Matt Walsh 'What is a Women?' trailer released

[MalagaNights]

Matt Walsh, the right wing Catholic who is against abortion and yoga (I'm just getting in all the reasons to not 'align' with him in advance, if that's your thing) has released the trailer for his documentary.

It looks hilarious and amazing;

twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1525477731181502464?t=zwaCB9yE6f6R48Q46arIeA&s=19

100%!

That this needs to be asserted, is so depressing! And such a threat to nuanced, intelligent debates.

About 10 years ago, a close friend worked in Parliament and she would always say the best, most effective policies and campaigns were drawn up and pursued by cross party groups fighting for the same cause.

What has happened?? Anyhoo... moving on...

I struggle to see how this person is helpful to women.

I'm sure there are religiously conservative women who would be more in agreement with Matt Walsh. He connects with their values and belief system.

No one is denying Walsh the chance to speak, that's ridiculous. Personally, I'm completely uninterested in what he has to say because A) I prefer to listen to women's voices and certainly don't think he has anything to bring to the debate that hasn't been said already numerous times and far better B) I completely disagree with him politically, a man who is anti-abortion is of no interest to me and I consider him to be harmful and dangerous to women and C) I don't particularly like him anyway on a personal level in the same way I think Titania McGrath is a bit rubbish, I expected the book to be funny and it was just dull. That doesn't stop him speaking, it means I don't care in the slightest what he has to spout.

Whoever this guy is, he’s not gender critical. I’m guessing he actually likes gender stereotypes ‘femininity’ for women and ‘masculinity’ for men only. No deviations from the model.
GC women would like everyone to be who they want to be and don’t subscribe to stereotypes.
I guess what all we’d have in common with him is thinking that ‘gender identity’ is bobbins (but a free choice if you’re believe in it) and doesn't trump biological sex in personal life or how law and society see that person. Just like religion it should not be foisted on anyone else who doesn’t share that religious belief.

I guess what all we’d have in common with him is thinking that ‘gender identity’ is bobbins (but a free choice if you’re believe in it) and doesn't trump biological sex in personal life or how law and society see that person. Just like religion it should not be foisted on anyone else who doesn’t share that religious belief.

Exactly. That's the only basic, secular principle in a Western democracy that has the potential to unite the most people from very different backgrounds and viewpoints.

I can't stand yoga. Does that mean there are two things Matt Walsh and I might agree about? Yikes, someone call an exorcist!

About 10 years ago, a close friend worked in Parliament and she would always say the best, most effective policies and campaigns were drawn up and pursued by cross party groups fighting for the same cause.

100% agree with this. When it comes to campaigning to safeguard women’s and girls’ rights, it is the only way we will get anywhere on this issue. That’s fine. We don’t have to align on everything.

People who would eg dismantle abortion rights (whatever their personal justification) are in my eyes a serious threat to women’s health, lives and our mental health and are actively threatening women’s rights and place in society relative to men’s. I have zero respect for that position however sincerely held.

But to get big changes and safeguards for women and girls made we will all need to work together on specific issues and that’s OK. As soon as those fellow campaigners on those specific issues start campaigning against abortion, I will disagree with those same individuals, and I will campaign against them on that issue which is also OK.

Political progress has always been made and sustained over time by forming strategic alliances on a focused limited cause. We can’t rely on any political party to do this for us. We are never going to all agree, so there is no point trying to proselytise or re-educate allies on a cause. To try that is not respectful of the individuals who are holding the views that we dislike (and likewise not respectful of us, as individuals holding our views which they dislike, if others try to change our views). We are all allowed boundaries and it’s healthy and essential to be aware of them.

He was excellent on Dr Phil!

I will watch this if I remember. Trailer looks interesting. Although my first thought is obviously " this is yet another man mansplaining what a woman is"

I'm not aligning with anyone . I view that as a lazy argument from people who have no other argument. I watch /listen/read a variety of resources many of which I disagree with. However if we all waited fir thr perfect source we'd never get anywhere.

Know your enemy and all that

Agreed Nonny. it gives me great hope for the future when very different people can agree on a limited thing, and work together on it.

I find a lot of currently- practiced ‘identity politics’ very disappointing because it makes people feel that it is good or inevitable to feel fundamentally atomised from each other, or to feel they only have a small group of people who have had the exact same experiences to call on. It makes people feel that their common causes can’t be fought for together with other groups or individuals, who agree with that cause but who have had different life experiences.

It feels so self defeating on the causes that the identity politics is (often very rightly) critiquing, because it makes real sustained change on those issues very unlikely. It uses up a lot of energy but leaves the real political power untroubled, and all of us still open to divide and rule. I’ve been politically homeless for so long I feel that’s probably the natural state now and feel annoyed that I can only vote within a party system.

It’s a question of picking the least objectionable party to vote for and then organising outside of that on the issues that I really care about. It isn’t the way I’d hoped it would be when I was younger or more naive, but here we are. Also doesn’t mean I don’t really value the work of women as members in political parties trying to improve their policies on women’s issues, I am very grateful to them. I think it’s an uphill struggle though and we all have to focus our energies where we can.

As I've said many a time, right wing women are women too so it should come as no surprise to find out that right wing women and men know this. Whether they have opinions on what rights those women have or don't have is pretty much redundant if nobody can define what one is.

Exactly. It's not all about us. This issue affects ALL women.

And there are certainly a lot.of men and women who aren't going to listen to feminists no matter how hard we try.

Whoever this guy is, he’s not gender critical.

I keep seeing the term Gender Critical defined as understanding that sex is real, important and immutable. It strikes me that this definition is incomplete because the belief (or knowledge) that that sex is real, important and immutable is likely to be shared by people across cultures and across political spectrums from the far right to the ultra left. Presumably to be Gender Critical a person must combine the knowledge that sex is real, important and immutable with a critique of gender. I doubt this applies to MW.

Just to clarify. When I said upthread:

”According to Matt Walsh the answer to ‘what is a woman?’ would be someone of the sex who doesn’t have the right to bodily autonomy. I’m sure there will be good content within this programme but I just know his arrogant, pompous tone will annoy the shit out of me.”

I did not at any point say I would therefore refuse to listen to Matt Walsh or watch his programme because my views don’t 100% chime with his total world view. I was merely voicing my view that I find it slightly discomfiting to be bedfellows with someone who denigrates certain beliefs I hold dear ie. that women should have the ultimate say in what happens with their own pregnancies and that Feminism is still (unfortunately) needed.

Let me be clear, just because Matt Walsh said the following on his Twitter:

”Feminism is rotten at the core. Each "wave" led inexorably to the next. There is no good feminism. It's one of the worst things to ever happen to western civilization”

it does not toggle a switch in my brain that makes me think ‘I can never, ever publicly agree with any other view held by this man’. It just annoys me that he holds these other views and I know it will be used as fodder by those who DO have this toggle switch in their brains that equates agreeing with this person on one issue, with agreeing and endorsing all his other views.

I just felt like stating this and I think it doesn’t take anything away from this discussion or mean we have to go ‘round and round in circles’. It’s just the nature of the political landscape at the moment. I look forward to watching the programme but predict I might find myself wincing occasionally.

The right wing argument is pretty absurd anyway. Given countries like Iran where they really do trans away the gay. Its seemingly OK to hold Iran up as something to aspire to with trans rights .pink news write a pretty gushing report about their trans provisions.

In the film he includes Jordan Peterson saying 'There are masculine girls . There are feminine boys. What are we going to do about that? Carve them up?'

I was merely voicing my view that I find it slightly discomfiting to be bedfellows with someone

I don’t view having the same beliefs as someone as being their “bedfellow”.

On the clip Matt Walsh makes it clear he is against the surgical and hormonal manipulation of children who identify as trans.

I feel the same way, and it’s very important that more parents are aware of where the ideology leads. Marci Bowers, the transwoman who has performed surgery on these young people, is also expressing her concerns. This is huge.

Marci Bowers and Matt Walsh likely disagree on many things, but it doesn’t mean they are bedfellows on this. In fact, if they were literally bedfellows I’m sure they’d be mutually horrified.

I’ve said this sooo many times every time this topic comes up, both generally and specifically about Walsh.

I know I am not bedfellows with Walsh. I know my own mind, I know my own beliefs, I know that I disagree with him on many other things. I also know that if I agree with him on this particular thing, it will in no way enhance his objectives with his other beliefs, because the people who share those other beliefs will do that.

But this is the most important thing:

I don’t CARE if people think I’m bedfellows with him. I don’t care if people here do. I don’t care if our lovely Monitors do and screenshot something out of context to “prove” something on a Twitter post. I don’t care if people in real life think it either.

Why, every time someone like Walsh comes along, do people angst like pathetic teenagers that it means something deep and significant if they dare to let themselves agree? Who gives a fuck, seriously? SO WHAT if you agree? What’s going to happen? You’re not going to start sending bomb threats to abortion clinics FFS.

Stop being so spineless. Have the strength to admit that you agree with something and the conviction in the rest of your beliefs to know doing so won’t change the rest of your fundamentals.

Everyone knows sex is real.

Especially 'trans' people who don't want to be the sex they are.

Because sex is real.

Giving up actual reality into the hands of the 'tyans inclusion' types at Stonewall is where everyone decided to abandon safeguarding.

We all know this. Matt Walsh included. He is just pointing out what women especially lesbians have been pointing out for years, because as a penis haver he has the ability to do so without bein canceled. Again, proving that everyone knows what sex is.

Its all one way too.

I mean there are plenty of people getting plenty of air time and " gigs" who have said and done many a controversial thing with whom the police or politicians remain perfectly happy to pose for photos with or retweet etc.

Yet women who agree with one thing someone says, we are all right wing bigots in bed with anti abortion activists etc

Long time lurker here!
The problem for me is the misogyny that he pushes elsewhere is the reason why I was 'gender dysphoric' as a child/teenager. I wanted to identify out of that misogyny (I am now happy with my sex and very thankful I'm not at teenager these days).

I see his views on male/female roles etc. as being a huge reason why I hated being female and I think he is part of the problem why so many female teenagers want to be male so it seems galling he then wants to tackle 'gender identity'.

But, on the face of it, this looks good. I agree with PP that any sunlight is good sunlight, I just wish something like this could be made by someone who aligns more with GC feminism and therefore their opinion can't be swept away by the opposition so easily with 'but... abortion' etc.

I get really dispirited by all these recordings of women on women's marches, pro-choice marches etc, being asked what a woman is and looking blank, giggling nervously, or aggressively refusing to answer the question. The latter are the worse. They know they can't answer the question. They are pretty much displaying the equivalent of men whose wives suspect them of cheating and who angrily shout their wife down as crazy, rather than answering the question that they know will expose them.

These 'women's rights' marches not answering what a woman is - it just exposes the utter conceptual vacuity at the heart of their thinking. If you want to defend women, at the base you have to understand what a woman is. It's such a failure of critical thinking, of education - the utter shallowness of thinking that these people display.

Did anyone one see the pro-choice marches saying men do not get a say on abortion yet not answering what a woman is? These people know damn well abortion is about women' sexed bodies yet still have the disingenuity to deny this to fit their doctrine. Its just so sad to see.

I think that’s a fair analogy. There are a lot of good points being raised in the trailer and though I agree with his standpoint on this issue, I’m cautious about aligning myself with this side of the coin too closely for obvious reasons. Though the liberal left is no better on the topic.

Matt Walsh is definitely not gender critical.

He recognises the reality of biological sex.

He also believes gender roles are linked to sex, and that women naturally have a role as mothers and homemakers and men as providers and protectors.

He thinks feminism has pushed women away from their natural roles, into male roles and it's undermining families and children and making women miserable.

Probably not many people here would agree with much of that.

I think there are some interesting points he makes, although he's pretty extreme especially to a British non religious audience, and don't agree with the gender critical notion on here that gender is entirely a social construct and needs to be abolished.

But what I, Matt Walsh & GC feminists all agree on is a women is an adult human female, men cannot become women & men should not be in women's spaces.

This is a clear case of that purity spiral, isn't it?

But, as in real life, I am friends with many people who hold beliefs I find improbable, impossible and even downright bizarre. Doesn't mean we don't have shared interests and beliefs. Nor does it involve pretending we don't disagree. We act like adults...