What do you think?
Rate this book
What Is a Woman? : One Man's Journey to Answer the Question of a Generation
Is this even a question?
What is a woman? For months, Matt Walsh devoted nearly every waking hour to answering this simple question. Honestly, it’s a question he never thought he’d have to ask.
But all of a sudden, way too many people don’t seem to know the answer. Is a woman a woman just by feeling or acting a particular way? Aren’t gender roles just a "social construct"? Can a woman be “trapped in a man’s body”? Does being a woman mean anything at all?
We used to think that being a woman had something to do with biology, but the nation’s top experts keep assuring us that is definitely not the case. So Matt decided to do what no man (whatever that means) had done before. He sat down with the experts and asked them directly.
In What Is a Woman?, our hero:
• Discovers that no one—not doctors, therapists, psychiatrists, politicians, transgender people, nor San Franciscans—can actually define the word “woman”
• Hilariously convinces a non-binary therapist that Matt is questioning his own gender identity
• Uncovers the shocking and horrifying roots of gender theory
• Learns exactly how activists and ideologues are trying to take over the minds of our kids
• Reveals a strategy to defeat the collective insanity that has taken over our society
Join Matt on his often comical yet deeply disturbing journey as he answers the question generations before us never knew they needed to ask: What is a woman?
What is a woman? For months, Matt Walsh devoted nearly every waking hour to answering this simple question. Honestly, it’s a question he never thought he’d have to ask.
But all of a sudden, way too many people don’t seem to know the answer. Is a woman a woman just by feeling or acting a particular way? Aren’t gender roles just a "social construct"? Can a woman be “trapped in a man’s body”? Does being a woman mean anything at all?
We used to think that being a woman had something to do with biology, but the nation’s top experts keep assuring us that is definitely not the case. So Matt decided to do what no man (whatever that means) had done before. He sat down with the experts and asked them directly.
In What Is a Woman?, our hero:
• Discovers that no one—not doctors, therapists, psychiatrists, politicians, transgender people, nor San Franciscans—can actually define the word “woman”
• Hilariously convinces a non-binary therapist that Matt is questioning his own gender identity
• Uncovers the shocking and horrifying roots of gender theory
• Learns exactly how activists and ideologues are trying to take over the minds of our kids
• Reveals a strategy to defeat the collective insanity that has taken over our society
Join Matt on his often comical yet deeply disturbing journey as he answers the question generations before us never knew they needed to ask: What is a woman?
251 pages, Kindle Edition
First published June 7, 2022
About the author
Matt Walsh
4 books480 followersMatt Walsh is a popular writer, speaker, and one of the Right's most influential voices. He is the host of The Daily Wire's Matt Walsh Show, where he boldly tackles the tough subjects and speaks out on faith and culture in a way that connects with his generation and beyond. He lives in Nashville, Tennessee with his wife and young children.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 296 reviews
June 9, 2022
Edit: I still think that this is a horribly researched book but my views on the matter have changed slightly.
I am still a huge ally to the transgender community, as every person needs to be treated with love and respect, and an individual within the trans community can often be attacked, even before that individual says anything.
But I do agree with the people in the comments who think that children should NOT have irreversible medical procedures done to them. Because yes, that is happening.
I recommend watching the story of Chloe Cole.
But please remember, you can be an advocate for both minors (ensuring they are protected from irreversible surgeries) AND transgender people (ensuring they are not subject to mock or hate).
After reading this book, I realized that both Walsh’s questions and the implications of this book stretch far beyond gender and gender theory. What stands out to me the most is in regards to education and human decency.
And yet, I don’t want to get into Walsh’s attack on education/universities, because that would make this review way too long. And if I even get started on his misreading of Judith Butler’s book Gender Trouble, this review would turn into a short book.
I will, however, touch on human decency.
The reason why this book is so frightening is because of what we know from history. While I believe it is helpful to compare historical events with present-day events, or even historical figures with present-day figures, I don’t believe that is it helpful to insist on the equivalence of two events or historical figures, because that insistence on equivalence would assume that the two events have the same scope and force. Or that two people have the same thoughts, and are therefore void of complexity/individuality.
It is clear that Matt Walsh cares about children. And he cares about the well being of adults too. That’s why it’s so easy for him to slip in commentary about people he disagrees with that is unbelievably degrading, generalizing, and dehumanizing. Throughout the book, his tactic to persuade the masses is to think that leftists and transgender/gender-nonconforming people are sick. He writes on page 85, “Demonstrating that the sick people pushing this program truly believe that no age is too early to sexualize children, the gender unicorn is designed for kids in kindergarten and even preschool.”
There have been countless programs, organizations, acts, and policies that conservatives and religious fundamentalists have carried out that are profoundly harmful to children. But I don’t think it’s fair for me to say that all conservatives and religious fundamentalists are harmful to children. However, in the way that Walsh explains what he calls “transgenderism,” he shows time and time again that he believes that transgender people, especially transgender women, are “confused,” “confuse children,” and “sexualize children.” First of all Matt Walsh, who are you to say that a transgender person is confused? Are you in their head? Do you know their life? How infuriating!
Just this morning I was writing to one of my friends on goodreads about how much I despise the lesbian movie Loving Anabelle. It is about an underage student in a romantic relationship with her teacher. Do I support that? Absolutely not. But am I a lesbian? Absolutely yes. The two can coexist. I don’t have to agree with every lesbian, I don’t have to agree with every lesbian representation in film, but I’m still a lesbian!
The same applies to the programs/people mentioned in this book. Am I inspired by the trans-affirming pediatrician Dr. Michelle Forcier? No, I’m not. For how condescending she was towards Walsh, I don’t believe she was ready to have a conversation with him. Her trans-affirming practices seemed performative in the interview/book, partly because she was not able to confidently challenge Walsh. He gave some Santa Claus analogy, for example, to argue that children are too naive to know what gender they are. She didn’t say anything. She shut the conversation down. I don't blame her, but I wanted her to challenge him. I wish that she said that trans-affirming care doesn’t deny that children are naive. A child’s understanding of their gender develops as they develop. As a child’s development is a complex configuration of nature and nurture, so too, I believe, is their gender. Edgardo J. Menville, MD, writes that gender “is informed by biology, culture, society, and the times in which we live. But it’s not clear in what proportions these elements contribute, or whether all these ingredients are really necessary.” So if gender isn’t certain and is developmental, should we deny adolescents gender-affirming care? No, I believe we shouldn’t.
Because denying adolescents care is avoiding gender complexity. Denying them care is arguing that gender is certain and binary. But how could it be, with all these diverse people/problems/life on this planet? Also, I can’t get into all of Walsh's commentary on the medical aspect of transitioning, because I’m not a doctor, and neither is Matt Walsh!
But what I do know is that most of it is half-truths and misinformation. First of all, everything has side effects. Many oppose birth control (and used to suggest taking pill pauses), but I need it, otherwise I'd bleed for at least 5 months straight! Seriously, I had to go to the emergency room for such abnormal bleeding and have had two hysteroscopies. And second of all, puberty blockers are explained erroneously. Contrary to what Walsh says, puberty still happens. No one is "stuck" pre-pubescent. And the puberty blockers are, in most cases, reversible.
He claims that Lupron causes osteoporosis. There is evidence that lupron reduces bone-marrow density, but through the minimal research I have done on this, it seems that doctors have plans for this—maybe they give the drug in small doses, maybe they assess if this drug is right for the patient. I also know that this is just one drug. I don’t know what exactly doctors do. But I do, (for the most part) trust doctors to listen to their patients, and, when the time is right, the patient may begin transitioning. The patient is not going to, in most cases, transition at a young age. And they certaintly won’t transition at a rapid pace.
Finally, although this book is frightening because so many take him seriously, he shouldn't be taken seriously. His book reads more like an opinion piece than a well-researched book. If you take even a glance at his references, you will see that most of them are random articles, such as “Netflix proud as Ellen Page announces she is transgender and changes name to Elliot,” from MARCA, not academic sources or peer-reviewed articles. It’s not surprising, given how much Walsh is against modern academia, but still. His articles of choice speak volumes about how seriously we can actually take his writing.
LET LGBTQ PEOPLE EXIST! THAT’S ALL I WANT. It won’t solve anything by insinuating that the LGBTQ community are a “mafia.”
I am still a huge ally to the transgender community, as every person needs to be treated with love and respect, and an individual within the trans community can often be attacked, even before that individual says anything.
But I do agree with the people in the comments who think that children should NOT have irreversible medical procedures done to them. Because yes, that is happening.
I recommend watching the story of Chloe Cole.
But please remember, you can be an advocate for both minors (ensuring they are protected from irreversible surgeries) AND transgender people (ensuring they are not subject to mock or hate).
After reading this book, I realized that both Walsh’s questions and the implications of this book stretch far beyond gender and gender theory. What stands out to me the most is in regards to education and human decency.
And yet, I don’t want to get into Walsh’s attack on education/universities, because that would make this review way too long. And if I even get started on his misreading of Judith Butler’s book Gender Trouble, this review would turn into a short book.
I will, however, touch on human decency.
The reason why this book is so frightening is because of what we know from history. While I believe it is helpful to compare historical events with present-day events, or even historical figures with present-day figures, I don’t believe that is it helpful to insist on the equivalence of two events or historical figures, because that insistence on equivalence would assume that the two events have the same scope and force. Or that two people have the same thoughts, and are therefore void of complexity/individuality.
It is clear that Matt Walsh cares about children. And he cares about the well being of adults too. That’s why it’s so easy for him to slip in commentary about people he disagrees with that is unbelievably degrading, generalizing, and dehumanizing. Throughout the book, his tactic to persuade the masses is to think that leftists and transgender/gender-nonconforming people are sick. He writes on page 85, “Demonstrating that the sick people pushing this program truly believe that no age is too early to sexualize children, the gender unicorn is designed for kids in kindergarten and even preschool.”
There have been countless programs, organizations, acts, and policies that conservatives and religious fundamentalists have carried out that are profoundly harmful to children. But I don’t think it’s fair for me to say that all conservatives and religious fundamentalists are harmful to children. However, in the way that Walsh explains what he calls “transgenderism,” he shows time and time again that he believes that transgender people, especially transgender women, are “confused,” “confuse children,” and “sexualize children.” First of all Matt Walsh, who are you to say that a transgender person is confused? Are you in their head? Do you know their life? How infuriating!
Just this morning I was writing to one of my friends on goodreads about how much I despise the lesbian movie Loving Anabelle. It is about an underage student in a romantic relationship with her teacher. Do I support that? Absolutely not. But am I a lesbian? Absolutely yes. The two can coexist. I don’t have to agree with every lesbian, I don’t have to agree with every lesbian representation in film, but I’m still a lesbian!
The same applies to the programs/people mentioned in this book. Am I inspired by the trans-affirming pediatrician Dr. Michelle Forcier? No, I’m not. For how condescending she was towards Walsh, I don’t believe she was ready to have a conversation with him. Her trans-affirming practices seemed performative in the interview/book, partly because she was not able to confidently challenge Walsh. He gave some Santa Claus analogy, for example, to argue that children are too naive to know what gender they are. She didn’t say anything. She shut the conversation down. I don't blame her, but I wanted her to challenge him. I wish that she said that trans-affirming care doesn’t deny that children are naive. A child’s understanding of their gender develops as they develop. As a child’s development is a complex configuration of nature and nurture, so too, I believe, is their gender. Edgardo J. Menville, MD, writes that gender “is informed by biology, culture, society, and the times in which we live. But it’s not clear in what proportions these elements contribute, or whether all these ingredients are really necessary.” So if gender isn’t certain and is developmental, should we deny adolescents gender-affirming care? No, I believe we shouldn’t.
Because denying adolescents care is avoiding gender complexity. Denying them care is arguing that gender is certain and binary. But how could it be, with all these diverse people/problems/life on this planet? Also, I can’t get into all of Walsh's commentary on the medical aspect of transitioning, because I’m not a doctor, and neither is Matt Walsh!
But what I do know is that most of it is half-truths and misinformation. First of all, everything has side effects. Many oppose birth control (and used to suggest taking pill pauses), but I need it, otherwise I'd bleed for at least 5 months straight! Seriously, I had to go to the emergency room for such abnormal bleeding and have had two hysteroscopies. And second of all, puberty blockers are explained erroneously. Contrary to what Walsh says, puberty still happens. No one is "stuck" pre-pubescent. And the puberty blockers are, in most cases, reversible.
He claims that Lupron causes osteoporosis. There is evidence that lupron reduces bone-marrow density, but through the minimal research I have done on this, it seems that doctors have plans for this—maybe they give the drug in small doses, maybe they assess if this drug is right for the patient. I also know that this is just one drug. I don’t know what exactly doctors do. But I do, (for the most part) trust doctors to listen to their patients, and, when the time is right, the patient may begin transitioning. The patient is not going to, in most cases, transition at a young age. And they certaintly won’t transition at a rapid pace.
Finally, although this book is frightening because so many take him seriously, he shouldn't be taken seriously. His book reads more like an opinion piece than a well-researched book. If you take even a glance at his references, you will see that most of them are random articles, such as “Netflix proud as Ellen Page announces she is transgender and changes name to Elliot,” from MARCA, not academic sources or peer-reviewed articles. It’s not surprising, given how much Walsh is against modern academia, but still. His articles of choice speak volumes about how seriously we can actually take his writing.
LET LGBTQ PEOPLE EXIST! THAT’S ALL I WANT. It won’t solve anything by insinuating that the LGBTQ community are a “mafia.”
June 6, 2022
The hero we all need. Thankful to people like Matt Walsh that will sacrifice his safety to ask these hard hitting questions...oh, wait, he's just asking what a woman is? And that's a bad thing nowadays apparently. The left really shines a spotlight on their stupidity and I am HERE for it. Thanks for being the hero we all need in ridiculous times like this.
June 7, 2022
Great read and an even better movie!
WAKE UP AMERICA!
They have come to destroy your family and children
WAKE UP AMERICA!
They have come to destroy your family and children
June 6, 2022
please shut up
June 10, 2022
The ultimate in mansplaining. By a right wing creep.
June 8, 2022
Here to offset the one stars by people who only hate Walsh and won't read the book.
I personally love Matt Walsh so I doubt my stars rating will go down when I read it. You know you're doing something right when you have such outspoken haters. I'm not sorry you're offended.
I personally love Matt Walsh so I doubt my stars rating will go down when I read it. You know you're doing something right when you have such outspoken haters. I'm not sorry you're offended.
June 7, 2022
Absolutely spot on. Excellent book.
June 14, 2022
Summary
Much of this book has some important points necessary for debate around transgenderism. But it is let down by an author lacking compassion who is trying to sustain biases within a readership he knows has already made up their minds.
Key Points
Matt’s key points are:
1. Many advocates of transgenderism hold a grasp over their views akin to religious belief. Conversation, where it can occur, is more dogmatic than academic; it is usually countered with ad hominem accusations of being phobic if the person questioning ideas does not conform to those of the person being questioned.
2. Silence on the consequences of life-changing medical/surgical procedures is a product of a practitioner's legal immunity based on having no duty of care to those undertaking ‘experimental’ procedures.
3. Building on point 2, ‘big pharma’ is agreeable with plans to persuade people to commit to procedures that will demand life-long subscription to drugs.
My criticism
Points 2 and 3 may have some interesting ideas, with elements of truth, but they are too sweeping in their delivery and borderline conspiratorial to be convincing.
Point 1, however, is something I hold to be true. I do believe that there is a deeply Marxist-based drive to reshape basic fundamentals of society to fit the contemporary beliefs of a few. Today, this Marxism takes the image of gender, where in the past it was once class.
The problem is that Matt does not realise the irony that he presents by critiquing this point whilst mentioning his own religion and his belief in the social security of church.
Indeed, I do not apologise for believing that religious adherence is a deeply problematic belief system, and totally incompatible with personal claims of being a rational thinker. Therefore, I cannot accept a claim from someone who says one side of a debate has no basis because their view on the world is bizarre, when the person making that claim equally has a view on the world shaped by an alternative dogma.
Personal Views
My personal views on such a complicated debate cannot be detailed in this short review. However, I will say that I agree with Matt’s suggestion that those who support sex-change procedures, but deny the compatibility of transablist logic, already harm their own position.
However, if someone wants to be called ‘she’, but appears to you like a ‘he’, why not do the small thing in your power to bring another person comfort and call them by their desired pronoun? a pronoun in itself is socially constructed anyway, as is any use of language.
My view is that any person who feels they have been societally pressured to conform to a male or female understanding of the world has a personal view deserving of respect. Modernity has enabled these people to fit in through expression of identity which they previously felt was repressed.
If that person then wanted to have a conversation (though given the personal nature of such things they are under no obligation to do so), then I would be happy to discuss my views on gender and sex. Put simply, these are that I believe one can live their life as they want to appear, and deserve the right to do so without harassment. That is thanks to gender’s flexible nature. Sex, however, is predicated on the physical reality of biology, whether around chromosomes or sexual organs. Intersex, of course, is another thing all together (but so unique relative to overall trans approaches to gender that, I feel, it shouldn’t influence to debate at large).
My hope is that we will get to a point in society where one’s gender identity does not matter, regardless of a person’s biological foundations. My point on highlighting the difference between sex and gender therefore is that dismissing differing factors between science and social construction is flawed and only leads to dogmatic and ideologically driven warring factions, not a path to social consensus.
I do not believe this to be a transphobic view. If I am to be labelled so, despite everything I have written so far, I would ask those who criticise suggestions of a difference between gender and sex as transphobia to read point 1 at the top.
To be clear, I support anyone’s right to choose who they want to identify as; it is the gift of our modernity. Indeed, I believe that we now have the science to overcome the social pressures previously fused unquestionably with biology. However, I do not believe that the ability to choose must result in the denial of fundamental biological realities.
Still, we (or, moreover, those who claim to live in a civilised and kind society) have a duty to ensure that our own values do not subjugate others’ to the point of harm. This goes both ways. Matt proves his inability to play his part in this book. He is certainly not trying to build any bridges.
Rating
This is why I have given the book 2 stars. It lacks balance. It selectively presents arguments and is clearly written as a tool to worsen divides in society by bolstering the one-sided views of his intended readership. Less important, but still influential in my scoring, is Matt’s lack of empathy. He is not a kind person. He makes this clear at the start by saying he will refer to people as he wants to, not as they have asked. That is his right, but I belief he is a worse person for it.
Conclusion
Matt is a person lacking compassion but looking into an important and deeply sensitive area of modern society. It means this book exists to foster anti-transgender views amongst a readership that likely already holds them.
Matt does very little to offer why this is a debate at all, because it certainly has another side.
Much of this book has some important points necessary for debate around transgenderism. But it is let down by an author lacking compassion who is trying to sustain biases within a readership he knows has already made up their minds.
Key Points
Matt’s key points are:
1. Many advocates of transgenderism hold a grasp over their views akin to religious belief. Conversation, where it can occur, is more dogmatic than academic; it is usually countered with ad hominem accusations of being phobic if the person questioning ideas does not conform to those of the person being questioned.
2. Silence on the consequences of life-changing medical/surgical procedures is a product of a practitioner's legal immunity based on having no duty of care to those undertaking ‘experimental’ procedures.
3. Building on point 2, ‘big pharma’ is agreeable with plans to persuade people to commit to procedures that will demand life-long subscription to drugs.
My criticism
Points 2 and 3 may have some interesting ideas, with elements of truth, but they are too sweeping in their delivery and borderline conspiratorial to be convincing.
Point 1, however, is something I hold to be true. I do believe that there is a deeply Marxist-based drive to reshape basic fundamentals of society to fit the contemporary beliefs of a few. Today, this Marxism takes the image of gender, where in the past it was once class.
The problem is that Matt does not realise the irony that he presents by critiquing this point whilst mentioning his own religion and his belief in the social security of church.
Indeed, I do not apologise for believing that religious adherence is a deeply problematic belief system, and totally incompatible with personal claims of being a rational thinker. Therefore, I cannot accept a claim from someone who says one side of a debate has no basis because their view on the world is bizarre, when the person making that claim equally has a view on the world shaped by an alternative dogma.
Personal Views
My personal views on such a complicated debate cannot be detailed in this short review. However, I will say that I agree with Matt’s suggestion that those who support sex-change procedures, but deny the compatibility of transablist logic, already harm their own position.
However, if someone wants to be called ‘she’, but appears to you like a ‘he’, why not do the small thing in your power to bring another person comfort and call them by their desired pronoun? a pronoun in itself is socially constructed anyway, as is any use of language.
My view is that any person who feels they have been societally pressured to conform to a male or female understanding of the world has a personal view deserving of respect. Modernity has enabled these people to fit in through expression of identity which they previously felt was repressed.
If that person then wanted to have a conversation (though given the personal nature of such things they are under no obligation to do so), then I would be happy to discuss my views on gender and sex. Put simply, these are that I believe one can live their life as they want to appear, and deserve the right to do so without harassment. That is thanks to gender’s flexible nature. Sex, however, is predicated on the physical reality of biology, whether around chromosomes or sexual organs. Intersex, of course, is another thing all together (but so unique relative to overall trans approaches to gender that, I feel, it shouldn’t influence to debate at large).
My hope is that we will get to a point in society where one’s gender identity does not matter, regardless of a person’s biological foundations. My point on highlighting the difference between sex and gender therefore is that dismissing differing factors between science and social construction is flawed and only leads to dogmatic and ideologically driven warring factions, not a path to social consensus.
I do not believe this to be a transphobic view. If I am to be labelled so, despite everything I have written so far, I would ask those who criticise suggestions of a difference between gender and sex as transphobia to read point 1 at the top.
To be clear, I support anyone’s right to choose who they want to identify as; it is the gift of our modernity. Indeed, I believe that we now have the science to overcome the social pressures previously fused unquestionably with biology. However, I do not believe that the ability to choose must result in the denial of fundamental biological realities.
Still, we (or, moreover, those who claim to live in a civilised and kind society) have a duty to ensure that our own values do not subjugate others’ to the point of harm. This goes both ways. Matt proves his inability to play his part in this book. He is certainly not trying to build any bridges.
Rating
This is why I have given the book 2 stars. It lacks balance. It selectively presents arguments and is clearly written as a tool to worsen divides in society by bolstering the one-sided views of his intended readership. Less important, but still influential in my scoring, is Matt’s lack of empathy. He is not a kind person. He makes this clear at the start by saying he will refer to people as he wants to, not as they have asked. That is his right, but I belief he is a worse person for it.
Conclusion
Matt is a person lacking compassion but looking into an important and deeply sensitive area of modern society. It means this book exists to foster anti-transgender views amongst a readership that likely already holds them.
Matt does very little to offer why this is a debate at all, because it certainly has another side.
July 2, 2022
"One Man's Journey to Answer the Question of a Generation"
"Question of a Generation"
What is the question of a generation? Is it to do with Climate, science, helping society or some broad political issue? No, it's one man's attempt to play hide the ball as he launches into a series of polemics and sophistry surrounding the issues of trans people wether real or imagined.
It's kind of sad that one can create a career from grifting off of a culture war whilst ignoring/dismissing the actual lives of transgender people. Walsh wants to debate but cannot fathom the idea of doing it in good faith or by at least spending the time to analyse the history of what women and transgender people have faced. The premise of 'just asking questions' is more used as cover for Walsh to moralise over his perceived threat that LBGTQI+ community brings to kids and society whilst ignoring actual circumstances of abuse done by all walks of life.
There's no hard hitting deep dive, just a lot of selective takes from interviews and ahistorical recounts in attempt to confuse causation and correlation and all whilst stoking fear of the trans community. It's also funny to see the astroturfing in the reviews of books by authors like Walsh. A lot of accounts solely created to preemptively combat actual reviews of their works so people actually think there's some of form of scholarly accuracy occurring. In the end it's just a game of PR.
Of course there are morons from all walks of life that push their sectarian beliefs to the point of exclusion and will never attempt to learn or empathise with others. Unfortunately the world can be like that, but there's nothing here in this book that really even answers Walsh's initial question of "what is a woman?". With what women already face both historically and today it's just Matt's attempt to throw fuel on the culture war fire to appease his own beliefs and to distract people from other pressing issues that affect society at large.
"Question of a Generation"
What is the question of a generation? Is it to do with Climate, science, helping society or some broad political issue? No, it's one man's attempt to play hide the ball as he launches into a series of polemics and sophistry surrounding the issues of trans people wether real or imagined.
It's kind of sad that one can create a career from grifting off of a culture war whilst ignoring/dismissing the actual lives of transgender people. Walsh wants to debate but cannot fathom the idea of doing it in good faith or by at least spending the time to analyse the history of what women and transgender people have faced. The premise of 'just asking questions' is more used as cover for Walsh to moralise over his perceived threat that LBGTQI+ community brings to kids and society whilst ignoring actual circumstances of abuse done by all walks of life.
There's no hard hitting deep dive, just a lot of selective takes from interviews and ahistorical recounts in attempt to confuse causation and correlation and all whilst stoking fear of the trans community. It's also funny to see the astroturfing in the reviews of books by authors like Walsh. A lot of accounts solely created to preemptively combat actual reviews of their works so people actually think there's some of form of scholarly accuracy occurring. In the end it's just a game of PR.
Of course there are morons from all walks of life that push their sectarian beliefs to the point of exclusion and will never attempt to learn or empathise with others. Unfortunately the world can be like that, but there's nothing here in this book that really even answers Walsh's initial question of "what is a woman?". With what women already face both historically and today it's just Matt's attempt to throw fuel on the culture war fire to appease his own beliefs and to distract people from other pressing issues that affect society at large.
May 9, 2023
I wouldn't normally write a review for a book I've never read but seeing as most of the reviews for this book are one-star reviews by people not even pretending to have read this, I feel perfectly justified in reviewing it without having read it either. I know enough about Matt Walsh and this book (and the movie) to know that I 100% percent agree with and support what he has to say and am going to love this book when I do get around to reading it. In the meantime, here you go, Goodreads
October 17, 2022
It's funny when Catholics selectively use science to confirm certain beliefs (e.g., biology to confirm gender essentialism) while ignoring the science that debunks other beliefs (e.g., virgin birth, intelligent design, etc...).
I mean, it would be funny if it wasn't harmful.
I mean, it would be funny if it wasn't harmful.
December 25, 2022
What Is a Straw Man?
CW for Walsh’s book: transphobia, misgendering
For those not in the know, Matt “theocratic fascist” Walsh is a right-wing conservative, anti-abortion, anti-sex-ed, Catholic political pundit whose opinions are so extreme he’s even been cancelled by other Catholics. In a statement from St. Francis Xavier College Church:
He’s devoted his career to smearing the trans and gender-diverse community, spreading misinformation (“millions” of kids on hormone blockers, genital surgery on children, everyone on the left is a “groomer”), inciting stochastic terrorism (encouraging his followers to target hospitals, schools, libraries and anyone else supportive of the trans community, which has resulted in bomb threats against children’s hospitals and schools, death threats against doctors, and heavily armed “protestors” outside drag shows). Matt Walsh is a radical religious zealot who would, I presume, based on his Twitter handle, like nothing better than to overthrow the Godless democracy in America and substitute for it a fascist Christian state. Objectively, Matt Walsh is a bigot.
As a person with a bias (and an axe to grind), Walsh’s sources should be regarded with a good deal of caution. Some of his sources include: Judith Reisman, a religious conservative and visiting professor of law at a Christian university who dedicated her life to trying to convince the world that all gay men are pedophiles and who believed that a secret cabal of homosexuals were responsible for Nazism and the Holocaust; Miriam Grossman, a psychiatrist, and another religious conservative, who devoted her career to preaching about the evils of sex education and who was in favour of conversion therapy; Lisa Littman, a “physician scientist,” whose paper on Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria was widely criticized for its flawed (to put it mildly) methodology and which has been rejected by mainstream researchers; Abigail Shrier, who has uncritically promoted Littman’s work, despite its lack of support from the scientific community; Scott Newgent, a trans man who, after experiencing terrible complications from his gender affirming surgeries, has gone on a personal crusade to end all gender affirming care for children; Jordan Peterson, a clinical psychologist and professor who is famous more for his bizarre and unhinged rants and emotional breakdowns during interviews than his insight into psychological phenomena; Michael Biggs, a sociology professor with a penchant for making transphobic Twitter posts; and Andy Ngo, a conservative journalist with ties to right-wing militant groups. These are the “experts” Walsh has lined up to “debunk” transgender science and medicine.
Now, all this might be taken for ad hominen, but in this particular instance, where an extremely volatile subject with a disturbing trend toward escalating violence against a vulnerable community is in question, knowing something about the author is important. The vast majority of people know next to nothing about the trans community or the research supporting gender-affirming care and are thus easily misled by people with bad intentions. This makes works like Walsh’s extremely dangerous. Despite a thin (very thin) façade of pretending to explore the titular question “What is a woman?”, nowhere is this question seriously explored by Walsh. Instead, the book is posed as a series of “gotchas” designed to make the trans community and its allies appear incoherent and ludicrous. There is no intellectual charity in his book, and even less objectivity. The hatred and disgust he feels for trans people seeps from its pages. This book is a hit piece, plain and simple, and Walsh’s sole objective is to get as many as people as possible to join him in hating the trans community.
Of course, if you agree with Matt Walsh, you don’t care about any of this. There’s only one thing on your mind. So I’m going to bite the bullet here and answer Walsh’s question: “What is a woman?” Based on my own research, and my experience as a trans woman, I would define a woman as: an adult human who psychologically identifies as a member of the female reproductive community. The difference between this definition and the conventional definition “an adult human female” is the third element, where “female” has been replaced with “who psychologically identifies as a member of the female reproductive community.” This latter definition includes all cisgender women by default, since a cis woman, by definition, is a female who psychologically identifies as a member of the female reproductive community. There is an alignment between her sex and her psychological orientation. A trans woman is a male who psychologically identifies as a member of the female reproductive community. There is a misalignment between her sex and her psychological orientation. Another term for a psychological orientation toward a reproductive community is “gender orientation.”
A couple of further clarifications are in order: What is a reproductive community and how does this differ from “sex”? A reproductive community is a social group derived from a reproductive role rooted in biology. Based on the inspection of genitals at birth, infants are assigned to one reproductive community or the other—male or female—and socialization into that group begins immediately (by treating baby boys differently from baby girls). The female reproductive community includes everyone assigned to that community (who stays assigned to that community) regardless of age or reproductive ability. I.e.: it includes young girls, adult women of reproductive age, women who have outgrown the reproductive phase, infertile women, and intersex women. It also includes trans women. Members of the female reproductive community want to be seen as, and referred to as, women. This is why pronouns are important.
Why does the female reproductive community include trans women? That hinges on the second clarification: What is psychological identification (as it pertains to human reproductive communities)? Psychological identification is an automatic, unconscious orientation toward other members of the community. When you identify as a female, you look to members of the female reproductive community for guidance on how to behave, so far as these behaviours pertain to your own reproductive role in the wider community. These people are "like you." This is your gender orientation, and you have it at birth; it shapes how you pay attention to other people, who you pay attention to, and who you strive to emulate. This is why children, sometimes as young as 18 months, are able to declare their gender identity (“I'm a boy” or “I'm a girl”). Your gender orientation is who you want to be when you grow up, and it can't be changed. It is not a matter of confusion or misunderstanding or the way you were raised. It's an orientation, just like sexual orientation.
This orientation toward other people is likely set in the womb and is most likely determined through a combination of genetics, uterine hormonal environment, and (possibly) epigenetically through early post-natal environmental conditions. (No one knows for sure yet, but the evidence for a genetic component is quite strong, as shown in twin studies.) As humans have evolved to be highly adaptive, and to learn how to survive from adult humans as opposed to relying on instincts, the argument that humans are born with an innate gender orientation is quite sound. There is also evidence to support the claim that infants pay selective attention to adults based on the sex of the adult, and that reward centers in the brain are activated for emulating same-gender role models but not for emulating other-gender role models. As gender expression is a behavioural language, fluency of expression, like other languages, will depend on a child's freedom to express themselves authentically. Interfering with this learning could interfere with a child's ability to express themselves fluently in that language. Gender identity is the identity that forms over time as the child internalizes the gender norms of its culture, expresses themselves, and receives feedback on that expression. Additionally, since gender orientation is itself biological, and thus subject to natural variation, nonbinary identities also sometimes occur (ambiguous or alternating attentional preferences when it comes to role models). All of this is available in the existing research if you know how to look for it, but you won’t find any of it in Walsh’s book because Walsh honestly doesn’t care.
What’s at issue here on the "trans question" is not “truth vs falsehood” or “biology vs biological denialism.” There is nothing unscientific or incoherent in the science or reasoning supporting trans identities and gender-affirming care. No delusions are involved, no denial of “basic facts,” just a difference of opinion about how we should classify and treat members of the trans and gender-diverse community. Based on over 100 years of scientific research into gender identity, the scientists and medical practitioners who deal with trans people on a day-to-day basis have settled on something like the above model and the gender-affirming care model of treatment. Trans people, their friends, family, and allies have no trouble at all understanding the definition of women in this expanded sense (that includes trans women) and which is routinely (and admittedly circularly) reiterated as “a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman.” The more specific (and non-circular) definition I've provided above prioritizes a person’s psychological identification and approach to the world over their reproductive anatomy. Which, in my opinion, and the opinion of many other people, is as it should be. You can reject it if you like, but you cannot dismiss it as being meaningless or incoherent.
What is meaningless and incoherent is writing a book criticizing and rejecting the position of the trans community without ever actually presenting (or understanding) the position of the trans community. Throughout, Walsh argues with a straw man, a figment of his own fevered imagination, mocking and belittling it, heaping abuse and scorn on a community he doesn’t even understand. It would be pointless to address the numerous flaws of the book on a point-by-point basis (though I could do so) because the entire premise is flawed. Such a refutation would be longer than the book itself. Is there room for improvement when it comes to trans healthcare? Absolutely. Much more (and better) research is needed so that we can provide the best care possible for trans people. And better diagnostic tools are required if we want to prevent non-trans people from being misdiagnosed (or misdiagnosing themselves), having medical interventions, and experiencing regret. But there isn’t a single good argument for opposing trans-affirming care in general. It is the best treatment modality we have, and, in the vast majority of cases (about 98% of the time) it works. We know from decades of futile effort that a person’s gender orientation can’t be changed; therapy (conversion therapy) simply doesn’t work. We know that transition improves the quality of life and reduces suicidality among trans people. We know that preventing transition does the opposite.
Walsh’s book is just another addition to the pile of anti-scientific “refutations” of science produced by people who don't like the results of science. It’s no different from books about climate change denial, anti-vaccination screeds, or Holocaust denial. In the end, it’s the kind of book only a transphobe could love.
CW for Walsh’s book: transphobia, misgendering
For those not in the know, Matt “theocratic fascist” Walsh is a right-wing conservative, anti-abortion, anti-sex-ed, Catholic political pundit whose opinions are so extreme he’s even been cancelled by other Catholics. In a statement from St. Francis Xavier College Church:
“His provocative positions on immigration, on communities of color, on Muslims, and on members of the LGBTQ community seemed designed to stir anger and resentment, rather than encourage thoughtful dialogue. His statements are in contradiction to Jesus' great commandment to love God and love our neighbor.”
He’s devoted his career to smearing the trans and gender-diverse community, spreading misinformation (“millions” of kids on hormone blockers, genital surgery on children, everyone on the left is a “groomer”), inciting stochastic terrorism (encouraging his followers to target hospitals, schools, libraries and anyone else supportive of the trans community, which has resulted in bomb threats against children’s hospitals and schools, death threats against doctors, and heavily armed “protestors” outside drag shows). Matt Walsh is a radical religious zealot who would, I presume, based on his Twitter handle, like nothing better than to overthrow the Godless democracy in America and substitute for it a fascist Christian state. Objectively, Matt Walsh is a bigot.
As a person with a bias (and an axe to grind), Walsh’s sources should be regarded with a good deal of caution. Some of his sources include: Judith Reisman, a religious conservative and visiting professor of law at a Christian university who dedicated her life to trying to convince the world that all gay men are pedophiles and who believed that a secret cabal of homosexuals were responsible for Nazism and the Holocaust; Miriam Grossman, a psychiatrist, and another religious conservative, who devoted her career to preaching about the evils of sex education and who was in favour of conversion therapy; Lisa Littman, a “physician scientist,” whose paper on Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria was widely criticized for its flawed (to put it mildly) methodology and which has been rejected by mainstream researchers; Abigail Shrier, who has uncritically promoted Littman’s work, despite its lack of support from the scientific community; Scott Newgent, a trans man who, after experiencing terrible complications from his gender affirming surgeries, has gone on a personal crusade to end all gender affirming care for children; Jordan Peterson, a clinical psychologist and professor who is famous more for his bizarre and unhinged rants and emotional breakdowns during interviews than his insight into psychological phenomena; Michael Biggs, a sociology professor with a penchant for making transphobic Twitter posts; and Andy Ngo, a conservative journalist with ties to right-wing militant groups. These are the “experts” Walsh has lined up to “debunk” transgender science and medicine.
Now, all this might be taken for ad hominen, but in this particular instance, where an extremely volatile subject with a disturbing trend toward escalating violence against a vulnerable community is in question, knowing something about the author is important. The vast majority of people know next to nothing about the trans community or the research supporting gender-affirming care and are thus easily misled by people with bad intentions. This makes works like Walsh’s extremely dangerous. Despite a thin (very thin) façade of pretending to explore the titular question “What is a woman?”, nowhere is this question seriously explored by Walsh. Instead, the book is posed as a series of “gotchas” designed to make the trans community and its allies appear incoherent and ludicrous. There is no intellectual charity in his book, and even less objectivity. The hatred and disgust he feels for trans people seeps from its pages. This book is a hit piece, plain and simple, and Walsh’s sole objective is to get as many as people as possible to join him in hating the trans community.
Of course, if you agree with Matt Walsh, you don’t care about any of this. There’s only one thing on your mind. So I’m going to bite the bullet here and answer Walsh’s question: “What is a woman?” Based on my own research, and my experience as a trans woman, I would define a woman as: an adult human who psychologically identifies as a member of the female reproductive community. The difference between this definition and the conventional definition “an adult human female” is the third element, where “female” has been replaced with “who psychologically identifies as a member of the female reproductive community.” This latter definition includes all cisgender women by default, since a cis woman, by definition, is a female who psychologically identifies as a member of the female reproductive community. There is an alignment between her sex and her psychological orientation. A trans woman is a male who psychologically identifies as a member of the female reproductive community. There is a misalignment between her sex and her psychological orientation. Another term for a psychological orientation toward a reproductive community is “gender orientation.”
A couple of further clarifications are in order: What is a reproductive community and how does this differ from “sex”? A reproductive community is a social group derived from a reproductive role rooted in biology. Based on the inspection of genitals at birth, infants are assigned to one reproductive community or the other—male or female—and socialization into that group begins immediately (by treating baby boys differently from baby girls). The female reproductive community includes everyone assigned to that community (who stays assigned to that community) regardless of age or reproductive ability. I.e.: it includes young girls, adult women of reproductive age, women who have outgrown the reproductive phase, infertile women, and intersex women. It also includes trans women. Members of the female reproductive community want to be seen as, and referred to as, women. This is why pronouns are important.
Why does the female reproductive community include trans women? That hinges on the second clarification: What is psychological identification (as it pertains to human reproductive communities)? Psychological identification is an automatic, unconscious orientation toward other members of the community. When you identify as a female, you look to members of the female reproductive community for guidance on how to behave, so far as these behaviours pertain to your own reproductive role in the wider community. These people are "like you." This is your gender orientation, and you have it at birth; it shapes how you pay attention to other people, who you pay attention to, and who you strive to emulate. This is why children, sometimes as young as 18 months, are able to declare their gender identity (“I'm a boy” or “I'm a girl”). Your gender orientation is who you want to be when you grow up, and it can't be changed. It is not a matter of confusion or misunderstanding or the way you were raised. It's an orientation, just like sexual orientation.
This orientation toward other people is likely set in the womb and is most likely determined through a combination of genetics, uterine hormonal environment, and (possibly) epigenetically through early post-natal environmental conditions. (No one knows for sure yet, but the evidence for a genetic component is quite strong, as shown in twin studies.) As humans have evolved to be highly adaptive, and to learn how to survive from adult humans as opposed to relying on instincts, the argument that humans are born with an innate gender orientation is quite sound. There is also evidence to support the claim that infants pay selective attention to adults based on the sex of the adult, and that reward centers in the brain are activated for emulating same-gender role models but not for emulating other-gender role models. As gender expression is a behavioural language, fluency of expression, like other languages, will depend on a child's freedom to express themselves authentically. Interfering with this learning could interfere with a child's ability to express themselves fluently in that language. Gender identity is the identity that forms over time as the child internalizes the gender norms of its culture, expresses themselves, and receives feedback on that expression. Additionally, since gender orientation is itself biological, and thus subject to natural variation, nonbinary identities also sometimes occur (ambiguous or alternating attentional preferences when it comes to role models). All of this is available in the existing research if you know how to look for it, but you won’t find any of it in Walsh’s book because Walsh honestly doesn’t care.
What’s at issue here on the "trans question" is not “truth vs falsehood” or “biology vs biological denialism.” There is nothing unscientific or incoherent in the science or reasoning supporting trans identities and gender-affirming care. No delusions are involved, no denial of “basic facts,” just a difference of opinion about how we should classify and treat members of the trans and gender-diverse community. Based on over 100 years of scientific research into gender identity, the scientists and medical practitioners who deal with trans people on a day-to-day basis have settled on something like the above model and the gender-affirming care model of treatment. Trans people, their friends, family, and allies have no trouble at all understanding the definition of women in this expanded sense (that includes trans women) and which is routinely (and admittedly circularly) reiterated as “a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman.” The more specific (and non-circular) definition I've provided above prioritizes a person’s psychological identification and approach to the world over their reproductive anatomy. Which, in my opinion, and the opinion of many other people, is as it should be. You can reject it if you like, but you cannot dismiss it as being meaningless or incoherent.
What is meaningless and incoherent is writing a book criticizing and rejecting the position of the trans community without ever actually presenting (or understanding) the position of the trans community. Throughout, Walsh argues with a straw man, a figment of his own fevered imagination, mocking and belittling it, heaping abuse and scorn on a community he doesn’t even understand. It would be pointless to address the numerous flaws of the book on a point-by-point basis (though I could do so) because the entire premise is flawed. Such a refutation would be longer than the book itself. Is there room for improvement when it comes to trans healthcare? Absolutely. Much more (and better) research is needed so that we can provide the best care possible for trans people. And better diagnostic tools are required if we want to prevent non-trans people from being misdiagnosed (or misdiagnosing themselves), having medical interventions, and experiencing regret. But there isn’t a single good argument for opposing trans-affirming care in general. It is the best treatment modality we have, and, in the vast majority of cases (about 98% of the time) it works. We know from decades of futile effort that a person’s gender orientation can’t be changed; therapy (conversion therapy) simply doesn’t work. We know that transition improves the quality of life and reduces suicidality among trans people. We know that preventing transition does the opposite.
Walsh’s book is just another addition to the pile of anti-scientific “refutations” of science produced by people who don't like the results of science. It’s no different from books about climate change denial, anti-vaccination screeds, or Holocaust denial. In the end, it’s the kind of book only a transphobe could love.
July 3, 2022
4.5 stars!
The only reason I take off half a star is because Walsh was clearly writing to fellow Christians and right-wing people. He has no shame in calling trans people and trans supporters delusional and often predatory. While I agree with EVERYTHING he said, I’m afraid any left leaning person would not be interested at all in reading this.
That being said, everything he says is right on the nose. It was honestly quite eye opening. After interviewing an array of doctors, psychologists, trans people, and any other liberal leaning idealogue, it’s quite clear that when asked the used-to-be simple question, “What is a woman?”, they say one of two things:
1. I am not a woman, so I can’t answer that. (…. Uh. Are you an airline pilot? No? So you can’t tell me what that is?)
2. A woman is a person who identifies as a woman. (….)
There’s so much in this book from disturbing history, to fascinating interviews, to truth “bombs”, to terrifying information on what children these days are being exposed to.
To anyone who doesn’t agree with me, I don’t want you to feel attacked or less than. I’m more than willing to share food and conversation with ANYone at ANY time. But I refuse to deny that a woman is someone born with a vagina or that a man is someone born with a penis.
The only reason I take off half a star is because Walsh was clearly writing to fellow Christians and right-wing people. He has no shame in calling trans people and trans supporters delusional and often predatory. While I agree with EVERYTHING he said, I’m afraid any left leaning person would not be interested at all in reading this.
That being said, everything he says is right on the nose. It was honestly quite eye opening. After interviewing an array of doctors, psychologists, trans people, and any other liberal leaning idealogue, it’s quite clear that when asked the used-to-be simple question, “What is a woman?”, they say one of two things:
1. I am not a woman, so I can’t answer that. (…. Uh. Are you an airline pilot? No? So you can’t tell me what that is?)
2. A woman is a person who identifies as a woman. (….)
There’s so much in this book from disturbing history, to fascinating interviews, to truth “bombs”, to terrifying information on what children these days are being exposed to.
To anyone who doesn’t agree with me, I don’t want you to feel attacked or less than. I’m more than willing to share food and conversation with ANYone at ANY time. But I refuse to deny that a woman is someone born with a vagina or that a man is someone born with a penis.
July 2, 2022
updated to add: I now have a rating system for nonfiction in place, so I've rated this book 5 stars according to that system.
This book exposes the transgender ideology for what it is.
What I got from this book as someone who already it informed and aware of the predation of children happening in the Western world, is that we live in very broken and very sad world. Since the moment of time when God said, ‘I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed’, Satan has been hard at work breaking down the institutions God put in place in paradise - the institutions made to benefit us and glorify the Creator - the most beautiful one being marriage.
Transgenderism is just one ploy, one devastating plot with heartbreaking consequences, to destroy sexuality in the confines of marriage, by exposing children at incredibly young ages to ideas and images they were never intended to grasp and carry. They are being told to go against everything in themselves, in their own human nature, to become who they are not. They are confused, vulnerable, and preyed upon by predators the radicals will never admit too.
Corrie ten Boom’s father made the analogy of the heavy suitcase — “And it would be a pretty poor father who would ask his little girl to carry such a load [referring to the suitcase]. It’s the same way, Corrie, with knowledge. Some knowledge is too heavy for children. When you are older and stronger you can bear it. For now you must trust me to carry it for you.”. Children were never intended to be exposed to such heavy knowledge at so young an age and with such an impressionable mind. Yet here we are - children as young as newborns allowed into gay bars to explore the world of sexuality in the radical eyes of those who wish to tear down every last traditional institution given in the Garden of Eden.
I wish there was another chapter at the end, or a note describing what we can do to stop this war on our children. Something to jump off of to get involved in the fight ourselves. And I do wish the left-versus-right argument wasn’t such a large focus. We cannot fight for our children if we are always fighting each other, drawing battle lines because one person is right and another is left; it’s sort of backwards that a book fighting a fluid, non-definable idea of gender identity bases arguments off of what political side a person ‘identifies’ with. But maybe I am reading too much into it.
For parents unaware of what is infiltrating their children’s schools, this book is a good starting point to educate yourselves on the culture war we are in the midst of. The paragraphs with the interviews are sort of transcript-like if you've watched the documentary, but you do not need to watch it in order to read the book. I do think both complement each other well, however.
The book ends on a clear and profound point (which I have summarized).
‘The truth is that after the Garden of Eden there has never been a place or a golden age when everything was perfect and made sense. But even so, the Massai people [tribe in Africa Matt interviewed] seem to have discovered a truth that we in the west don’t know — or maybe they never forgot a truth that we no longer remember. . . . Maybe happiness comes not from making the world affirm “who we are,” but by becoming who we were created to be.’
This book exposes the transgender ideology for what it is.
What I got from this book as someone who already it informed and aware of the predation of children happening in the Western world, is that we live in very broken and very sad world. Since the moment of time when God said, ‘I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed’, Satan has been hard at work breaking down the institutions God put in place in paradise - the institutions made to benefit us and glorify the Creator - the most beautiful one being marriage.
Transgenderism is just one ploy, one devastating plot with heartbreaking consequences, to destroy sexuality in the confines of marriage, by exposing children at incredibly young ages to ideas and images they were never intended to grasp and carry. They are being told to go against everything in themselves, in their own human nature, to become who they are not. They are confused, vulnerable, and preyed upon by predators the radicals will never admit too.
Corrie ten Boom’s father made the analogy of the heavy suitcase — “And it would be a pretty poor father who would ask his little girl to carry such a load [referring to the suitcase]. It’s the same way, Corrie, with knowledge. Some knowledge is too heavy for children. When you are older and stronger you can bear it. For now you must trust me to carry it for you.”. Children were never intended to be exposed to such heavy knowledge at so young an age and with such an impressionable mind. Yet here we are - children as young as newborns allowed into gay bars to explore the world of sexuality in the radical eyes of those who wish to tear down every last traditional institution given in the Garden of Eden.
I wish there was another chapter at the end, or a note describing what we can do to stop this war on our children. Something to jump off of to get involved in the fight ourselves. And I do wish the left-versus-right argument wasn’t such a large focus. We cannot fight for our children if we are always fighting each other, drawing battle lines because one person is right and another is left; it’s sort of backwards that a book fighting a fluid, non-definable idea of gender identity bases arguments off of what political side a person ‘identifies’ with. But maybe I am reading too much into it.
For parents unaware of what is infiltrating their children’s schools, this book is a good starting point to educate yourselves on the culture war we are in the midst of. The paragraphs with the interviews are sort of transcript-like if you've watched the documentary, but you do not need to watch it in order to read the book. I do think both complement each other well, however.
The book ends on a clear and profound point (which I have summarized).
‘The truth is that after the Garden of Eden there has never been a place or a golden age when everything was perfect and made sense. But even so, the Massai people [tribe in Africa Matt interviewed] seem to have discovered a truth that we in the west don’t know — or maybe they never forgot a truth that we no longer remember. . . . Maybe happiness comes not from making the world affirm “who we are,” but by becoming who we were created to be.’
July 4, 2022
I watched the documentary first. I had no idea a book was coming with the same name, but I enjoyed the documentary a lot so I decided to get the audio of the book to listen to while cleaning. I found it engrossing and more interesting than the film. I’m truly horrified by this whole topic, being a genX parent of four. I find the exploiting of young girls bodily discomfort to be a crime. I am so glad this book was written because it walks through the history and demented circular logic of these current issues. We all need to reject the current ideology being forced on our kids. We must raise up and be heard that this isn’t okay to shove down their throats.
June 27, 2022
Mandatory reading for parents, teachers, therapists, activists and anyone with an interest in the rights of vulnerable people. You don’t need to agree with Walsh’s angle (every author has one) however, dismiss his writing at your peril.
If left to permeate our schools, healthcare and communities, no one will have the ability to avoid being witness to the real damage that this stereotyping/cataloging of people under the guise of ‘gender identity’ incurs.
(outcome: medicating and operating for “mental health”)
If left to permeate our schools, healthcare and communities, no one will have the ability to avoid being witness to the real damage that this stereotyping/cataloging of people under the guise of ‘gender identity’ incurs.
(outcome: medicating and operating for “mental health”)
March 3, 2023
Great book! I’d love to watch the documentary sometime. More than anything I was reminded how loving God is and how thankful I am that He gave us strict boundaries to reside in, and the chaos that occurs when those boundaries are crossed. I’m heartbroken for people who don’t know the peace in resting in who you were created to be, and how frantic they must feel trying so hard to “find themselves.” I’m disgusted by people who have preyed on the anxious minds of young women and men by telling them lies about themselves and making them more miserable than they were before.
Want to Read
May 11, 2023Any book that draws fire from lefties who neither know their history nor how to understand logical discourse is a sure-fire must read for me. As soon as possible, I'm getting my hands on this book. I'm sure Walsh has done an exemplary job.
November 2, 2022
Too hard to relate the history of the late 19th century and whole 20th century innovators which did the "research" to initiate these group think belief systems and developed/ incorporated the entire gender function defined, as opposed to sex genital /physical formation as millennia labeling of humans. You need to read it. And its depth. I do remember rushing to throw up when a film of Kinsey experimental techniques on young children, mostly boys- was shown to my group during a graduate Psych. class back in the 1990's. Beyond sick. Beyond child abuse. The aim in the first 100 years was to break down all shame, primarily. And the history of those who developed these fields is pure projection because of their own sexual proclivities or intentions. Even the natural response to children- which is to cover themselves automatically in group nude situations; it is core stated to break that down. Step one only. This literally makes me nauseous.
The people who gave this 1 star did not read the book. It's mostly history and exact events- the papers and organized groups' histories which have resulted in the present state of no WOMAN definition becoming possible. Not even for most doctors when asked. Name calling is the usual response to any of these questions or suppositions arising from the current practices on this subject too. It is demonstrated here profusely on Goodreads.
It's first onus was for the pedophilia core. It was from the first 1800 something definitions. And also to negate all religions and their influences. That was and is now central focus to the organizational subcultures, as well. Hedonism and entire life sexual alive appetite twinned. The only biggest sin being celibacy.
This is not a book I would recommend for the weak stomached or common good intent majority of heart. Either. The reality right now in schools and the exact graphics put in books to kids who don't even know yet how to read! The mantra is the more the better and the earlier the best. Across the boards too. Especially in the teaching crafts coming out of the most prestigious international (not just USA) institutions of "higher" learning.
This is not a rant by Matt Walsh. It is mainly history of people and events. And the results. There are too many quotes from too many truly wise to include in the review or my reaction. But read this if you have the will to be a witness. And can truly understand how the very core and heart of human behaviors can be redefined into paths that are almost entirely the opposite of the normal human. Or even a healthy human.
One quote from the World League for Sexual Reform (one of the first back in the latest 1800's and founded in Berlin Germany)- "application of the knowledge of Eugenics towards improvement of the race through Birth Selection." "proper, scientific understanding of the variations in sexual constitutions (intersexuality)" and to free sex from being "complicated by any sense of guilt."
"To put it succinctly, the League wanted to overturn traditional ideas of sexual morality, marriage, and the relationship between men and women." And it got much worse after that- to even interpreting Bible or other past records into definitions that they never, ever held. Not even in nuance or any sense of cognition to same.
But this is also an excellent logic or philosophy question. What he asks, and what answers he gets when he asks them. It is the exact function that is described in the title. Matt Walsh gets answers- but most of them hold nothing but evasion. And immense ignorance.
We have come to the point of having to ask IF humans who want a limb amputation can be accommodated. And most doctors will no longer answer that one either. And also to a place in which there is no science in "the science". Not in definition, description, or even in base theory.
The people who gave this 1 star did not read the book. It's mostly history and exact events- the papers and organized groups' histories which have resulted in the present state of no WOMAN definition becoming possible. Not even for most doctors when asked. Name calling is the usual response to any of these questions or suppositions arising from the current practices on this subject too. It is demonstrated here profusely on Goodreads.
It's first onus was for the pedophilia core. It was from the first 1800 something definitions. And also to negate all religions and their influences. That was and is now central focus to the organizational subcultures, as well. Hedonism and entire life sexual alive appetite twinned. The only biggest sin being celibacy.
This is not a book I would recommend for the weak stomached or common good intent majority of heart. Either. The reality right now in schools and the exact graphics put in books to kids who don't even know yet how to read! The mantra is the more the better and the earlier the best. Across the boards too. Especially in the teaching crafts coming out of the most prestigious international (not just USA) institutions of "higher" learning.
This is not a rant by Matt Walsh. It is mainly history of people and events. And the results. There are too many quotes from too many truly wise to include in the review or my reaction. But read this if you have the will to be a witness. And can truly understand how the very core and heart of human behaviors can be redefined into paths that are almost entirely the opposite of the normal human. Or even a healthy human.
One quote from the World League for Sexual Reform (one of the first back in the latest 1800's and founded in Berlin Germany)- "application of the knowledge of Eugenics towards improvement of the race through Birth Selection." "proper, scientific understanding of the variations in sexual constitutions (intersexuality)" and to free sex from being "complicated by any sense of guilt."
"To put it succinctly, the League wanted to overturn traditional ideas of sexual morality, marriage, and the relationship between men and women." And it got much worse after that- to even interpreting Bible or other past records into definitions that they never, ever held. Not even in nuance or any sense of cognition to same.
But this is also an excellent logic or philosophy question. What he asks, and what answers he gets when he asks them. It is the exact function that is described in the title. Matt Walsh gets answers- but most of them hold nothing but evasion. And immense ignorance.
We have come to the point of having to ask IF humans who want a limb amputation can be accommodated. And most doctors will no longer answer that one either. And also to a place in which there is no science in "the science". Not in definition, description, or even in base theory.
June 22, 2022
Matt Walsh is a guy I've been following since 2011-2012, when he was a small-time blogger with a "podcast" he recorded in his car. He's obviously an incredibly controversial figure, but I won't be addressing that in this review. I love Walsh and his no-nonsense style. I love his dry wit. I love his introverted-ness. I love his intelligence. In many ways, I have taken inspiration from him as a person who unflinchingly stands up for what he believes with a good sense of humor. All that aside, I think his writing style in book form can be at times very surface-level and basic, and at other times go so incredibly in-depth that readers are at risk of getting lost in the weeds. This book had a huge wealth of information. I've already seen the documentary, and was interested to see how much more in-depth the book went. In the case of the history of gender theory, as well as specifics on "gender-affirming" surgery, it gave much more information. I'm going to try to get better at looking up sources given in books like this for more information, but this was definitely a good start, especially for someone who has mainly just observed gender theory in society. All in all, I really enjoyed the book, and highly recommend it if you're interested in this topic.
June 25, 2022
Book 71 of 2022
I really appreciate this book because @MattWalsh talked to a lot of people in positions of power about this simple question. What is a woman? I had no idea this would ever be a hard question to answer. People in the medical community, academics, psychologists, health care providers of all rankings, politicians and more gave their opinions and wow, was it staggering what they said. It is shocking what is being believed and what is being peddled as truth. I think the best part of this book was looking back at the history and understand the men like Alfred Kinsey and John Money and how their experiments and false research have laid the groundwork for our current feelings on sex education in schools, etc. This was a great companion to the documentary of the same name, available on #DailyWire which I also watched.
Rating -- five stars
Format -- hardcover
I really appreciate this book because @MattWalsh talked to a lot of people in positions of power about this simple question. What is a woman? I had no idea this would ever be a hard question to answer. People in the medical community, academics, psychologists, health care providers of all rankings, politicians and more gave their opinions and wow, was it staggering what they said. It is shocking what is being believed and what is being peddled as truth. I think the best part of this book was looking back at the history and understand the men like Alfred Kinsey and John Money and how their experiments and false research have laid the groundwork for our current feelings on sex education in schools, etc. This was a great companion to the documentary of the same name, available on #DailyWire which I also watched.
Rating -- five stars
Format -- hardcover
Want to Read
June 16, 2022"The Left is terrified of the film. It’s that simple. If they thought they could debunk it they would. If they thought it was poorly made they’d make fun of it for that. But they can’t debunk it and it’s well made, so they cower and hope it goes away. It won’t."
Matt Walsh tweet
5 of june 2022·
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2022/0...
UPDATE
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...
UPDATE
https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/sta...
Matt Walsh tweet
5 of june 2022·
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2022/0...
UPDATE
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...
UPDATE
https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/sta...
June 24, 2022
Matt Walsh took on a task. That task was getting the answer to a simple question. He left the comfort of his Daily Wire office and sought out the answer to this: “What is a woman?” Most of us would simply answer ‘a woman is an adult human female’ but as you can expect, it was not that easy for him.
With the never ending questions and controversy surrounding gender and pronouns, and while he openly states that he has no problem with someone’s belief system, he went out to quite simply locate the truth. The book, and Its attached documentary, raise many important points around the subject of transgenderism. Matt Walsh has been criticised for a ‘lack of compassion’ in the subject, claiming that it is leading people to foster anti-trans views, but Matt Walsh is right with this book. To search for truth, compassion needs to be put aside to find the answers.
In his search for the truth, Matt visited scholars, professors, doctors, senators, psychologists and more, and asked the simple question “what is a woman?”
He visited experts in the transgender field as well as general medical experts. He met with the general public on the street in a variety of cities across America. He attended a Woman’s March to talk to those there too. This is a man that took it one step further and went to a tribe in Africa to examine how culture, and in particular what being a man and a woman meant to them. .
Matt visited scholars, professors, doctors, senators, psychologists and more, and asked the simple question “what is a woman?” He visited experts in the transgender field as well as general medical experts. He visited the general public on the street in a variety of cities across America. He attended a Woman’s March to talk to those there too. This is a man that took it one step further and went to a tribe in Africa to examine how culture, and in particular what being a man and a woman meant to them.
Matt explained to everyone he visited, why he was there and what he was looking for. Unfortunately, he didn’t get what he wanted. There were lots of waffling answers. Lots of redirection in conversation from those he questioned and lots of just simply ignoring what he asked. What he did find on his travels, was that those professionals whom we charge with the protection of their children, Drs, teachers etc, were pushing social agendas towards transgenderism. These ‘professionals’ were directing children towards transgender thinking. Whether that be with the aid of dressing in rainbows for pride month or questioning biology itself. Matt reveals how on his travels, he found out how activists are pushing the agenda towards children in schools. When questioning it, at such a school, he was given 60 seconds to make his case. He made his case in less than that!
The book looks at biological foundation of life and how we’ve moved towards transgender. It examines how popular celebrities have been “cancelled” for exposing their honest views. The book talks of how a man cannot physically become a woman, but merely an image or impression of one. After all, a man cannot give birth. The book examines how medications are given to children, the same meds used in chemical castration. This book looks at the desensitising of the world, in the way that we advertise “you can be what you want to be”, without addressing who the person actually is underneath.
The book addresses how toddlers are being dehumanised by parents who, because their daughter plays with trucks and boys toys, now say that she is telling the, she wants to be a boy. It also looks at the frightening ways that social media influence teenagers into believing that by having irreversible puberty blockers and surgery, their life will change. Perhaps the most telling of all, was an interview with Scott Nugent. A female who transitioned to a man later in age. Scott shared all of her journey, some good, some not quite so good
This book is a great read, incredibly informative and despite what many critics say (the critics are usually from the left) it is not one sided. It does not promote anti-trans views. Matt has said himself that his own beliefs are ‘men are men and women are women’ – it’s down to simple biology but while he respects that other people have their belief system, he doesn’t necessarily agree with them.
The documentary attached to this movie has been called a ‘mockumentary’ – after all, Matt Walsh is known through his Daily Wire shows for his dry wit and humour.
The documentary and the book were eye opening. Yes, there were funny parts. There were times when it was hard to believe that it was a medical professional addressing Matt Walsh, due to the absurdity of the conversation. But on a deeper level, it was scary. The documentary showed the truth of the world, and how children are being exposed in it.
Matt Walsh searched for truth, and found a lot to debate along the way. Extremely worthy of a five star rating.
Highly recommend this book. Matt Walsh has a way with his words that draws you in, and enables you to understand each side of a debate. Loved it.
With the never ending questions and controversy surrounding gender and pronouns, and while he openly states that he has no problem with someone’s belief system, he went out to quite simply locate the truth. The book, and Its attached documentary, raise many important points around the subject of transgenderism. Matt Walsh has been criticised for a ‘lack of compassion’ in the subject, claiming that it is leading people to foster anti-trans views, but Matt Walsh is right with this book. To search for truth, compassion needs to be put aside to find the answers.
In his search for the truth, Matt visited scholars, professors, doctors, senators, psychologists and more, and asked the simple question “what is a woman?”
He visited experts in the transgender field as well as general medical experts. He met with the general public on the street in a variety of cities across America. He attended a Woman’s March to talk to those there too. This is a man that took it one step further and went to a tribe in Africa to examine how culture, and in particular what being a man and a woman meant to them. .
Matt visited scholars, professors, doctors, senators, psychologists and more, and asked the simple question “what is a woman?” He visited experts in the transgender field as well as general medical experts. He visited the general public on the street in a variety of cities across America. He attended a Woman’s March to talk to those there too. This is a man that took it one step further and went to a tribe in Africa to examine how culture, and in particular what being a man and a woman meant to them.
Matt explained to everyone he visited, why he was there and what he was looking for. Unfortunately, he didn’t get what he wanted. There were lots of waffling answers. Lots of redirection in conversation from those he questioned and lots of just simply ignoring what he asked. What he did find on his travels, was that those professionals whom we charge with the protection of their children, Drs, teachers etc, were pushing social agendas towards transgenderism. These ‘professionals’ were directing children towards transgender thinking. Whether that be with the aid of dressing in rainbows for pride month or questioning biology itself. Matt reveals how on his travels, he found out how activists are pushing the agenda towards children in schools. When questioning it, at such a school, he was given 60 seconds to make his case. He made his case in less than that!
The book looks at biological foundation of life and how we’ve moved towards transgender. It examines how popular celebrities have been “cancelled” for exposing their honest views. The book talks of how a man cannot physically become a woman, but merely an image or impression of one. After all, a man cannot give birth. The book examines how medications are given to children, the same meds used in chemical castration. This book looks at the desensitising of the world, in the way that we advertise “you can be what you want to be”, without addressing who the person actually is underneath.
The book addresses how toddlers are being dehumanised by parents who, because their daughter plays with trucks and boys toys, now say that she is telling the, she wants to be a boy. It also looks at the frightening ways that social media influence teenagers into believing that by having irreversible puberty blockers and surgery, their life will change. Perhaps the most telling of all, was an interview with Scott Nugent. A female who transitioned to a man later in age. Scott shared all of her journey, some good, some not quite so good
This book is a great read, incredibly informative and despite what many critics say (the critics are usually from the left) it is not one sided. It does not promote anti-trans views. Matt has said himself that his own beliefs are ‘men are men and women are women’ – it’s down to simple biology but while he respects that other people have their belief system, he doesn’t necessarily agree with them.
The documentary attached to this movie has been called a ‘mockumentary’ – after all, Matt Walsh is known through his Daily Wire shows for his dry wit and humour.
The documentary and the book were eye opening. Yes, there were funny parts. There were times when it was hard to believe that it was a medical professional addressing Matt Walsh, due to the absurdity of the conversation. But on a deeper level, it was scary. The documentary showed the truth of the world, and how children are being exposed in it.
Matt Walsh searched for truth, and found a lot to debate along the way. Extremely worthy of a five star rating.
Highly recommend this book. Matt Walsh has a way with his words that draws you in, and enables you to understand each side of a debate. Loved it.
June 15, 2022
Love this book? Also help support “Posie Parker” aka Kellie Jean and get a “woman: adult human female” shirt/hoodie/mug.
I really hope Matt Walsh and the DW release a shirt/hoodie/mug that says “man : adult human male”
I ALSO hope they do WIAW 2 or extended cuts of the first documentary too.
Great documentary, great book 10/10. So many messages that people need to hear, only downside is those that need to hear it most refuse to listen (hello 1 star humans).
Had it on pre order and binge read it until completion.
I really hope Matt Walsh and the DW release a shirt/hoodie/mug that says “man : adult human male”
I ALSO hope they do WIAW 2 or extended cuts of the first documentary too.
Great documentary, great book 10/10. So many messages that people need to hear, only downside is those that need to hear it most refuse to listen (hello 1 star humans).
Had it on pre order and binge read it until completion.
June 2, 2022
Like seriously, u get zero play...
Cringe + ur white + go bald somewhere else
Cringe + ur white + go bald somewhere else
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 1, 2022
I know some aren't fans of Matt Walsh and maybe most people that read this book are already in agreement w the things he has to say. But I think he is asking very pertinent questions to people of influence and expertise (sometime supposed) about the reasons behind the unprecedented rise in people, especially youth, indentifying as transgender. This rise in numbers is not a harmless trend. Also, the history of gender theory and its pioneers, like Alfred Kinsey and John Money, has some deeply disturbing aspects.
June 14, 2022
Pre-ordered this book, Absolutely worth it! It's enjoyable and easy to read.
June 19, 2022
common Sense
Our society has drifted into unthinking oblivion when it takes an entire book (or movie) to state what is absolutely apparent. To exist is to be. To be has to be something. A “something” has to be definable or it is nothing, a non existant. If you cannot define something it does not exist. To attempt to define something using the same word in the definition is not defining something and therefore is nonexistent. The transgender attempts at define a woman is vacuous and meaningless. This book provides realistic examples and knowledge necessary to combat the most evil and pernicious threat society has ever faced. Mandatory reading, and studying.
Our society has drifted into unthinking oblivion when it takes an entire book (or movie) to state what is absolutely apparent. To exist is to be. To be has to be something. A “something” has to be definable or it is nothing, a non existant. If you cannot define something it does not exist. To attempt to define something using the same word in the definition is not defining something and therefore is nonexistent. The transgender attempts at define a woman is vacuous and meaningless. This book provides realistic examples and knowledge necessary to combat the most evil and pernicious threat society has ever faced. Mandatory reading, and studying.
July 2, 2022
“But thinking I’m Superman doesn’t make me fly.”
I am astounded, disgusted, inspired, unmoored, and just overall in awe of this work. Matt Walsh’s simple question is profoundly provided and is excruciatingly ignored throughout the interviews highlighted in this book. There is heartbreak in this question. I loved every minute of this book and it’s documentary. Thank you Matt Walsh for standing up to ask this question! Let’s save our children!
I am astounded, disgusted, inspired, unmoored, and just overall in awe of this work. Matt Walsh’s simple question is profoundly provided and is excruciatingly ignored throughout the interviews highlighted in this book. There is heartbreak in this question. I loved every minute of this book and it’s documentary. Thank you Matt Walsh for standing up to ask this question! Let’s save our children!
July 18, 2022
This book is an absolute must read. I saw the documentary and found it interesting and helpful but the book offers even more insight into this issue. I appreciate the sensitivity that Walsh writes with, and I realize that “sensitive” isn’t a normal word used to describe Matt Walsh.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 296 reviews