The Matt Walsh Show - Matt Walsh Responds To His TikTok Critics - Part One

Episode Date: July 5, 2023

Matt Walsh responds to some of his critics on TikTok.   - - - Today’s Sponsors:   ExpressVPN - Go to https://expressvpn.com/walshYT and find out how you can get 3 months of ExpressVPN free! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the interest of efficiency, we'll be responding rapid fire style to TikTok videos attacking me just over the past two weeks or so. I say this will be rapid fire, but take that with a great assault. I'm not Ben Shapiro, so rapid fire is relative. Eventually, we actually hit chipmunk speed and then we go silent and we go back in time. Anyway, let's go through these. Matt Walsh is a fascist who is promoting violence against trans people. His language is inflammatory and factually incorrect. That is such bullshit. The idea that being trans is the result of some kind of social contagion has been disproven so many times.

The theory of rapid-onset gender dysphoria comes from a survey of 256 parents of trans children and not from the trans children themselves. The article has been removed and criticized for bad methodology. After being peer-reviewed, it was found that rapid-onset gender sporea isn't even a formal medical diagnosis. It was found that between 2017 and 2019, the rates of teenagers identifying as trans didn't even increase. Theory of rapid onset gender dysphoria argues that trans children identify as trans because they're trying to escape social stigma or to become more popular with their peer group. This makes no sense because rates of bullying and suicidality amongst trans youth is consistently higher when compared to their cis peers. The idea that the existence of trans influences like Dylan Mulvaney are somehow transing your kids is completely unfounded.

None of Dylan's content than I have ever seen argues that you should be trans or is trying to promote transness onto children at all. Well, where to begin? You say that the survey about, Rapid onset gender dysphoria was invalid because they interviewed parents rather than the children themselves. Well, yes, if a child is sucked into a social contagion, he's not going to report that he's been sucked into a social contagion. Are you actually trying to prove that children aren't being indoctrinated by arguing that the indoctrinated children say they haven't been indoctrinated? Yes, I mean, if you go to your local Scientology Center and you ask anyone there whether they've been brainwashed, they're all going to say no. You're stepping over a line now.

You're stepping overline. You know you are. If you don't like the term rapid-onset gender dysphoria, you can call it whatever you want. If you prefer something less clinical-sounding, then just call it, wow, look at all of these kids calling themselves trans all of a sudden syndrome. The point is that, according to data compiled by the Williams Institute, only half a percent of all adults in this country identifies trans, while the number for kids between the ages of 13 and 17 is 1.4%. That's nearly three times higher. And the numbers are even more striking when you break them down by generation. There was a Gallup poll that found that there are twice as many trans identifiers in Gen Z as as there are among millennials. And there are many more among millennials than among baby boomers. For baby boomers, it's 0.2% identify as trans.

For Gen Z, it's nearly 2%. 0.2% versus 2%. That is a 10x increase. You think this happened by accident? Or perhaps you would say that there have always been this many trans people in the world, but they weren't free to live their truth or whatever. Well, the trouble with that theory is that there's absolutely not even one single shred of evidence to support the dramatic claim that there have always been millions upon millions of closeted trans people through history. Now, you can either believe what the data tells you, what all of it tells you, all of it, or you can invent a story entirely unsupported, completely built on your imagination, about millions and millions and millions of theoretical trans people in older generations who do.

don't show up in the data. This is what you're reduced to. You ever read the fine print that appears when you start browsing an incognito mode? It says that your activity might still be visible to your employer, your school, your internet service provider. So to actually stop people from monitoring your online activity, you need to do what I do and use ExpressVPN. Think about all the times you use Wi-Fi at a coffee shop, hotel, or even a friend's house. Without ExpressVPN, every site you visit can be logged by the admin of that network. That's still true even when you're in incognito mode. ExpressVPN is an app that encrypts all of your network data and reroutes it through a network of secure servers so that your private online activity stays private.

ExpressVPN is super easy to use. The app has one button. You tap it to connect and your browsing activity is secure. It's as simple as that. Stop letting strangers invade your online privacy. Protect yourself at expressvpn.com slash Walsh.YT. Use my link at expressvpn.com slash Walsh YT to get three extra months free. That's EXB, RESSSVPN.com slash Walsh YT. You cannot be something and also the negation of that thing at the same time. Matt Walsh is just going to be upset with people using microlabels. What the f***ing is this? See, he wants to have it both ways where he hates the oversaturation of language of microlabels,

yet when something is not 100% consistent and precise enough, he gets mad at that too. Art sniffing mumbo-jumbo. Now he's taking issue with microlabeling. Despite earlier complaining that macro-labeling is not specific enough. you can't have it both ways. We have to use umbrella terms, which are not going to be exactly precise. Yet as long as we understand

that if somebody says bisexual and asexual, they're probably referring to romantic attraction to both genders. Well, thank you for reminding me about my fart-sniffing mumbo-jumbo-jumbo line. I'm quite proud of that. Now, my issue is not with the act of labeling. There is some amount of labeling

that's necessary and normal. Human beings label things so that they can communicate coherently with each other about those things. But coherence is the point here. When the labels create incoherence, then they defeat the purpose of the entire exercise. That sign can't stop me because I can read. If the label doesn't clarify but rather creates more confusion, then it's not even a label.

It's more of an anti-label. It's an attempt to make it harder for people to understand what something is, not easier. Calling yourself a bisexual, asexual is exactly like calling yourself a meat-eating vegan. It tastes just like KFC. I know, right? Now, you say that perhaps asexuals experience a little sexual attraction to both sexes, and that somehow justifies calling a bisexual-Asexual. But that's like saying that a meat-eating vegan is a vegan who eats only a little bit of meat.

It's just a hamburger. Not all the time. You're disgusting. Well, by definition, if you eat a little bit of meat, then you eat meat, which means you aren't a vegan. You may be a less enthusiastic meat eater or a reluctant meat eater or an occasional meat eater. or maybe there's some other adjective you can affix there, but a vegan is someone who doesn't eat meat, period. An asexual experiences no sexual attraction.

If you experience sexual attraction, you're not asexual. That's just like your opinion, man. See, this is the other problem with your compulsive and incoherent labeling. You don't allow for variations within the labels. You pretend that you do. You pretend that you're all about variation. You embrace all kinds of variety you claim. But you don't, because the moment you notice a variation within a category, you create a whole new category for that variation.

And you do this kind of thing everywhere in every context. The most obvious example, of course, is how you've eliminated masculine women from existence, Tom boys we used to call them. You've erased that variation by labeling them trans men. This is the worst part about the way that you label. It's not just that it's incoherent, it's also that it's so damned a lot. limiting. Oh, did you hit that woman?

Right, let me show you, baby. That ain't no woman. It's a man, man.