The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1199 - Pop Star Falls To His Knees And Apologizes For Saying Boys Are Boys And Girls Are Girls

Episode Date: August 7, 2023

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, a pop star comes out against gender transitions for children, and then backtracks in humiliating fashion shortly afterwards. It is one of the most cowardly caves we've seen yet. But plenty can be learned from it. Also, the women's national soccer team loses and the country celebrates. Obama's biographer says he confessed to sexual fantasies about men. And a NASCAR driver is fired for liking a George Floyd meme.   Ep.1199   - - -    Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm    - - -    DailyWire+:   Become a DailyWire+ member to watch shows, documentaries, movies, and more : https://bit.ly/3JR6n6d   Get Your Jeremy’s Hand Soap here: https://bit.ly/3q2CCIg   Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj    - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   Good Ranchers - Get $30 off with promo code WALSH at checkout. https://bit.ly/3UywSAT    PragerU - Join Club5: https://donate.prageru.com/give/431495/#!/donation/checkout?c_src=podcast&c_src2=DW   - - -   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

Today on the Matt Wall Show, a pop star, comes out against gender transitions for children, and then backtracks in humiliating fashion shortly afterwards. It's one of the most cowardly caves we've seen yet, but plenty can be learned from it. Also, the women's national soccer team loses and the country celebrates. Obama's biographer says that he confessed to sexual fantasies about men, and a NASCAR driver is fired for liking a George Floyd meme. All of that, and more today on the Matt Wall Street. I am often accused of being a pessimist, but I think that's an unfair charge.

I'm not a pessimist. I'm simply a realist, and I understand that human nature is what it is, and therefore people tend to act a certain way, and that results in many predictable conclusions. It's not my fault that those conclusions are often depressing, enraging, perplexing, disappointing. I wish that it wasn't this way, but I prefer to see things as they are rather than as I wish they would be. In other words, again, I'm a realist. But every once in a blue moon, I will put my realist glasses down and try on a pair with a rosier

tint. I will try to adopt the mentality of someone who is more naively optimistic. And the thing is that every time I do this, I regret it. Case in point, this weekend, the pop star Neo got a lot of attention for some comments that he made during an appearance on a show called Vlad TV. And during the conversation with host Gloria Veles, the singer was asked about his views on gender ideology, and he responded with a lengthy and I think rather well-spoken monologue on the topic. You could tell that this is a subject that he spent some time thinking about. And his thoughts were, We're quite lucid on this topic. Listen.

Parents have almost forgotten what the role of a parent is. It's like, okay, if your little boy comes to you and says, Daddy, I want to be a girl. And you just let him rock with that. You just let. Right. He's five. Right.

And where did he get that from? If you let this five-year-old boy decide to eat candy all day, he's going to do that. Exactly. When did it become a good idea to let a five-year-old, let a six-year-old, let a 12-year-old make a life change. decision for their self. I can't take credit for it, but I heard somebody say one time,

he's like, all right, if your son comes to you and says, Daddy, I want to be a girl, ask your son, son, what is a girl? Hmm, that's a good one. What is he going to do? He's going to say, well, he might want to play with dolls. All right, you want to play with dolls. Fine, play with dolls, but you're a boy.

Right. That's right. I want to wear pink. All right, but you're a boy. That's right. I have no issue with the LBGT. I have no problem with nobody. Right.

Love who you love, do what you do. Exactly. personally come from an era where a man was a man and a woman was a woman and it wasn't but two genders and that's just how I rock. Me too. You could identify as a goldfish if you feel. Right. I don't care.

That ain't my business. It becomes my business when you try to make me play the game with you. I'm not going to call you a goldfish, but you want to be a goldfish, you go be a goldfish. Amen. It's just, we live in a weird time, man. Now, fans of this show might have a pretty good idea who he was just quoting there. he was in fact directly referring to something that I said during my Dr. Phil episode. Here that is. I have four kids. When a four-year-old boy comes to you and says, oh, I'm a girl, here's a good follow-up question.

What is a girl? Ask him what he means by that. What do you mean by a girl? And when you ask him that, here's what he'll tell you. He will tell you what he really means is that he wants to do some of the things that girls do, like play with the dollhouse. Or, you know, he likes the color pink. That's fine. Play with the dollhouse. But you're still a boy. So me and Neo on the same page, a classic collaboration. So far, so good. But of course, we know that the left cannot allow somebody like Neo to say these kinds of things. They believe they own him. He belongs to them, both because he's a mainstream celebrity and because he's a black man. By the left's thinking, Neo owes them his unthinking fealty. So the outrage mob set to work, screaming that he was a transphobe and a bigot and on and on and on. But he didn't relent at first.

He addressed the comments in an Instagram post where he appeared to double down. He said, quote, first and foremost, I condemn no one. Who am I to condemn anybody? Your life, your kids, your choice. I was asked a question, and I answered it. My opinion is mine. I'm not asking anybody to agree with me, or am I telling you that you can and cannot do with your children? I stated my opinion on a matter, and that's that.

Why should I care if my opinion upset you when you don't care if yours upsets anyone? Opinions aren't special. We all have one. People voice them regularly, whether they're asked or not. I was actually asked mine. agreeing to disagree is not a declaration of war. Y'all do whatever the hell you all want to, but my feelings on the matter are mine. Same way yours are yours. Meanwhile, I love everybody. Don't agree with some of y'all's ideals, but love you no less. Now, if you inspect this

statement closely, you'll begin to see that this is not really a double down. In fact, you can detect the seeds of equivocation already, and it's not very subtle. Which is why I almost tweeted something predicting that he would fully cave to the mob within the next 24 hours. But I stopped myself, I put on my little worn roast-colored glasses and decided to be positive and optimistic instead, you know, because everyone's always like, well, he's so negative about everything. So I don't want to be negative, so I sent out a tweet simply congratulating Neal for taking this stand.

And I left it at that. Then an hour later, an hour later, as if to punish me for dabbling with optimism, Neo posted another statement. Here's what it said. After much reflection, I'd like to express my deepest apologies to anyone that I may have hurt with my comments on parenting and gender identity. I've always been an advocate for love and inclusivity in the LGBTQI-plus community, so I understand how my comments could have been interpreted as insensitive and offensive. Gender identity is nuanced, and I can honestly admit that I plan to better educate myself on the topic

so I can approach future conversations with more empathy. At the end of the day, I lead with love and support everyone's freedom of experience. expression and pursuit of happiness. Now, we've seen many people utterly debased themselves and shed whatever scraps of dignity they still had left, all in a vain attempt to appease the zombie hordes. We've seen many targets of the outrage mob in this exact situation decide to betray the very people who were defending them while bending the knee to a bunch of pitchfork-wielding troglodytes who will still hate them even after they apologize.

We've seen all of this more times that we can count or want to count. But what makes this one especially grotesque is that Neo's original statement was spoken with such force and even eloquence that you can tell this is an issue he really cares about and has long reflected on. In other words, this isn't someone sort of pathetically apologizing for some off-the-cuff remark. This is someone apologizing for saying something that it's clear he truly and deeply believes. Now, if I took this final statement, this apology seriously, I might ask, what arguments did the other side make to convince him that gender identity is nuanced? Neo, what facts did they present to you to make you question your previous belief that it's a bad idea to transition a five-year-old boy? What actual points did they make to persuade you that actually it's a good idea to castrate and sterilize children? You know, before you said that little children are too young to consent to these things, what happened to make you suddenly feel otherwise?

What did the other side say to lead you to the conclusion that you need to educate yourself more on this topic? I would ask you, what, you know, tell us more about this road to Damascus moment. What was said to you in that blinding light? What great truth was revealed? Well, I would ask all that, but we know the answer. Right? We all know the answer. The other side made no argument. They presented no facts. They didn't give any reason to actually believe anything they say on this subject. Instead, his handlers and his PR team and his record label executives told him to bend the knee or else.

They threatened him with loss of revenue and who knows what other kinds of blackmail. And they wrote up a statement for him to post and he posted it. That's why it contains a bunch of language that he would never use, you know, LGBTQI plus. I guarantee he's never said that in conversation. Now, this is, of course, by no means meant to let him off the hook, far from it. He gave up his soul for fear and greed. He's a coward and a traitor to himself and his own belief system. Many such cases, in each case is just as shameful and disgusting as the last.

But it's worth reflecting on the fact that, out of all the neos of the world, who have prostrated themselves before the mob of trans activists and offered their own integrity up as sacrifice for their sins, and of all these people and all of their forced scripted apologies, not one of them has ever said, you know, the trans activists made such and such point, and it really made me think differently about this situation. Here's a point that I said this before, and then the other side made this point,

and it really made me think differently, and here's the point that they made. Here's the argument they presented. That has never happened. million of these apologies, and we've never seen one like that. Because the trans activists have persuaded many people, but they've persuaded no one. They have won millions of converts, and also not a single convert. That's because their position is one so laughably incoherent, so ridiculous and irrational, so nakedly insane, that no sane person could ever truly be convinced by it. That's why

they don't bother convincing. They can't. Instead, they use intimidation, threats, coercion, fear. That's how they've assembled an army marching under a flag that none of them believe in. They've built a house of cards and imprisoned millions of people inside of it. And all that any of the people inside that house of cards have to do, that prison, all they have to do is just push gently against one of the walls and it all comes tumbling down. The trans activists recognize this, which is why they must be so quick to squash dissent whenever it arises. And luckily for them, there are many cowards in the country who are quite easily squads. But the good news is that these kinds of tactics can only work for so long. A position so absurd and morally depraved can only be defended for so long.

Eventually, that House of Cards will come tumbling down one way or another. We're watching it happen right now in the culture as we speak, in fact. And Neo, along with the rest of the coward contingent, will be on the inside when it finally falls. Now let's get to our five headlines. I don't know about you, but this summer heat in Nashville feels hotter than it's been in years. Thanks to the heat and the inflation, we're feeling the heat in more ways than one. So the one thing I'm not sweating this summer, though, is my meat price. Thanks to Good Ranchers, my price is locked in for two years. You might be thinking a price lock guarantee on meat.

Yes, it's amazing and you need it. You need to try it. Good Ranchers is the only meat company locking in your price with our industry-first price. lock guarantee. Since 2021, they've been helping people combat the inflation on the meat aisle, as well as the mystery of it, too. It turns out that over 85% of grass-fed beef is imported from overseas. So not only is it store-bought meat expensive, but it's often low foreign quality, too. When you subscribe to Good Ranchers, you get a guaranteed price and a trusted 100% American source for your favorite cuts. You can save on your beef, chicken, and pork by locking

in your price today. Every single steakhouse quality cut is individually wrapped and flash frozen to make meal time easy. Visit Good Ranchers. dot com and use my code walsh for $30 off any box. That's promo code walsh at good ranchers.com. Good ranchers.com American meat delivered. Let's start the headlines today with some good news. The United States, this is the daily wire. The United States women's national team has been eliminated from the FIFA Women's World Cup after losing in a penalty shootout to Sweden, marking the earliest exit in history for the team. Sweden beat the United States in the round of 16 following 120 minutes

of play and a dramatic penalty shootout in which the video. assistant referee confirmed a shot by Sweden's Linta Lina Hurtig did cross the line, shocking American players and fans who thought it was saved by the American goalkeeper. The U.S. women's team has won the tournament four times, more than any other national team, and a win this year would have marked the team's third consecutive championship, but that didn't happen and they lost.

Now, this was truly the worst defeat for the women's team since they lost to a group of high school boys a few years ago. Actually, the Swedish team may have been comprised high school boys at this point. And, you know, who knows? I don't know. I didn't watch the game. But we haven't gotten to the best part yet. The best part is that Megan Rapino, the team captain, who said that she, previously said she was going to retire after the end of this season. She had a penalty kick or a free kick or whatever it is. Again, I'm not a communist. I don't watch soccer. I don't know what the rules are. But it was some

kind of kick at the end. And a chance to save the day for her team. And instead, as her very last act as a professional soccer player. Here's what happened. Let's watch that together. How many discounts does USAA auto insurance offer? Too many to say here. Multi-vehicle discount. Safe driver discount. New vehicle discount.

Storage discount. How many discounts will you stack up? Tap the banner or visit usa.com slash auto discounts. Restrictions apply. Well, I don't feel bad laughing, first of all because she's laughing at that kick. That's how terrible it was. Honest to God, I could do better than that.

I really could. I've kicked a soccer ball approximately zero times in my entire life, and I could do better. I really could. You know, they could have pulled some dude down from the stands with mustard stains on his shirt and still eating a hot dog with a hot dog in one hand, and he would get off a better kick than that. So really a disaster for Megan Rapino and the women's team, and great to see. Now, after this humiliation, Megan Rapino was asked about her favorite moments as a soccer player, and that last moment definitely was not one of them.

But here's what she said. Is there a memory that stands out to you right now in this moment? Oh, I mean, probably equal pay chance after the final. And I think, you know, they were saying equal pay, but could have been saying a lot of things. I think this team has always fought for so much more. And that's been the most rewarding part for me, of course, playing in World Cups. and winning championships and doing all that.

But, you know, to know that we've used our really special talent to do something, you know, that's really like changed the world forever, I think that means it most to me. And, you know, the players in this locker room here, they're just getting started. And, you know, to all the players that I've played with, obviously, you know, who know what it's like to be in the grind, that's the best part. It's an ironic response because she had,

just proven why women should not have equal pay with men in soccer. But that's what she cares about. That's the highlight for her. She spent her career whining that she wants to be paid as much as the men, and that to her is the main takeaway from her own career. And I basically agree. I think most people do. See, I'm happy that they lost and that she was embarrassed, and many people feel the same. Twitter was full of people gloating about it, deservedly so. But ideally, it shouldn't be this right way. In a healthy country, Sports, it's supposed to be one of those things that unites people, that we all root for our sports heroes. We all root for, especially if it's a national team. We should all be rooting for that team. It's a national team. And yeah, maybe what happens on the field or on the court, in and of itself doesn't matter that much, but at least this opportunity for everyone to just sort of like be on the same side about something, as superfluous as that thing might be on the surface. But we don't have that anymore from sports, and we don't have it from this, because these are women who kneeled during the national anthem.

We went overseas disrespecting their own country and flag. These are the women, Megan Rapido in particular, who betray not only their country, but their own sport, their own profession, and the women who may come after them, when she came out and enthusiastically endorsed letting males compete against females in sports. So these are partisan hacks in an athletic costume. These are ideologues in a jersey. And they aren't even trying to represent the United States. They're representing a very specific viewpoint. Right? That's who they're trying to represent.

So they're part of the problem. They are part of the move towards making sports non-unifying, making it partisan and divisive, which it was never supposed to be. It's supposed to be, again, the opposite of that. And the end result is this unfortunate scenario. where they're supposed to be representing their country, they lose, and their country is happy about it. But it's their own fault. It's their own fault of their country mocks them when they lose.

This is what they've done to themselves. All right, Daly Wire has this report. The biographer for former President Barack Obama made explosive statements during a lengthy interview published this week by Tablet Magazine. Historian David Garrow, who wrote Obama's 2017 biography, Rising Star, The Making of Barack Obama. talked about various aspects of who the former president was, both politically and personally. Journalist David Samuels asked Yarrow about how he got some of Obama's former girlfriends to give him letters that Obama wrote to them while in college and law school, and what was the most surprising thing that he found from the letters. Gero said, quote, with Alex, who was Alex McNair, a former girlfriend of Obama, I think she wanted to have her role known. So when Alex showed me the letters from Barack, she redacted one paragraph in one of one.

of them and just said, it's about homosexuality. Gero said the letters ended up at Emory after Alex sold them and at the school did not mention the paragraph in its press release, announcing its possession of the letters. He said that he emailed his friend Harvey Claire and told him to go to the Emory archives to see the letters. And Garo said, quote, he spent his whole life at Emory, but they won't let him take pictures. So Harvey has to sit there with a pencil and copy out the graph where Barack writes to Alex about how he repeatedly fantasizes about making love to men. So that's the, finally the headline there is that there are these letters. According to this biographer, there are letters that Obama wrote in college

where he talks about his frequent fantasies of having sex with men. And I don't know, would anyone really entertain the idea that this isn't true? Like, it's not exactly the most shocking rumor we've ever heard. I think we can just maybe agree on that. But it does go to show. It's sort of incredible that even now, much of Barack Obama's life and backstory and also that of his wife, by the way, so much of it is still a mystery. He was in office for eight years. He's been out now for almost eight years.

And just very shrouded, very cloudy is his backstory. Because the very moment he emerged on the national scene, it was made clear. that you can't ask any questions about him. You can't ask about his biography. You can't ask about his background. Yeah, this guy that is a state senator, he just like comes out of nowhere. And he's a community organizer, state senator after that.

And he comes out of nowhere onto the national scene. And everyone, you know, so we're saying, well, like, where did this guy come from? What's his background? Seems like a fair question is to ask. Somebody wants to be president. We weren't allowed to ask it, though, because it's racist. Can you imagine if, imagine what we'd find out if Barack Obama was subject

to even like a tenth of the scrutiny of Donald Trump? That's one of the many incredible things about Trump and the way that, and how his, his, you know, presence on the national scene as a political figure is so different from anything else we've seen. There's entire, we know everything about him, which was already sort of the case before he ran for president, because he's been living in the public eye for 30 years before that, and he was on TV forever and everything. So it's like everyone knew the guy, everyone knew. There already been biographies written about him and everything.

And then the media and the deep state go to work, exposing every last detail they can. Some of it made up, some of it not, ripping his life apart. And so we've seen. We've seen everything there is to see about Donald Trump. We've seen the very worst of it. And we've also seen that the worst of it really isn't that bad. It's not nearly as bad as they would have this.

I mean, they wanted us to believe this is, you know, once we find out the truth about Trump, you'll be shocked, how deep his corruption is and everything. And then you find out what's going on behind the scenes. It's just kind of like what you expect. Oh, so Trump is Trump. Basically what we found out is that the guy that he presents himself as is exactly who he is behind the. the scenes. There's really no, he's an open book, really. Which is why, as I've often said, like the scrutiny trying to paint Trump as this sort of like deeply corrupt political figure

has only had the opposite effect of proving how not corrupt he really is. Because if there was something else there, we can guarantee that we would see it by now. They would let us know. and they haven't. They've given us the best or the worst. The worst is that he kept some documents because he thought it was cool to have them. That's the worst. That's the worst they can find. And again, can you imagine if someone like Obama had even a fraction of that kind of scrutiny? Well, we can only imagine. We can only imagine what they would find because we are left to only imagine. Daily Wire has this story. NASCAR faced backlash online over the weekend. after it suspended a driver for, quote, his actions on social media.

Noah Gregson was suspended by NASCAR and Legacy Motor Club after he reportedly liked a meme on Instagram that mocked George Floyd's death. And we'll show you that meme in a second before we do. Let's get just get the whole story. I mean, this guy was fired for not even, he didn't post the meme. He didn't even like retweet it to propagate it, get it in front of more people. He just liked it. And by the way, the way, you know, I don't like tweets at all, but people that do that,

it's not even, even though it says like, sometimes they do it as people do that because they're just bookmarking it so they can go back later. People have different reasons for clicking like on something. Or maybe just because they like it. So who knows? Maybe he bookmarked it. Maybe he saw the meme and said, you know, this is an interesting thing. I want to revisit it later.

Think more about it. Who knows? Who knows what his motives were. But all he did was. click like on it. Click the little heart button on it. NASCAR said in a statement, quote, NASCAR fully supports Legacy Motor Club's decision to suspend Noah Gregson. Following his actions on social media, NASCAR has determined that Gregson has violated the member conduct section of the 2023 NASCAR rulebook and has placed him under indefinite suspension. Legacy Motor Club said

in a statement, we've made the decision to suspend Noah Gregson effective immediately regarding his actions that do not represent the values of our team. Josh Barry will drive the number 42 entry for this weekend, NASCAR Cup Series race at Michigan. Now we get immediately to the inevitable here. So there was no, with Neo, there was a little bit of lag time. There's a little bit of time in between. But in this case, right away we get the next paragraph, which tells us that Gregson apologized for liking the meme, writing, quote, I am disappointed in myself for my lack of attention and actions on social media. I understand the severity of this situation to continue. I love and appreciate everyone. I try to treat everyone equally no matter who they are. I messed up,

plain and simple. So another coward. It's a coward bonanza today, that is what we're dealing with. And yet again, as always, is this going to do anything for him? Is it going to be invited back into the fold? He's going to get his job back. All the people that have torn him down and said that he's a horrible racist and all the rest of it, and he's terrible. He's a fascist, whatever they're saying about him, are they going to go back and say, well, you know, he apologized and let's give him another chance. It was just a meme, guys, and he apologized for it. And let's be reasonable about it. Okay, we don't have to tear this guy's whole life apart for a meme.

He did apologize. Are any of them going to say that? Is even one person in the outrage mob going to say that? The answer is no, of course not. No one's going to say that. Which is why even as a matter of just pure, we don't have to appeal to your courage, even. It'd be good if we could. Like, I wish we could appeal to your courage, if you're Noah Gregson or Neo.

and just say, you know, have some backbone. Stand by what you said. Don't cave to the mob. Just don't do it. Have a little bit of courage. I wish we could say that. That's a non-starter with a lot of people. But we don't even have to appeal to that.

It's also just pure self-interest. It's like the not only is it the best thing to do morally to stand by your actions and not to cave to the mob. It's also just strategically the best approach. because you're already labeled this way, and you're never going to get that label off you. Whatever the leftist mob is saying about you, they're going to say that about you forever now. Sorry to say, that's just the way it's going to be. But you do at least have some people defending you and sticking up for you. And so you might as well, for pure self-preservation, your best move is to stick by them and to stand by what you said.

And that's why Gregson should have come out. Smartest strategic thing for him to say is to come out and say, hey, you know what? It was a joke. It's a meme. All you people crying about it, you're all a bunch of hypocrites and cry babies. Okay, you know that if you agree with me politically and I like to meme, you know, going the other way, you'd have no problem with it. You're all a bunch of frauds and phonies. I apologize to none of you.

Kiss my ass. You disgusting cry bullies. You know what? And then he goes and post the meme again. Here's the meme again. I'm going to blow this meme up and put it on a billboard on the highway now because of you people. That's what I'm going to do. That's what he should have said. But he didn't instead of he apologized. I understand the severity. That's the part that gets me the most. I understand the severity of that, really, the severity of this situation. What is, tell me, Noah, what's the, what's the severity of you like a NASCAR guy? A NASCAR driver liked a meme. Really? What's the severity? What's the severity? severity of that. It's the severity of the situation. No, that's what you say if, like, I don't know.

That's what your doctor says to you, maybe, if they're letting you know that you have terminal cancer to talk about the severity of the situation. There's no severity to you liking a meme. No one's hurt by it. That hurts no one. No one's actually offended. All the people pretending to be offended are actually happy. Okay, because you're a NASCAR driver.

you're automatically suspect as far as they're concerned politically and ideologically. And so they have a chance to drag you down. It's also just fun. It's a recreation for them. They'll rip your life apart and move on to the next one. And it's all fun for them. So they're happy. They're really happy about it.

Nobody was heard. It's not a serious situation. But he apologized anyway. Now, before we go any further, I think we should probably take a look at this meme in the interest of journalism. This offensive, unsightly meme. So let's put it up on the screen here. So there's the meme that he liked.

And as you could see, it says under denie, under denie. And then it's George Floyd's face on the body of a lobster. Recalling, of course, Sebastian from the little mermaid who sang famously, Under the Sea. And so that's the joke. Now, there's the joke there. That's what it is. Now, I want to say something here.

I don't see what. I want you to leave this up. I want you to leave this up the entire time as we talk about it. I don't see why we would assume that this is meant to mock George Floyd. I don't see it. I mean, Sebastian's a lovable character. This imagines George Floyd reborn as this lovable character. I think those mourning George Floyd's death could even be comforted by this.

I think it's deep-lop I think, I mean, you could make the argument that Noah Gregson wanted to comfort. those who are still mourning the passing of George Floyd these three years later. And he's saying, you know, George Floyd's in a better place now. He's reincarnated as a lobster deep in the sea. Why is that a bad thing? Bad thing. Some people believe in reincarnation. We're going to be judgmental of those people. So that's what I take from this. I think if you're really mourning George Floyd, you should be, it should make you happy to think, well, you know, maybe George Floyd is in the ocean singing songs to a mermaid in a much better place. But if it is, and this is a big if, this is a huge if, if it's meant to be mocking,

which I think we don't know that, but we'll never know. If it is, then the only reason why this would be considered way, way out of bounds and just absolutely awful, you know, the kind of thing that you would lose your job over is if you agree, that George Floyd is a martyr and a saint and not a violent criminal and drug addict who died as a direct result of his own life choices and his own behavior. You know, and if you believe the latter, right?

If you believe what is, in fact, the reality, which is that George Floyd, again, was a violent criminal and a queer criminal drug addict and died as a direct result of his own actions, then this kind of thing, again, if it is meant to mock him, Then you're making fun of somebody dying, so it's in poor taste. At worst, that's what it is. Not something you lose your job over.

You don't lose your job over that. It only becomes a severe situation and something where people have been hurt and deeply offended. If you think that George Floyd is a saint, this is St. George Floyd. He's a great man, a wonderful member of his community, one of the greatest Americans this country has ever produced. and that's why he has murals and that's why he has statues now, and he's deserving of all of that, that's the only way that this becomes, this, this is, graduates to the level of something that you'd lose your job over. Because then it becomes an act of blasphemy. And that's how, and that's how it's being treated.

This is, this is why the left reacts to something like this is because it's not because it's a joke and poor taste about someone who died. They don't care about that. Like, nobody really can everyone understand, you know, morbid humor is something that everyone engages in sometimes. it's not a big deal. Most of the people pretending to be offended by this, I guarantee there have been 9-11 and Holocaust jokes that those people have laughed about.

And this is one guy who died and they're pretending that they're horrible. Every single person who's, by the way, every single person who's pretended to be offended by that, every single one of them, you check their Twitter account. At some point, they've posted a meme mocking, say, Ashley Babbitt, who died on January 6th.

So it's all, you know, It's all a charade. And that's why they don't really care. It's not that, well, we never make jokes about people who died. We never do that. Everyone's done that. Everyone has done that. That's not the point.

For them, it's blasphemy. It's blasphemy against a sainted, hallowed, blessed figure. That's the way that they see it. And that's the way NASCAR sees. You know, NASCAR, and this is just the latest example of this, NASCAR is, I mean, fully woke all the way. I mean, they are not quite NBA tier, but they're close. I would even, in wokeness factor over the last several years, I put them, it's like NBA

is at the top of the woke pyramid, and NFL is actually a few notches below that, and NASCAR is above that now. They're climbing the woke ladder. All right. We could take that down now. George Floyd. In a better place. Let's see. We have time for maybe one more. This is, you know, we're just skip ahead to this. Okay, so

the media has been enthralled by a story, by a certain story, and they're very excited about it. They're having a field day. Very, very excited about this. The story, as reported in the Daily Mail, repeated by every corporate media outlet, and I'll read you with Daily Mail reports, and then I mean, every corporate media outlet has put out a report just like this, which is phrased almost exactly the same way, like a cut and pace job. So here it is. One of the funders of the film Sound of Freedom has been arrested for kidnapping a child, according to court records. Fabian Marta, 51, was one of thousands of donors who gave funds for the production of the film based on former Department of Homeland Security agent Tim Ballard's efforts against child trafficking.

The St. Louis, Missouri resident was charged with felony child kidnapping last month. The Sound of Freedom movie tackles a very tough subject and took extraordinary effort to bring it movie theaters. That's from Marta who wrote that on Facebook and a now deleted post, as reported by Newsweek. I'm proud to have been a small part of it. If you see the movie, look for Fabia Marta and family at the very end of the credits. And sure enough, Fabian Marta is in the credits of the film. In some cases, that's the way it's been phrased in the headlines. There have been headlines saying, a funder of Sound of Freedom, charged with, you know, child trafficking, child kidnapping.

And then there are other headlines that say, you know, man who appears in credits of sound of freedom charged with child kidnapping. He could face 10 years in prison. Now, so that's the headline. And again, the media is very excited about this. I mean, they're getting these reports out everywhere. And if you look at the leftists on social media, they're gloating about it. They're happy about it.

They're very happy at this happened. They're very happy about the story. This is a story, allegedly, about a child who's kidnapped. and the left cannot contain their glee. They can't even pretend to contain it. They're excited. Here's the part they don't highlight. First of all, this film had 6,000 people who funded it with an average of 500 bucks each.

So Fabian Marta probably, I don't think we know the exact amount that he gave, but everyone, you know, if he's around the average, then he gave 500 bucks or so. or that's all he would have needed to give to account as a funder. So that is the big time funder, someone who gave $500 bucks to the film. The second point is that according to follow-up reports on this story, Fabian Marta is a landlord who provided lodging to a woman and her child, and that woman is involved in a custody dispute. And that's the story.

Now, what are the details from there? Did Marta actually do anything wrong? Was he involved in some kind of conspiracy? What are the details with the child and the custody dispute and who's in the right and who's in the wrong? I have no idea. I have one of the slightest idea. I don't know anything else. And I don't think the media knows anything else. And it's a very complicated situation. But this is, we know at least, some kind of obscure custody type dispute between a woman, a child, a father, presumably, and a landlord. And one of the people in that involved in this dispute gave a few hundred bucks to a film. In other words, there's no story here. You know, the fact that a guy is a landlord and he's involved in this dispute and there's a custody dispute and he gave 500 bucks to a sound of freedom a few years ago, that's not a story. That's not anything. You would hear that if you didn't have the media's framing of it and you hear that and someone tells you that. It's like imagine, imagine someone just ran into your living room and you had no reference, no frame of reference. And they just told you this story. Guess what? Listen to this. You're not going to believe it.

What? What's going on? So there's a guy who's a landlord for a woman who has a child and they're in a custody dispute and he's just been arrested for kidnapping because he's involved. and he gave 500 bucks to a movie that deals with child trafficking. And that's the story. Can you believe it? If you heard that, you say, what, okay? What's the relevance of that? Why is this headline news? Why are you so excited about it?

It's not a story at all. But the left is very sorry, excited about it, because they see it as something that somehow discredits the movie. Which, of course, even if like the worst version, of this story was true. When you read the headlines, you're supposed to imagine in your head that Fabian Marta is, when you hear investor or funder of film, you're imagining like this millionaire who gave millions of dollars to make the film. And when you hear that he's involved in kidnapping, you are supposed to imagine that he actually physically kidnapped a child and

stole the child and all of that. And that's not apparently what actually happened. But even if it did, that wouldn't, the movie's based on a true story. about it's an anti-child trafficking movie that doesn't discredit the point of the fit what so does that mean that now child trafficking is good or something So even in the worst version of story doesn't discredit the film And it especially doesn't given what we actually know to be true about about this story But it does raise the question of why is the left so desperate? What do you have against this movie? Like the movie didn't blame you for anything. I didn't what do you what do you have against you? What do you have against you? it. Maybe you've seen the movie and it's hard for me to believe that you even watched objectively

or that you objectively analyzed it. But even if you think that, oh, the acting isn't very good, the script's not good, whatever, what do you have against it? Why are you so desperate to find some reason to discredit it? So really, this raises a lot of questions about you. Why would you see? Those of us who are normal, we can't even put ourselves in this mentality. There's a movie out there, it's an anti-child trafficking movie. It's a movie about kids being rescued from trafficking. Maybe you want to see the movie. Maybe you don't. Maybe it's the kind of subject matter that's too upsetting for you, so you don't want to watch the movie. I know there are many, many people that are, I've talked to who said, well, I can't even, I don't want to watch the movie because

the subject matter is so exciting. I just don't want to sit there and watch it. So maybe whatever your perspective is, but why would you like hate the very idea of the movie? Why would you have some kind of agenda against the movie? It's a very good question. And all of the potential answers to those questions are not very flattering, flattering for the people on the left. It says a lot about them.

And none of it is good. We could leave it at that. Let's get to the comment section. Our country might be headed in the wrong direction, but Prager U videos could help save the future of America. or Prager You makes educational pro-American content. That's been changing people's minds for over a decade. Their impact is pivotal in these times.

My friends of Prager You are reaching millions of people with their educational videos, but they have a long way to go. You can help Prager You reach thousands more people by joining Club Five for just $5 or more per month. Go to preggar-u.com slash Club Five now to join. Your gift will ensure that Prager You has the support it needs to be here for the long haul. What are you waiting for? Join a movement with thousands of people and thousands of fellow patriots in the fight to save America. So you'll receive a free Prager You bumper sticker plus an e-book of scripts from Prager You's five-minute videos.

When you join Club Five Today, that's preggeru.com slash Club Five today. Maddie Sheehan says the fact that Matt actually didn't know who Maya Khalifa was or how to pronounce her name is truly heartwarming. Well, I knew of Maya Khalifa because her name had come up before for saying dumb things in social media. So she's one of these people that provides that kind of fodder every once in a while. but yeah, I don't pronounce her name. I'm not familiar with her body of work, shall we say. And the reason for that is that I don't watch this stuff. And it's always interesting me, this is not directed at you, Maddie.

But every time I talk about the problems with porn, I always hear from people who are like, well, I know I knew your hard drive. It's full of porn, right? Everyone looks at porn. You're only saying this because, you know, you're protesting too much. You're only saying this because you watch a lot of porn or whatever. Which, even if that was true, by the way, it wouldn't disprove whatever I'm saying about pornography being harmful. You know, actually basically irrelevant.

But it's not true. You know, I just actually don't watch it. I just simply don't. And if this is, that's it. I don't know what to tell you. There's a lot of people that find that fact very. I can't believe this. It's kind of like what we talked about earlier.

You know, if that's your perspective, it says a lot more about you than me. It's like impossible. This is what you get from many people. It's impossible for them to believe that there could be anyone who doesn't watch porn. They can't even wrap their minds around the possibility. And if that's your mentality, then again, it says something about you. But on the other side of it, if you're someone who is struggling with this with this compulsion to watch porn all the time, and the people who act like, well, everyone watches porn, there's no way to not watch porn.

The people saying that with this kind of defeatist mentality, they're saying that to you because they don't want you. They want you to, you know, people to have a vice, you know, misery loves company. they take solace in knowing that other people share it with them. They don't want you to pull yourself out of it. But what you should know is that it is actually, like, it is definitely possible to have a life that doesn't involve pornography. That is 100% of possibility. It is a very realistic goal.

You can achieve that. It is possible. I can tell you that. All right. Gary says, porn star, Matt got it right by calling them cyber prostitutes, and he was being polite. Yeah, polite. I don't know if it's polite or not, but I do prefer to use that term whenever I can because I just think it's more accurate. It gives a more accurate kind of illustration of what these people do. It is a for, it's cyber prostitution.

Which is why, you know, one of my arguments about pornography is that I think most people, unless you're very libertarian, most people basically agree the prostitution should be illegal. You know, whether they think about it a lot or how strongly they feel, I don't know, but most people, you know, there is not any great push out there in most areas of the country to legalize prostitution. And in fact, if there was a movement in your own community, if you lived in an area where prostitution is not legal, and there was a movement to say, you know, prostitution needs to be legal here in your neighborhood, you would probably object. Most people would object because you're going to say, you know, that's not going to make our community any. There's no way, they're going to look around and say there's no way that my community will be improved by legalizing prostitution here. There's no there's no possible improvement that I could possibly foresee by the legalization of prostitution. So that's how I think most people view it. And yet if you mention banning, prohibiting, or even just simply regulating pornography,

A lot of those very same people recoil in horror. They can't imagine that. They're perfectly fine with prostitution being illegal, but they can't imagine the same would apply to pornography. Well, why not? It's the same thing. Prostitution is when you're having sex for money. So prostitution is.

It's like the definite, what's the definition of prostitution? Having sex for money. Pornography, you're having sex for money. whether it's whether you work you know officially for the quote unquote porn industry or you are only fans you know whatever even if you're putting videos out on your own or whatever it's in the end it's for money it's being monetized somebody is monetized so it is for money all the videos on porn hub that is those are all being monetized porn hub makes billions of dollars um or at least millions of dollars many millions at the very least porn up makes

So prostitution is sex for money, pornography is sex for money, and the only difference with prostitutions we traditionally think of it and pornography is that with pornography, a third party is being invited in to witness the sex for money. And what, that makes it better? That means it should be, that's an argument for it being legal. understand. So most people are fine with the fact that it's not legal to bring a prostitute to the motel room and have sex with the prostitute and payer. Most people are, you know, that's not legal in most places and most people are okay with that. Yet if we bought a third party

in to watch, now it's okay? Or you just, you do the exact same situation, but put a camera there and film it so that people can watch on the computer and now we're fine with it. Now, now it should be totally illegal. It's just, it doesn't make any sense. The argument doesn't make any sense. So it seems to me that there should be, there should be some symmetry here. Either prostitution is legal everywhere, just as pornography is, or pornography is illegal for the same reason prostitution is. I don't see how you differentiate between the two. They're exactly the same thing. The only difference is that whatever the harms of prostitution are, those harms are exacerbated. by about a factor of like a million by pornography.

So the only difference between pornography and prostitution is a pornography is a lot worse. And finally, the fact that many men fear marriage because of ending up with someone like Mia Khalifa is definitely not an irrational fear. The problem is that they start believing that every woman is like that, which is as irrational as it gets. Yeah, I think that's kind of what it comes down to. And that's why I was trying to emphasize, you know, this is the little nuance here that is not that hard to detect. But we should recognize that the young men who are, you know, shying away from marriage, that for a lot of them, it's because they see women like this. And they see the Instagram video where she's laughing about divorcing all these men and encouraging women and saying, hey, if you're not feeling fulfilled every second of the day and your men,

marriage, then just leave and go find somebody else. And this is, this is the cultural, it's not just this porn star saying that. This is the cultural atmosphere. This is the message you get everywhere. And these men, they hear that. And so it makes them very nervous about getting married. And we should acknowledge that. We should acknowledge that, that their apprehensions are justified. But then what they should, but what they need to realize is that actually in almost every case, when it comes to these kinds of women, it's very easy to detect them early on. It should take basically one conversation. If you didn't know anything about Maya Khalifa at all,

and you just happen across her, you know, on the street, and you had a conversation with her, how long in that conversation do you think it would take you before you realize what kind of woman this is? Like, do you think there's any chance that you could have a conversation with Mike leave? Again, having no frame of reference at all. But is there any chance that you could have a conversation with her in any context? And you would walk away thinking, you know what?

That's a woman of high integrity. She's very intelligent. Got a lot of character. Great depth in the way this woman thinks and views the world. That's a great woman. Would anyone think that? Of course not. So in almost every case, you don't actually have to worry about women like this,

even though they exist, and there are men who exist like this on the other end of it, but you don't really have to worry much about it because if you just have your eyes open and your ears open, it's easy to detect them. And so therefore, they're easily avoidable. Let's get to the daily cancellation. You know, it used to be conventional wisdom in the field of economics that corporations should do everything they can to make a profit and maximize shareholder value. That was the whole point of a corporation. It was taught in every high school econ textbook,

just like the principle of supply and demand, there was this idea that if for some reason a corporation decided to spend a ton of money on social causes instead of growing the business, then they were doing something wrong. They were misusing shareholder funds. They were engaging in a form of social engineering, which is unethical, and maybe even illegal. Pretty much everyone agreed with that. In the last decade or so, though, this reasoning has fallen completely out of favor. major corporations now, they see social engineering as their primary objective, whatever the consequences might be. BlackRock and Vanguard are fixated on ESG scores, which means that making sure that companies are promoting values like sustainability and inclusivity and so on. They care about ESG more than profitability

in some cases. Now, you often hear this phenomenon being described as wokeness, but that doesn't really capture what's happening. Wokeness implies a kind of pie in the sky naivete. It suggests that corporate executives from the coastal states are being earnest when they, for example, schedule pride nights at NHL games or pay Dylan Mulvaney to promote Bud Light. What's actually happening is more sinister. Corporate wokeness is coordinated. It's disingenuous. Its aim is not inclusivity, whatever that means. Instead, the goal of these corporations is to ensure that conservatives never hold any power in this country ever again.

That's it. What's often called wokeness in reality is best described as a hatred of traditional values. It's an effort to stamp out conservatives and to destroy them. With very few exceptions, no matter what the company, no matter what the industry, this is the goal of corporate America. They don't see their role as selling products. They understand that their true purpose is to promulgate left-wing ideology to the point that it's dominant and totally unchallenged in the culture. Now, companies rarely admit this out loud for obvious reasons. Usually they bombard you with left-wing marketing, but they don't tell you what their actual objective is.

There is, though, at least one notable exception that we've just found. We've come across a company that internally at least is willing to say that, yes, they want to wage political warfare on conservatives and to bring back the glory days of the Obama administration. This is a company that effectively acknowledges that its woke marketing and indeed its entire product line is a kind of Trojan horse for something very different. And the company is called Harries and they make razors. You might know the Daily Wire has some history with them. Harry's surfaced a few years ago as a low-cost alternative to big brands like Gillette. But I want you to take a look at this recent advertisement from Harry's and get a sense of their marketing these days.

Watch. Okay, so that's a woman, first of all, if you didn't already get the drift. And as you can see from the text in the video, Harry's is promoting this idea that it's gender-affirming for women to buy razors and shave. And the point of buying Harris raisers, in this case, isn't really to fulfill any useful function. It is to make women feel like men. The ad is, among other things, an endorsement of self-mutilation. Harry's has selected an actor, apparently a woman who had her breasts cut off, and they're celebrating that decision.

Pause for a second to consider how remarkable this is. You might remember that it wasn't too long ago that the left claimed to abhor female general mutilation in places like Africa. And now here they are endorsing the practice of, you know, female self-mutilation, the same thing. sell cheap razors? The key question is why is Harry's doing this? Do they really think that this is going to help them sell more razors? Are they just hopelessly naive? We don't have to look far to find an answer to that question. Here's the CEO of Harry suggesting that something else might be going on. This is a clip that was just on earth by the popular Twitter account end-wokeness. I want you to watch this. You know, created a really sort of unbalanced dynamic and made the

co-parenting thing really hard to actually live in practice. And so that experience was one that led us to this conclusion that, hey, we need not just a general parental leave policy, but an equal parental leave policy that treats birthing and non-birthing parents equally. So we implemented that and give everybody four months regardless of whether you're the birthing parent or the non-birth parent. Thanks. And then last, we also, as a company, have always tried to sort of be socially minded and

not just be about bottom line profits. The CEO of Harry's is using terms like birthing parents to describe women and non-birthing parents to describe men. He sounds more like a Berkeley co-ed than the leader of a major company. If you ran a poll, you'd probably find that a very small percentage of the country talks like this, maybe something like 0.000-01%. It's like that guy and three other guys and they're the only people. So why is he doing it? If he's not trying to increase profits or grow his business, what is he doing exactly?

Those are good questions. So after seeing that clip, we decided to take a closer look, and now we have the clearest possible answer to that question. We've unearthed Harry's internal global strategy agenda from 2018. The document is called Painting the World Orange, positioning our way into a more progressive future. It was put together by an external agency that Harry selected, and here's a direct quote from that document.

As you hear this, keep in mind that, again, this is supposedly a company with the primary purpose of making razors, but this is the quote, quote, We recognized that rigidly binary gendered constructs were part of the toxic scaffolding we needed to slowly dismantle. The future's orange became our internal shorthand to refer to the thinking and orange, we hoped. We begin to refer to all the behaviors by which we would embody progressive values for men everywhere. We were excited. This was a brave, bold positioning that could, we hoped, shift culture significantly. The document goes on to mourn the fact that Barack Obama is no longer in office.

It then explains that if you voted for Trump, if you supported Brexit, if you recognize that boys are boys, then you're blatantly racist, divisive, and, quote, toxic. The strategy document states that Harry's, as a company, needs to fight, quote unquote. Harry staffed up accordingly. Per this strategy document, Harris then took a company-wide turn to become, quote, an army of energized and motivated social change agents for progressive masculinity. Now, what's amazing about all this is that it contradicts Harry's own studies on this. topic. Around the same time, when this strategy document was released, Harry's commissioned something called a masculinity report. And the report found that men who valued traditional gender roles were more likely to have a positive mindset than men who didn't. But Harris didn't change their approach in light of this research, their own research. Instead, they enacted a policy to cut off

business relationships with companies who don't align with their radical views on this topic or presumably any other. In other words, you must share Harry's progressive values or you lose any contract that you had with Harry's. Now, one of the companies that Harry's dropped, as you have probably heard, was the Daily Wire. Harry's was upset, allegedly, that Michael Noel said, boys are boys and girls are girls. Jeremy Boring launched Jeremy's Razors in response. But Harris didn't simply cut off companies like the Daily Wire. They also started putting a lot of money into groups that sexualized children at the same time. Since 2019, for example, Harris has partnered with the Trevor Project, which bills itself primarily as a suicide hotline.

Harry's has given seven figures and contributions to the Trevor Project, in fact. As we mentioned before on this show, the Trevor Project has lately been pushing the lie that castrating and surgically mutilating children will somehow reduce their mental distress when, in fact, the opposite is the case. The New York Post reports that the Trevor Project also runs a chat room for children in which adults discuss, quote, nullification surgery, which means removing all external genitalia. That's nullification.

People in chat room also detailed their masturbation addiction, their auto-gynophilic tendencies, their BDSM practices, all of which can be viewed by children. Harry's also donated 100% of the profits from its recent pride campaign to organizations such as the UK organization, Mermaids, which is unapologetically in favor of sexualizing and supposedly transitioning minors, quote-unquote transitioning. The Daily Telegraph found that mermaids offered, quote, advice to users who present themselves as young as 13, that controversial hormone-blocking drugs are safe and totally reversible,

which is not true. Additionally, Mermaids offers chest binders to children as young as 13 years old without any parental consent. A Mermaid's moderator also reportedly, quote, congratulated a teenage user for deciding that they were transgender by the age of 13 and decided they wanted drugs and all the surgeries at the age of 13. It's clear that regardless of how they build themselves, Harry's isn't really a razor company. It's a vehicle for left-wing ideologues who want to transform the country. and they're very open about that. And Harries is not alone. The only thing that separates Harry's from pretty much every other major corporation in the country

is that they put all this in writing. That's it. So-called woke corporations like Harry's, they're not misguided. They're not overly idealistic. They're not stupid. They know exactly what they're doing. They hate you and they want to destroy you. And it is nothing less than an act of self-flagellation to voluntarily give your money to business

like this. They are spitting in your face, and you are paying them for the service. And if that's how Harry's or any other left-wing company wants to operate, that's their prerogative. But we're still a country where the vast majority of people don't refer to mothers as birthing parents and don't think it's a good idea for women to have cosmetic double mastectomies and don't believe in sterilizing and castrated children, which means that we are a country where companies like Harry's should go bankrupt. It's up to us to make sure that happens. which is why we should all be saying that Harry's is today and forever canceled. And I'll do it for the show today.

Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Talk tomorrow. Godspeed.