New York Magazine sort of gives away its feeling on The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh and his film, “What Is a Woman?” by declaring it “dangerous” and anti-trans right in the tweet. We’re not yet sure what’s dangerous about asking what a woman is — we currently have a sitting Supreme Court justice who can’t define what a woman is because she’s not a biologist. But we’ve certainly heard plenty about women’s rights since the Dobbs ruling overturned Roe v. Wade. Did everyone get anti-trans overnight, or is there really a thing called a woman?
— Intelligencer (@intelligencer) July 7, 2022
Malcolm Harris writes in Intelligencer about the “just asking questions” anti-trans campaign.
By disguising a religious precept as a reasonable question, Walsh and his team have set out to win new friends and encourage existing allies at the same time. It’s an effective strategy, and the majority of us who understand the factual existence of trans people can’t afford to ignore them.
It’s clear from what we might charitably call his writings that Walsh is a Christian fundamentalist who is personally and professionally dedicated to making sure God’s law is law. And yet, in his biggest, most prominent piece of content yet, Walsh never talks about his god — a curious omission in a movie about reality and identity.
Is Walsh a coward? Has he renounced Jesus Christ for the filthy lucre of his Daily Wire boss, Ben Shapiro? That doesn’t seem to be the case.
So, wait: “Walsh never talks about god” but he disguises “a religious precept” as a reasonable question? And has Walsh renounced his Christianity to please his Jewish boss, Ben Shapiro? So did you want Walsh to bring up God or not? Which film are we talking about, the one on-screen or the imaginary one Harris is reviewing?
Well, some of us would just like a clear answer.
— Christina Struck (@ParisianDreamer) July 8, 2022
Can you answer the question?
— Robbie Leffel (@robbieleffel) July 9, 2022
All these articles are the same.
“My ideology is fragile and doesn’t hold up to scrutiny, therefore the scrutiny is the problem”.
Then they construct a straw man and argue with it…completely missing the point of the scrutiny in the first place.
— Jeremy (@carry_on_folks) July 8, 2022
Common sense is the greatest enemy of sophistry. I can see why you might not like it.
— Nicholas Silveus 🕊 (@NicholasSilveus) July 9, 2022
Dangerous? That's a strong endorsement, now I have to watch it. Should I wear a helmet?
— Troy Sa (@TroySa80) July 8, 2022
If someone locks down his account because people asked him to explain some of their perceived inconsistencies in his review rather than make any attempt to answer them, then maybe the review isn't that great
— ripx4nutmeg (@ripx4nutmeg) July 9, 2022
Sounds like he didn’t even watch it. 🤭
— Adolfo Pérez (@3lWasChIng0n) July 8, 2022
I think far too many people make the mistake of assuming that “God said so” is the only argument in favor of religious values. Especially religious people. That’s not an argument made in the documentary, as you cleverly pointed out before ignoring entirely.
— Captain Sirk (@CaptainSirk1) July 9, 2022
The author of the piece claims that there is abundant evidence that people can change gender.
Can anyone point me to this overwhelming evidence?!
— Tanhauser Gate (@TanhausersGate) July 9, 2022
“Despite mountains of evidence, the movie’s producers and onscreen guide, right-wing pundit Matt Walsh, do not believe that people can change their gender.” Umm.. people are not clown fish. Science
— nunyo (@Orwellfarm) July 8, 2022
Man I wonder why it’s working for them to ask questions
— ec47c (@ec147c) July 8, 2022
How is it anti-trans? It demonstrates that self-appointed "intellectuals" can't answer a basic question. And how is it "dangerous"? Should it be censored then? Should the government get involved?
— Mark Novak (@UnHerdNerd) July 8, 2022
"dangerous"…as opposed to giving chemical castration drugs to literal children in order to halt their bodies normal growing processes, which is totally safe and normal, I assume?
Ahhh, to be a leftist. Up is down, wrong is right, warnings are dangerous…what a world.
— [redacted] 🤫 (@akadakastraka) July 8, 2022
Intelligencer made nothing but assumptions in this piece. I don't agree with the right or left on all things. If you run on logic and observation you find that this documentary is not transphobic. To the contrary, it is a plea for the cumulative happiness of the next generation
— Michael Cosentino (@MichaelCosent19) July 9, 2022
Anti trans? More like exposes the fact that we live in a time where nobody can define what a woman is anymore and how dangerous trans ideology has become. But yes, anything that doesn't go with the narrative has to be deemed as "anti" 🤣
— formerlibconfsns (@formerlibconfs) July 8, 2022
What is anti-trans about it?
Why is everyone so opposed to defining what a woman is?
— 🎆🇺🇸Colorado Woman in Ohio🇺🇸🎆 (@ColoradoOhio) July 8, 2022
The idea that asking "what is a woman" is dangerous might tell you everything you need to know about the trans movement.
— TheAmishNerd (@TheAmishNerd) July 9, 2022
Remember how Democrats were furious with Republicans for asking Ketanji Brown Jackson a “gotcha” question like that?
Trans conservative Blaire White makes very simple but very important observation about trans women https://t.co/myVuGOurkV
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) July 8, 2022
To change your comments display name, click here.