a position. even more incoherent and morally insane. And he succeeded in his goal, against all odds. He succeeded. It's bad enough to argue that some little girls are actually boys inside and need to be surgically and medically altered to turn them into their true selves. It's even worse to acknowledge that all of that is nonsense and yet defend a parent's right to mutilate their children anyway.

So French, as he says, knows that boys aren't girls and yet is now willing to call it, is not willing to call it child abuse when a parent has a boy physically and permanently damaged in order to make him into what he isn't and can never be. You know, a mom who throws her son out the window because she thinks that he's really a bird is dangerous and psychotic, obviously. But the sane man who sits by and watches it happen

and even defends the mother's right to do it is something even worse, I would say. So contrary to what French claims, leave loving families alone is neither a constitutional nor moral command. It is rather the platitude of the intellectually lazy. I would say that a parent who permanently disfigures their children and sets them up for a lifetime of confusion, despair, and regret are not by any definition of the term loving, because to love is to will the good of the other, and castrating and sterilizing your children is not willing their good, but rather willing their misery.

and their eventual suicide. And it's not just my subjective opinion that it isn't good to do this to a child. It's a moral fact. It is so fundamental, so basic, so self-evident that to deny it is to invalidate any and all moral statements. Because if we cannot say that it is plainly evil

to castrate and mutilate children, then we cannot say that anything is evil. I cannot think of a definition of evil that would not include to start with this form of abuse. And besides, even if this abuse does align with a parent's perverted idea of love, so what? Not everything done in the name of love is okay or moral, nor should it all be permissible under the law, just because someone said it was loving, obviously. Here, David, I will, I'll tell you a singular moral command. Here's one. Protect the innocent. Children are innocent.

and they cannot consent to being brutalized in this way. They cannot consent to it. It is happening to them. It is happening to their bodies, their lives. They cannot consent. Who gives a damn if the parent consents to it? What does that matter? The fact that their parent consents to it is irrelevant

and will do the child no good as he grows older. When a young girl enters adulthood without her breasts, without her voice, without her ability to have children, all of that permanently deprived of her, taken away, stolen, what difference does the parents' previous consent make? Who cares? Is she supposed to take solace in that while she's forced to live every day for the rest of her life with the tattered remains of her womanhood? Is she going to live the next six decades of her life saying, well, at least my parents consented to it when I was 14? If you're so focused on rights, why not focus on that? Why not focus on the right of a child to be free from grave bodily harm. Does a child have that right, David?

Does a child not have that God-given right? What about a child's right to their own body, their own identity, their own future? Let me ask you this. Do parents have the right to mutilate their children? Or do children have the right to not be mutilated? That is the central question. That is the question right there. And one with an obvious answer, if you ask me. It's the most obvious and the easiest answer imaginable. Yet it's an answer that you still fail to get right. Which is amazing.

And even worse, you know better. And you admit that you know better. And for that reason, David French is today canceled. And we'll leave it there for this portion of the show. As we move over into the member's block, hope to see you there. If not, talk to you tomorrow. Godspeed.