The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1107 - CBS Airs Satanic Ritual In Prime Time

Episode Date: February 6, 2023

Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm  Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the CBS airs a satanic ritual in prime time during the Grammy's last night. We'll talk about our culture's continued slide into outright satanism. Also, the Chinese balloon saga finally comes to an end. But was the whole story just one big diversion tactic? A medical researcher admits he was wrong about COVID. Should we forgive and forget? And in our Daily Cancellation, I provoked enormous controversy with my provocative claim that men want loving and appreciative wives. I will address the controversy today. - - -  DailyWire+: Use code DONOTCOMPLY to get 40% off annual DailyWire+ membership plans and watch the brand new series, Master’s Program with Dennis Prager: https://bit.ly/3dQINt0   Get 40% off Jeremy’s Razors subscriptions at www.jeremysrazors.com  Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj   - - -  Today’s Sponsors: Birch Gold - Text "WALSH" to 989898, or go to https://birchgold.com/walsh, for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit. Innovation Refunds - Learn more about Innovation Refunds at https://getrefunds.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 Wall Show, CBS airs a satanic ritual in primetime during the Grammys last night. We'll talk about our culture's continued slide into outright Satanism. Also, the Chinese balloon saga finally comes to an end, but was the whole story just one big diversion tactic? A medical researcher admits that he was wrong about COVID, should we forgive and forget? And in our daily cancellation, I provoked enormous controversy with my provocative claim that men want loving and appreciative wives. People are very upset about this. I will address the controversy today. All of that.

And much more, the Matt Wall Show. Despite the U.S. blowing through $31.4 trillion debt ceilings in January, the leftist White House still refuses to reduce spending. If you're tired of the government playing games with your savings and your retirement plan, then you need to get in touch with the experts at Birch Gold today. For over 5,000 years, gold has withstood inflation, geopolitical turmoil, and stock market crashes. Now you can own gold in a tax-sheltered retirement account. Birch Gold makes it easy to convert an IRA or 401k into an IRA in precious metals. Text Walsh to 98-98-98 to claim your free info kit on gold and then talk to one of their personal. precious metal specialist with an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, thousands of happy

customers, and countless five-star reviews. You can trust Birch Gold to help protect your savings today. Text Walsh to 98-98-98-98-8 and protect yourself with gold today. That's Walsh to 98-98-98 today. Well, the most shocking thing about the Grammy Awards last night was that apparently they're still doing the Grammy Awards. The second most shocking thing is that from what I read this morning, they gave the song of the year honor to Bonnie Raite, who's a talented and soulful musical artist who actually deserves the recognition. She was able to go up to the stage by herself to accept the award because she wrote and performed the song herself. Compare that to, say, Beyonce, who needs 97 songwriters and 3,000 producers to manufacture her music through

an assembly line like process. But Bonnie Raid is not the person we're supposed to be celebrating today. Our adulation is supposed to be focused primarily on the singer's Kim Petra's and Sam Smith. They're both white males, but their win is in the best pop duo category is supposed to be a victory for diversity and inclusion, as these are white males who self-identify as something other than white males. Sam Smith claims to be non-binary, while Kim Petras identifies as a transgender woman, quote unquote. Here is Petras accepting the award and congratulating himself for his historic achievement. Listen. Sam graciously wanted me to accept this award because I'm the first transatlantician.

transgender woman to win this award. I just want to thank all the incredible transgender legends before me who kicked these doors open for me so I could be here tonight. Well, he's not the first male to win the award. He's probably not the first male who dresses like a woman to win it, but he is the first male winner who claims to be a woman, and this is supposed to be a historic achievement. But here's a perhaps more interesting point about Kim Petrus, born Tim Petrus. He got gender reassignment, quote-unquote, surgery at the age of 16.

In fact, back in 2009, the then aspiring pop star did a media tour where he was celebrated for having the courage to live as his true self with the aid of, you know, genital mutilation and drugs and all the rest of it. Here's a clip from an interview on a British talk show back then. Listen. But it's not just the scale of her ambition that makes young Kim very extraordinary. Well, Kim was born Tim and is believed to be the youngest person in the world to have had a sex change and she joins us now and it's lovely to have you here thank you very much

indeed welcome so um so you're born in 1992 in cologne in germany right and we've we've met a number of of people who've been in a sort of similar position who've sat where you're sitting and all have said from the word go there was no question that they knew precisely what they were they were trapped in the wrong body it's right um i always knew it you know when i was a little kid i was always wanting pink dresses Barbie everything Well, there you have it. He liked pink dresses. You like Barbie?

Clearly proof that he was born in the wrong body, whatever the hell that's supposed to mean exactly. But his doctors couldn't give him a new body because such a thing is impossible. You can't have a new body. You only have the body that you're born with. All they could do is mutilate the one and the only body that he has or will ever have. And that's what they did at the age of 16. Now, keep this in mind when the left claims that these procedures aren't being performed on minors. One of the biggest now Grammy Award-winning pop stars in the country is a male who had his gender reassigned or confirmed, according to the updated euphemisms, as a minor.

And this was back in 2009 when the medical guidelines were stricter than they are today, though obviously they were not nearly strict enough even then. Now, the song that won the award is aptly titled Unholy, and the two award-winning males performed it for the assembled audience after they won this award. Madonna, who with each passing day comes to more and more resemble the creepy puppet from the Saw franchise, introduced the duo who then launched into a blatantly demonic performance. The whole thing was designed to look like some kind of satanic sex ritual with fire and devil horns and BDSM themes and Sam Smith dressed like Satan. Here's a clip, and make sure you pay attention all the way to the end of this clip, watch. The satanic ritual brought to you by Pfizer.

too on the nose, I have to say. Now, needless to say, the main reason they went all in with the campy, party city devil costumes and demonic imagery and all of that is that they want attention. Sam Smith is the same guy who just released a music video that shows him parading around at a piss orgy drinking urine. He's desperate to be noticed and will do literally whatever it takes. He certainly can't rely on the quality of his music to speak for itself. I mean, putting aside the Satanist stuff, just listen to the lyrics from the... that unholy song that we just heard a clip of. Lyrics, Mommy Don't Know Daddy's Getting Hot at the Body Shop doing something unholy.

He's sat back while she's dropping it. She'd be popping it. Yeah, she put it down slowly. This is just absolute brain rotting stupidity. These are alleged artists who have no art to offer, nothing to say, no talent, no creativity. And so they can only try to shock us. There's always been art with immoral messages. The difference is that in modern times, our immoral art is produced by the most tiresome

collection of monotonous, talentless, idiot hacks to ever walk the earth. As I said about Sam Smith's peeguzzling music video, this stuff is indeed offensive and gross and disgusting, etc. It's all of that. But it's also utterly tedious and boring. These depraved attention mongers can't even manage to be offensive in a interesting way. Instead, they simply recycle the same shock tactics over and over again. And we've seen it all by now. As it turns out, there are only so many ways to be a satanic horror. After a while, it gets repetitive. And we are way past that point today. But with that said, even if these

degenerate pop stars are just vying for our attention in the most obvious overdone ways, because they have the IQ and creative talent of a paper plate, there is still a certain significance to the fact that a major broadcast network, you know, broadcast a satanic ritual live on air last night. I think it would be a mistake to ignore this development completely. Instead, we should, I think, focus on it for long enough to learn the lesson that this event can teach us. Two lessons, really. First, the left's cultural agenda is to tear down and desecrate all that you love and hold as sacred. They have no ideas of their own. They have no plan. beyond the destruction.

That's why they borrow from Christianity even while they try to ridicule it. They have to, in effect, sit on the same limb they're trying to saw off the tree. They can't stand on their own. They have nothing. They don't have their own platform. It's an agenda motivated by pure hatred and resentment. They don't even know why they hate what they hate, but they do hate it, and their hatred drives them to destroy. Second, and I think maybe a most important point, is that left is a

is Satanism. There's a reason they rely so heavily on satanic imagery and all that kind of stuff. They are all literally Satanists, just not for the most part theological Satanus. That's an important distinction here. There are some theological Satanists out there who actually worship the devil outwardly, you know. But these people, they don't consider themselves, and most leftists, they certainly don't consider themselves to be worshipping a being called Satan. Rather, they're worshipping what Satan worshipped, which is the self. The story of Satan is that he refused to worship and serve God, choosing instead to worship and serve

himself. And the modern leftist has made the same choice. Leftism is the worship of the self. It is the elevation of the self and the wants and desires of the self, especially the sexual wants and desires, above everyone and everything else. Almost all modern pop music is an ode to this idea. Pop stars are singing praises to the gospel of self-worship, which is to say that most of it is satanic. Yes, there's something that Media Matters can pull. Most pop music is satanic because it is about promoting the worship of the self.

It's just that it's usually not so explicit about it. But I think it's probably better that they are explicit so that people can see all this stuff for what it really is and respond accordingly to it. Now let's get to our headlines. If you want a business, the past few years have been a bumpy ride from COVID lockdowns to buy inflation. You could probably use a break. And innovation refunds can help with that.

If your business has five or more employees and managed to survive COVID, you could be eligible to receive a payroll tax rebate for up to $26,000 per employee that is not alone. There's no payback. It's a refund of your taxes. That's all it is. All you're going to do is go to getrefonds.com. Their team of tax attorneys are highly trained in this little known payroll tax refund program and have already returned $1 billion to businesses and they can help you too. They do all the work, no charge up front. They simply share a percentage of the cash that they get for you. Businesses of all types can qualify, including those who took PPP, nonprofit, and even those that had increases in sales. See if your business qualifies for ERC assistance in about eight minutes. All you do is go to get refunds.

Click on Qualify Me and answer a few questions. This payroll tax refund is only available for a limited amount of time. Don't miss out. Go to getrefonds.com. Getrefonds.com. All right. As you can hear, I got a little bit of a cold. So I hope I don't lose my voice again, as I did a few months ago.

Although I say I hope I don't lose my voice, but maybe I hope that I do lose it because it was kind of nice last time. I have to admit. I felt, you know, the thing is you lose your voice, you feel fine other than that. But for my job, I have to talk. So if I lose it, that means I get to take a vacation. And there's no pressure to talk at all because I can't. So we'll see what happens.

But we'll start with this from the Daily Wire. The conclusion of this saga that many people were fascinated by, I have to confess, I wasn't nearly as interested as most people seem to be. And in fact, I never would have guessed that, that they could get like a four-day news cycle out of a balloon flying in the sky. I didn't guess that one. Now, granted, there have been other balloon-centric news cycles before. There was a kid in a balloon or something?

There was some sort of that ended up being a hoax. A balloon boy? That was a thing, right? Or did I just dream that? That was a thing, okay. And was the kid actually in the balloon? Were they making that up the whole time? It was made up.

Okay, so there was that news cycle. That was a little bit more interesting, I think, than this. But here's the latest from the Daily Wire. The Chinese foreign minister responded to the U.S. military shooting down at spy balloon over the Atlantic Ocean on Saturday by claiming without evidence that the balloon was a civilian object and that the country was extremely upset by the action. A civilian object. It was a balloon from a child's birthday party that just went up in the sky. You know, they were having a barbecue out, and one of the balloons just went.

up and then it floated across the Pacific and over Alaska and down into the continental United States. It happens. You know, it does happen. An F-22 Raptor took out the spy balloon with one air-to-air A9X sidewinder missile that was fired in an altitude of approximately 58,000 feet. The decision to shoot down the spy balloon came after President Joe Biden allowed the balloon to fly thousands of miles over the continent on the U.S. during the last several days. The statement claimed, China expresses its strong dissatisfaction in protest against the U.S.'s use of force to attack civilian unmanned aircraft. The Chinese side has repeatedly informed the U.S. side after verification that the airship is for civilian use and it entered the U.S. due to force

major. It was completely an accident. The statement continued, China clearly asked the U.S. to handle it properly in a calm, professional, and restrained manner. A spokesman for the U.S. Department of Defense also stated that the balloon will not pose a military or personal threat to ground personnel. China will resolutely safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of relevant companies while reserving the right to make further necessary reaction. Maybe this is a thing that actually starts the hot war between China and the U.S. is over a balloon. It's always what you don't expect.

Biden tried to take a victory lap over the weekend after the spy balloon was shot down, claiming that he ordered the Pentagon to shoot it down on Wednesday as soon as possible. The decision was made to not shoot it down over the land because debris could cause damage when falling to the ground. They also claim that, from what I've read, they claim that they jam the signal of the spy balloon while it was flying over the U.S. And then they waited until it was over the ocean. They shot it down.

And now they're going to try to collect the remnants of it so they can take it and study it and whatever, get whatever information they can out of it. The Biden administration also claimed over the weekend that there were multiple instances. I think they said three instances where a spy balloon floated above the United States, while Trump was in office, and he didn't do anything about it. So that was their official response. Oh, yeah, well, what about him? He did it, two. I have to say, first of all, number one, I am sticking with my theory that really it was aliens.

There's nothing to hang that theory on at this point, but that's what I choose to believe about this, and that certainly makes it more interesting to me. The second thing is, if it wasn't aliens, on the radical chance that it wasn't aliens, then, you know, did Biden respond the right way? Did the Biden administration respond the right way to this balloon thing? I tend to agree with most people that, as I said on Friday when we talked about this, that he should have shot it down the first chance that they saw it. And considering the fact that it floated over Alaska and then down across the United States,

it was over Montana when we first heard about it, these are not heavily populated areas and you could have easily shot it down and, you know, in an area where the debris is not likely to cause any harm to any people. But they claim that they jam the signal, wait until it was over the ocean and they took it out. And maybe they did. I can't say that they didn't do that.

And if that is what they did, okay, that's, that might be a fine way of responding. To me, though, the issue is that after a while, the whole story starts to seem like a distraction. That's kind of the camp that I end up in here. It's a very strange thing that, you know, in the middle of last week, they make this big announcement about the balloon, and then that's, and then that's what we're focused on. That's what the news media is focused on for days and days is this balloon, which they now tell us it was never a big deal.

They jammed the signal. They took it down. They always had it under control. Again, there's no reason to believe the Biden administration on anything that it says, but for all I know, that could be true. I don't know. I don't believe it. I don't believe anything they say on their own word. But I also don't know. I really don't know what the deal was with this balloon. But the real question I have is like, why was that the thing they wanted us talking about for days? And it's just a good practice. You know, whenever the media is pointing your direction over here, it's always good to think, well, what's over there that they don't want us talking about? Especially when they're pointing us over here and say, look at that, look at the big balloon in the sky. Look at that.

Let's talk about that for three days. And then they move on from it. Talk about it for three or four days is, oh, it was never a big deal. Anyway, let's go back to what we were talking about. What were we talked? We weren't talking about anything before, right? Okay, well, let's reset the news cycle and we'll, we'll, find something else. That's my question. What were they trying to distract us from?

Post-Millennial has this story, a trans-identified male who claims to be the mother of two trans kids testified before a Minnesota House Committee in favor of Minnesota becoming a trans-refuge state for people seeking out-of-state medical sex changes. The biological male has a trans partner as well as two children who are involved in gender identity. Amber described the torrent of damaging, ill-informed and outright malicious legislation being introduced across the country has reason for Minnesota to become a safe haven for transgender individuals and parents seeking experimental sex changes for their children. So we've been following this law in Minnesota, and there have been several days of testimony, and this is the latest with this male who identifies as a female.

Let's just watch a little bit of this testimony. My name is Amber Mum. I use she, her pronouns. I'm a member of the St. Cloud Hive of the parents and allies of trans youth, the transgender movement for liberation, and a member of the Tea Time support group run by the Aliveness Project. I am also a proud transgender woman, but more importantly, I am the mother of two wonderful transgender and gender expansive children. I drove down from St. Cloud to show my support for House File 146 and thank Representative Finkie for introducing such an important and

and life-saving bill to protect trans children and their families at such a critical time for us. As you may be aware, there's a torrent of damaging, ill-informed, and outright malicious legislation being introduced across the country, targeting transgender and gender expansive people broadly, but trans children in particular. It is our daily experience to be forced to keep track of which state is safe for us to visit. Minnesota has been overall very accepting and supportive of our family, But even then, we don't feel 100% safe and assured that we will be able to get the gender affirming care that both of my kids need and deserve Very recently an amendment was proposed to House File 16 in Minnesota, which bans children's conversion therapy in an attempt to ban essential health care for transgender children This happened in our state

Because of this, my trans partner and I frequently discuss plans to flee the country if these targeted hateful bills keep being introduced her past. I never thought that it would come to this, but here we are. Pause up. But keep this image up on the screen of this, right? Once again, this is someone that everyone looks at this person and says, well, that's a, that's a woman all right. Certainly. I mean, I don't, I don't, I don't even say this is an insult. To me, he looks a little bit like the, he's like a pink version of the, what's the blue guy from McDonald's? He's a little bit like that guy, but in pink.

Grimmus, yeah. It's a little bit like a pink grimace. Again, I don't mean as an insult. I mean, that's a look that some people enjoy. But I do think it's interesting that this individual, okay, so this person is married to a trans person. And then what do you know? They also have two children who just so happened to be trans. But remember, there's no social contagion aspect of this.

And, well, certainly no one is turning children trans or encouraging them to be trans or planting these ideas in their head. No one is doing that. That's a conspiracy theory. And yet, yet, what do you so often find? You so often find that so-called gender expansive adults tend to have, quote-unquote, gender expansive children. I just feel, I mean, you feel horrible for these kids. What chance do they have in the world? And that's what stops me from, you know, he says that, well, we're going to, I want to flee the country.

Well, if he himself flees, and he's doing that, you know, in part in response to some of the laws that were, that are being passed around the country. But then I consider that another great benefit of those laws. except that he has kids he'd bring with him. And they're the real victims and all this. But also remember something else that this person right here, that is a real woman. And not only that, he's a realer woman than real women. At least that's what this person on TikTok, and lives of TikTok posted this a few days ago. There's someone on TikTok explaining that exactly that, that quote unquote, trans women are more woman-lawful.

than actual women. Listen. But I'm just going to be honest with you guys. I am tired of turf's making a mockery of real women. Oh, what? You were born with ovaries. You bleed every month. You have XX chromosomes.

Yeah, that's cute. Tell me what other external factor that doesn't apply to all of you defines you. At the end of the day, you're out here thinking that trans women are making a mockery of you when it's the exact opposite. You are pretending that you know that you are a woman when the only people here who know that for sure are the ones who have have put in the work to understand themselves, the trans women. You have put zero work in actually understanding yourself. You are only a woman because everybody else around you looked at the same external factors that you look at and said, hmm, seems like woman behavior to me.

And you went, all right. The only person making a mockery of womanhood is you because you do not fully understand what makes you a woman. Stop harassing trans women. I don't even identify as a woman and I'm more of a woman than you. It's okay to be scared of cisept men, but don't take it out on people who aren't even threat. Maybe there's a term that we should introduce into the dialogue here, which is a trans supremacist, because that's what you hear there. And that's in fact, most trans activists,

that's actually what they are. They're trans supremacists. They don't just, no, it's, they don't want to be included as, as a woman. They don't want to be merely included. They want to be at the top of, you know, the pecking order. Okay, they want to be celebrated as not just a woman or one woman among many. They're the best women of all. And that's actually what they want. Because the one thing we always know about the left is that, you know, whatever they claim they want, it's never just that. That's always, that is only the beginning. It's just what gets them in the door. And inclusion, which they shouldn't even get that. Okay, we should not be including males in the category of woman because they're not, but that's not what they're looking

for. What they're looking for is what you just heard there, trans supremacy, basically. All right, the Daily Wire has this. Could the experts be starting to admit three years later that they were wrong about COVID? At least one medical research is calling on the scientific community to admit mistakes were made. Kevin Bass wrote, I was wrong, we in the scientific community were wrong, and it cost lives. He wrote this in a recent op-ed for Newsweek.

For years and with almost no voice, the scientific elites seemingly doubled down on the, almost one voice, rather, the scientific elites seemingly doubled down on the necessity of broad vaccine mandates or prolonged lockdowns, even as Americans suffer. Medical professionals who questioned the narrative

or offered opinions not accepted by the mainstream were mocked and censored on social media platforms. Bass said that he staunchly supported public health authorities when they called for lockdowns, vaccines, and booster shots. He believed at the time that they were responding with compassion, diligence, and scientific expertise. Now the scales have fallen from his eyes, he said. Public health authorities overstated the evidence and misled the public on a litany of

issues, including natural COVID immunity versus vaccine immunity, school closures and disease transmission, aerosol spread, mask mandates and vaccine effectiveness and safety, especially for young people, Bass wrote. He wrote, quote, if our public health officials had led with less hubris, the course of the pandemic in the United States might have had a very different outcome with fewer lost lives.

And so this guy, Bass is the latest. There haven't been a lot of them, but there have been a few of these so-called health experts, medical professionals who have come out and said, yeah, we got this one wrong. which is it's good for them to admit it. It's good for them to, it's late. It's a little late in the game.

It's good to finally admit it. The problem, though, is, well, it's a couple problems. First of all, this is not a simple mea culpa. Well, my bad. Okay. What you went along with promoted was the, I mean, the shutdown of society. I mean, you were pushing something that had disastrous effects on people's lives, deadly effects on people's lives, and those reverberations are still being felt and will be felt for years to come. I mean, those effects are permanent in a lot of ways. We live in a post-COVID shutdown world, and it's not like what the world would have been had those shutdowns never occurred, and it never will be. So it's not the kind of thing that you could just say, well, my bad, and we'll respond and say, oh, we forgive you.

But I will say that, you know, I draw a distinction between people who were mistaken, who were duped, whatever, and the people who deliberately lied to us. Now, this Kevin Bass person claims to be in the former category, he says that he himself was duped by the medical professionals. he believed what they told him. Maybe that's the case. But the real issue here is that we were lied to. And the people who lied and used those lives to lies to try to destroy our lives, there can't be any forgiveness, certainly no forgetting of that. No, as the media is called for, pandemic amnesty.

There can be no amnesty for that. That's for sure. So I want to mention this also. There's an interesting trend on social media in recent years where the conversation about Leonardo DiCaprio's famous habit of dating younger women has devolved from jokes the people would always make to actually accusing him of being a sex predator. Leonardo DeCabrio is a sex predator for dating 19 and 20 year olds. That is a widely held view now on social media, at least. And it came up again this weekend when a woman named Fay Micah tweeted this. very viral tweet. She said, at this point, I can't even join in on the jokes anymore. If

Leonardo DiCaprio was approaching 50 and dating a teenager, then he's an actual sexual predator. Let's be clear. And that tweet has about 300,000 likes. Many more are echoing the sentiment as well. Now, the first problem here is that you really are lessening the impact of the term sex predator when you apply it to a man dating a legal adult, any rational person would at least agree that there's a significant difference between Linar DiCaprio and a lot of people that you find on the sex offender registry. Like, you're using the same term to describe a man dating a 19-year-old as we would to describe, say, a child molester.

And if you actually do think that DiCaprio dating a 19-year-old is equal to a man who rapes a child, that what that really tells me is that you're not nearer. is horrified by child rape as you should be, which is what apparently has led you to equate the two. And that's very concerning. But here's the point I really want to make about this. The curse of the modern age, one of them, is a total lack of intellectual consistency, where what somebody says one minute has no connection to what they'll say the next minute. It creates a a national discourse that is schizophrenic. That just sounds insane.

So, consider that a great number of the people who are, to use the leftist phrase, problematizing DiCaprio dating 19-year-olds, a great number of these people are on the left, which means that their philosophy of consent works something like this. A 19-year-old is not old enough to fully consent to dating a Hollywood actor. However, a 15-year-old is old enough to consent to having her breasts removed. And a 10-year-old is old enough to consent to taking puberty blockers. And a 3-year-old is old enough to consent to identifying as another gender and can consent to a social transition, quote-unquote.

Not like that, but let's keep in mind that 16-year-olds, according to the left, are old enough to vote. We want them taking part in the democratic process. Like, we want their votes to count as much as the vote of someone who's not. who's 30. And they also think that middle schoolers are old enough to obtain birth control and abortions without parental consent. And what about 19-year-olds? Well, I mean, at 19, the left would say that a person is old enough to consent to literally any sex change procedure at all. Hysterectomy, double mastectomy, she can have the skin on her arm peeled off and turned

into a fake penis. I mean, life-changing and life-destroying procedures. She can, consent to at the age of 19 and even younger. So she can enter into all of those things with full knowledge and discernment. And, you know, we can trust her judgment when she does. But she can't date Leonardo DiCaprio. That's where we draw the line. You consent to all of that, but not to Leonardo DiCaprio. It just doesn't make a lot of sense.

Of course, doesn't make sense. And what I would say is that, look, if you want to take this kind of a minimalist sort of approach to 19-year-olds and what they're capable of consenting to, then fine. But let's take that logic all the way to its conclusion. Because according to that logic, I mean, the voting age should be, I mean, not even 18. Let's raise the voting age to 30. I mean, it is true that your brain is not fully developed until you're 25. So let's raise the voting gauge to at least that, to at least 25. And what about these life-changing, which is really to say life-destroying sex change procedures?

I would like to ban all of them outright. But if you won't agree to that, then you should be able to agree. Well, let's raise that to 25 as well. none of those procedures at all until you're 25. Because again, remember, I mean, 19-year-olds, they cannot even be trusted to decide who they want to date. So if that's the approach you want to take, then let's just be consistent about it. But they can't be consistent because nothing that these people say means anything from one moment to the next. That's what you understand about the left.

There are no precedence being said. there's no such thing as precedent. They can say, you know, they can lay down one principle in one moment and then another principle that totally contradicts that principle next. Because it's just about what they need in any given moment. And it's extremely concerning that that also applies to concepts like consent. The judgment that, the way that they judge this is like, what do I need ideologically? And ideologically, I need to be able to say that a 15-year-old girl is fully psychologically

capable of consenting to have a breast removed for cosmetic reasons. That's what the left thinks. But when it comes to Leonardo DiCaprio's dating habits, they don't have that same ideological need. And so in that case, they can essentially treat Leonardo DiCaprio's 19-year-old girlfriend as less capable of consent than the 15-year-olds who having the breast removed. Obviously, total, total absolute incoherence. Let's get to the comment section.

In case you missed it or still haven't gotten yours, last week we dropped the newest edition to my swag shack, the notorious SBG T-shirt over daily wire.com slash shop. I think I'm supposed to hold up the shirt. It's over here. That's still in plastic. Is this? Oh, this is nothing.

That's not the shirt. Now, I keep saying that they're trying to get me to promise to rap for the gang, but this is simply not the case. To be clear, I'm in no way obligated to share my gifts of inherent natural rhythm and intricate rhymes. All I'm saying is that I reserve the right to withhold my talents. They just know that if I did choose to freestyle for whatever reason, it would be magnificent. My flow is unmatched. You've already heard a little bit of that on the show today, actually.

Sometimes I do, you know, perform pop and rap lyrics. and so you know what that sounds like. I'm gonna turn it up a little more this time. Used to dream about getting it. Now I got it. I don't drive. So what are you waiting for? This new shirt instantly maximizes your street cred,

affirms your identity as a sweet baby gang gang, and generally confuses the masses. So go to dailywire.com slash shop to get your notorious SBG shirt today. Totally ordinary says, I made terrible decisions as a young person and became a stripper. I believed all the feminist crap. I think these girls repeating talking

talking points like empowerment and my body to cover the feelings of shame. Also, the girl talking about how men solely want to see her in particular is wrong. These men don't care who the woman is as long as she's available for his viewing and checks a few boxes. There were women before her and will be a long line after. No one will miss her. That's exactly right. And you made terrible decisions as a young person, as many young people tend to do.

The difference between you, though, and a lot of other people, especially people you're referring to here, is that you were able to acknowledge the error in your ways and actually change, whereas I think for a lot of people, this is what they get from the culture, they make those terrible decisions, and then they believe that all they could do is just double down and double down. and find a way to convince them that their, you know, their self-destructive behavior is empowering, which is something that they themselves don't believe, but they'll spend their entire life trying to convince them of this thing that they'll never believe. Ali says, I love that in this episode, Matt clarified that gender affirming surgery is wrong regardless of age. If we say it's okay for adults, then we also, by default, have to admit that it's okay for children. or at least adolescents.

But we don't have to say. I mean, there are plenty of things that are okay for adults that are not okay for children. So just because it's okay for adults doesn't mean that it's okay for children. But in this particular case, what makes it wrong is not just that children can't really fathom what they're doing and they don't have the ability to consent to it. I mean, that is, that's part of what makes it terrible and evil. But also, it is a fundamentally destructive thing. I mean, you're destroying your body. And anyone who goes to a doctor asking for this to be done to them, no matter their age,

already by default, can't consent. I mean, the fact that you want it to be done to you means that you're not, you're not in a good psychological state. The fact that this desire exists in the first place, that you have the desire to chop body parts off and all the rest of it, it shows that there's something deeply wrong. There are some deep psychological problems going on. And rather than just affirming these delusions and monetizing them and profiting off of them, what we should be doing is trying to treat those psychological problems. And that's the case, no matter how old you are. J.B. says, Matt, I'm married. I have 11 children and 22 grand, so please don't think I'm

against marriage, but I met a fellow who made the choice to become a brother at St. Benedict's Abbey in Kansas. Lest you get the wrong picture, this man is good-looking, athletic, has a great personality, he was dating when he felt the Lord calling him. He has dedicated his entire life to serving our Lord. I can't help but admire him. Not everyone is called to marriage. I've never said that literally every single person is. In fact, I've always mentioned that there are people who are called, for example, to the religious life. But the important point is that if you're called to the religious life, that is still, you know, as a man, if you're called to the religious life, you're still taking on a kind of spiritual fatherhood. So I

would argue that all men and women are called to be fathers and mothers. And for most people, that's going to be in the literal kind of biological sense of having kids. But for other people, it'll come in different forms. And one way is through the religious life. But everyone is called to a, to a, every man is called to a life of paternal service. Maybe the way to put it. Jocelyn says, can I be a general in the sweet baby gang?

I ended an hour-long pay-it-forward chain. The workers stared at me with hate and disgust. I just got my free chicken and left. We don't have time for this nonsense. sense. Well, we don't have any generals in Sweet Baby Gang. There are no ranks beyond me. There's me and everybody else. So it would be a threat to my power if we were to promote you. So we can't do that. But you do have my admiration, especially to do that. So this was a pay-it-forward chain at some course at a restaurant, some kind of fast food restaurant where they serve chicken.

I mean, usually, I've only ever encountered them at Starbucks. But to do this at a place where people are buying entire meals, no, you made the right choice. I'm not just going to sit here and like volunteer to pay for whatever meal the car behind me just bought. No way. All right. Dave says, Matt, I saw a video I need you to weigh in on. A guy sits next to a woman on a bus and she yells at him and calls him creepy. Seems like one of those gym video situations except that there were a bunch of other empty seats on the bus.

So why did he sit next to her? How do you rule on people who sit closer than necessary to strangers on public transportation? All right. I think this is the video. I saw the same video on being passed around on social media. I assume this is the video you're talking about. Let's watch a little bit of this. Why are you moving away?

That's rude. Why are you coming with me? Because you're sticking weird. There's nothing with weird. But it's not just weird. You literally chose to sit right from you. It's ridiculous. Why I'm hearing from you is ridiculous.

You literally chose to sit right next to me on an empty bus. It's weird. It's not weird. I don't know why you care so much. You don't even know me. What is it right if I know you? What is it wrong? What is it wrong?

Because it's a bit weird sitting next to someone that you don't know. Like, I don't, I don't know why you care so much. You don't even know me. What is it like? What is it wrong? Because it's a bit weird sitting next to someone that you don't know. Like, I don't, I don't really want to, I don't come on a bus to start dating someone. Okay, no, I don't think it's fair at all to compare this to the gym.

Now, the gym situation is a woman looking for an opportunity to shame a man as some sort of creep when all he's doing is just working out. He happens to glance their direction. That's not what's happening here at all. I mean, she's 100% in the right. Now, I can't, I don't know the man's motivation for sitting next to this woman. We could probably guess. But, yeah, when you've got an entirely empty bus and you choose to sit right next to a stranger,

now that is never okay. This is, it does, and this goes for public transportation, airport terminals. same principle applies to urinals and bathroom stalls. It's like if you can give other people room and personal space, sometimes you can't. Sometimes there's no choice. If you walk under the bus and no matter what, you're going to end up sitting next to a person, then yeah, just choose. For me, in that situation, it's like a Southwest flight.

And if I'm in one of the later boarding groups, I'm going to, you have to sit next to someone. I'm going to choose someone who's smaller and will take up less elbow space. That's what I'm going to do. But in that situation, you have to make a choice. But to sit directly next to someone when you don't have to is obviously creepy and weird. I mean, imagine if you were at a, you know, you're sitting in a food court and there are a bunch of empty tables. And then someone sits down at your table with you, who you don't even know. It's the same kind of thing.

Don't do that. That's hard. I've got a timely and important book to share with you today. Times best-selling author, Heather McDonald, has teamed up with DW Books to bring you a powerful new book, which is called When Race Trump's Merit, How the Pursuit of Equity, Sacrifice Is Excellence, destroys beauty, and threatens lives. Do you believe in fairness and merit? Do you care about the future of our society and institutions that shape it than if this book is for you, if you do? In When Race Trump's Merit, McDonald exposes the dangerous consequences of prioritizing

race over merit in all aspects of society, from science to music to law enforcement. Our institutions are being eroded and destroyed all in the name of equity. This book takes a hard look at the impact of the left's pursuit of equity and how it's undermining meritocracy and putting our society at risk. McDonald provides a clear and sobering analysis of what's happening and what we can expect if we don't act. If you're interested in understanding the threat to Western civilization and fighting back, don't miss this essential book when race Trump's merit hits shelves April 18th,

but you could pre-order your copy today at Amazon or wherever books are sold. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. You know, I have often admitted that if we live, in a sane society, not a perfect one, but merely a sane one, then I wouldn't have a job. At least I wouldn't have this job, because my job at present consists largely of saying very obvious things, things that would not need to be said in a country where sanity reigned. Things that if they were said in a sane country, they'd be met with yawning, slightly bemused reactions. People would respond, yeah, and? Why are you telling us this? And they get back to their

lives. But because insanity rather than sanity reigns here, it is necessary to state the obvious. And the obvious, when stated, will nearly always be met with screams of horror and breathless denunciations from people who believe that there is nothing so offensive as a thing that is obviously true. And that brings us to the latest controversy, the latest firestorm that I find myself in the middle of. It began last week on this show when I dedicated Thursdays, I think Thursday's daily cancellation to a so-called divorce coach, who, among other things, advised women that if their husbands have grown unhappy or bitter through the course of their marriage, it's because the husband was always an angry person whose mask has finally fallen off.

Now, I countered that it's certainly possible that a man might fool his betrothed by dawning a mask which slips during the course of the marriage, revealing his true and miserable self. However, I suggested a woman who notices that her husband is turning into such a person would do well to consider that his happiness might not be baggage he's secretly brought into the marriage, but rather a change that has taken place during the marriage. She should think about whether she is giving her husband what he most wants and needs. She should think about whether she is helping her husband to be happy or if she is facilitating his unhappiness. And the good news, as I explained, is that the wants and needs of a man are generally pretty simple. What most men want is simply to come

home from work to a wife and children who are happy to see him and grateful for him and, you know, with dinner cooking on the stove, that doesn't hurt either. Of course, as I acknowledge during the segment, not everyone's situation is exactly the same. And even in the ideal scenario, it can't be like that every day. In fact, even in my specific case, you know, I really like to cook. So there are plenty of days when I cook and my wife cleans up the dishes afterwards. There are variations on this basic thing. Variations that also have to account for the fact that there are plenty of households, especially in this economy, where both the husband and the wife have to work, they're forced to work, or they've decided that they have to work. So I'm not laying

out a precise, unchangeable formula that must apply to everyone every day no matter what. Rather, I'm trying to explain that in most cases, a man simply wants to provide for his family, he wants his work and his sacrifices to be noticed and appreciated, he wants his wife to love him and be affectionate towards him and care for him and respect him. And he wants his children to love him and appreciate him and respect him and be excited to see him. Whatever exact shape this takes, if a man can have all of that, he will be happy. If a man does not have that, he will probably not be happy. This is the point I made during the segment, which my team also posted a TikTok and which I reiterated in a tweet over the weekend.

On Twitter I posted this, which is what I just said, quote, all a man wants is to come home from a long day at work to a grateful wife and children who are glad to see him and dinner cooking on the stove. This is literally all it takes to make a man happy. We are simple. Give us this, and you will have given us nearly everything we need. Okay. It's like brings you up to speed. And then came the responses, which break down along the lines you might expect. Across the platforms where we've had this conversation. Most men have answered either that they have exactly what I described and they love it, or they aren't married yet, but they hope to have it when they are married, or they are married and they wish they had that,

but instead they come home to an unkempt, unappreciative household and a nagging wife every day. And it makes them very miserable. Very few men have said that they categorically do not desire anything resembling the situation I described. The feminists, on the other hand, have had quite a different reaction. There have been hundreds, if not thousands of outrage, well, thousands actually, of outraged responses to my provocative claim that men want to be loved and respected by their wives and children. And I'll read through just a few of them, a few examples. Here's one from notorious cat lady Jill Philopovich who tweeted,

get yourself Doordash and a dog and please leave women alone. Then she continues, this manages to be insulting to women and men at the same time. And clearly if your husband is unhappy or abusive, it's your fault for not having dinner ready or being sufficiently happy. Anyway, I'm glad to know men who actually like women as people and want partnership, not a servile wife as mommy who breeds silent and compliant children and asserts no needs of her own. Elizabeth Spears, who's a Democratic consultant who made it on to this show several months ago after writing a column claiming that adoption is more traumatic than abortion. She was especially in sense. She wrote, the kind of man who wants this believes that women exist solely to serve his needs.

And in relationships where that is true, the relationship is partly about power and control, a root cause of domestic violence. Later, she posted, this service model of relationships often doesn't work even when women want to play that role because Matt is an overgrown baby and doesn't understand that men can get all of those things and still be abusive and cheat and be unhappy themselves. Another woman in media, Jennifer Robeson, who claims to not be a feminist, posted, your domestic tableau is creepy because it focuses only on your needs. It is you surveying your family as objects that exist only to please you, not considering that they are discrete humans with their own drives and desires. Now, there are many other responses like this, and not all from female feminists, some from the even more pathetic male variety of feminists, and all labeling me a sexist, a caveman, a backwards, abusive troglodytes, stuck in the past, etc., and most accusing me of making additional statements that I never made. There were also comments sharing violent fantasies about my family, which I won't repeat. Suffice it to say that we live in a deeply depraved culture, one where people lash out at what is normal. They attack normalcy itself.

And that's the first point I want to make about all this. Even if you disagree with what I said, either because you don't believe that that's actually what men want or because you don't think men should want it, there is no question that I was articulating a very normal, very conventional, and very traditional idea, one that most men through history can relate to, even prior to the industrial age and the invention of the nine to five job. That doesn't automatically mean that you can't be critical of the man as breadwinner arrangement or of men who want to come home to a loving wife and a hot dinner. I mean, if you want to criticize that, sure, go ahead and try. But it does make you an utterly ridiculous an unsurious person if you treat the concept as somehow shocking and offensive.

You can try to find a reason to oppose the way that billions of men and women have chosen to live their lives, but what you can't do is treat it like some freakish, shocking, outrageous thing. By comparison, just as an analogy. Lots of people like Star Wars, right? I don't like Star Wars. Now, I'm free to disagree with the tastes and preferences of the majority of people, but I would come off like a blabbering lunatic if someone said that Star Wars was their favorite movie

and I reacted by shouting, what? Are you kidding me? Star Wars? You like that movie? I've never heard of anyone who likes that. In fact, you might suspect that my argument against Star Wars is rather weak if I feel the need to overcompensate by pretending that I'm astonished to hear that the film has any fans at all. But this is all the Left ever does.

They treat totally normal traditional ideas and value systems as not only wrong but appalling and bizarre. They do this because they have no real argument against what is normal and traditional. All they have is their theatrical protestations, and they hope that that will be enough. One other thought in this vein. Note that if instead of expressing a desire

to come home to a loving wife and children, if a man instead were to express a desire to, say, become a genderqueer trans woman and join a polyamorous, furry BDSM sex cult, the same people attacking him now would instead forcefully defend the validity of his lifestyle choices and preferences. That's because any and all desires are celebrated by the left, unless they are normal and healthy and traditional ones. Second point, I have been criticized for discussing what a man needs and what a man wants

without saying anything about what a woman needs and a woman wants. This has been willfully misinterpreted as a claim that women don't need or want anything or that their needs and wants are unimportant. Now, I of course never said that, and I don't think it. I just simply didn't mention the needs of women because that didn't happen to be the subject that I was speaking about at the time. Okay? Just because a person is talking about one subject, it doesn't mean that they are denying the importance of every other subject they aren't talking about in that moment. It is in fact okay to talk about men without allotting equal or greater time to a discussion about women. There's already plenty of air time taken up by conversations about women.

And most of the time, when there's a discussion about relationships, it's going to be focused on what women need and what men need to do to fill those needs. And yet, if you spend even a few minutes talking about the other side of that coin, you're accused of erasing or marginalizing women. It's ridiculous. And also precisely the attitude that makes this kind of. necessary in the first place because the attitude from a lot of people is that men are not allowed to talk about What they want and what makes them happy Women are allowed to talk about that but men are not allowed to discuss it and if you bring it up it is somehow offensive You can't even talk about the needs and wants of men without

Automatically undermining the needs and wants of women. It is again totally ridiculous and it's a game that I will not play Third, many of my critics have taken special exception to my use of the word grateful. You know, it's bad enough that I would promote, as they say, a patriarchal and sexist family arrangement, but it's even worse that I would suggest that a wife should be grateful to her husband and for the sacrifices that he makes for the family. This tweet from someone with the username VMW is typical. She says, I'm far from what one would call a feminist. and as a woman who was a stay-at-home mom and does cook dinner most nights,

even I objected to your grateful comment. Maybe it's you who should try to try some reevaluation of your thoughts regarding a wife's role and motivation in marriage. Well, I've got some bad news for this lady. If she doesn't think that she should have gratitude for her husband, if indeed she thinks grateful is a dirty word, then it's highly probable that her husband is unhappy and her marriage is miserable, a miserable drudgery for all involved,

including the kids. Gratitude is absolutely essential to any happy marriage. And yes, that means that the gratitude should go both ways. But if you hear someone say, wives should be grateful for their husbands, and your immediate response is, oh yeah, well, what about husbands, huh? They need to be grateful too, you know. If that's your response, then you've revealed yourself to be an emotional child, a self-centered brat, reacting like a three-year-old who sees that her brother got

slightly more ice cream in her bowl. That's not fair. What about me? That attitude is a perfect example of what a lack of gratitude looks like in practice. And it is absolutely toxic. Fourth point, finally. Rather than crying about the fact that so many men desire to come home for work to a happy and grateful family, you might take a moment to consider why they desire it, why we desire it. Now, it could be that we're all a bunch of woman-hating sons.

psychopaths who hate women so much that we married and literally dedicated our lives to them. Or it could be that we are human beings who feel that deepest of human longings to love and be loved. We want to love our families by providing for them. We want to love them by being useful to them, by giving them something that they need. This is why getting laid off or fired or forced out of work for long stretches or even retiring can sometimes be literally deadly for a man. He feels deprived of the opportunity to be useful, to love his family in an active and productive way. This is what lies at the root of that terrible, evil, patriarchal male urge to be a breadwinner. What lies at the root is his desire to give to those he loves.

How awful, right? What a terrible thing. And yes, he also wants to be loved. He wants to know that his efforts are noticed and appreciated. He wants warmth and love and affection and gratitude and respect from his wife. And if he doesn't get it, he'll be unhappy with a pain that he feels at the deepest levels of his soul, but which he may never speak out loud for as long as he lives. I mean, a man won't usually say any of this out loud, especially these days when he's certain to be shouted down if he dare verbalize any of it. But it's the truth.

and those who try to stop us from acknowledging this truth or talking about it, they are the ones who are today canceled. And that'll do it for this portion of the shows. We'll move over to the members block. Hope to see you there. If not, talk to you tomorrow. Godspeed.