Matt Walsh PROVES LGBTQ+ individuals aren’t persecuted… apparently…

So yesterday, Matt Walsh posted an amazingly stupid take on why the LGBTQ+ community isn’t persecuted  in The Daily Wire. In it, he claims to prove that the community, which formed around fighting back against the persecution of underrepresented gender and sexual minorities, isn’t persecuted. Honestly, all he actually manages to do is illustrate how easy it is to assume that something you don’t personally experience isn’t actually real and you can confirm that belief by doing absolutely zero research into the topic.

That about sums it up, too. Matt has taken no time to understand, instead opting to believe that he already understands the world completely and there is no reason to try to understand more. The thing is, though, he’s wrong and it doesn’t take long to recognize that.

Take, for example, this portion of his article:

Budweiser explains that asexuals are those who have no sexual attraction to anybody. This is a category that includes approximately seven people on Earth. Demisexuals are those who are more likely to experience sexual attraction after they get to know someone. Another name for this group is “women.” There are about 3.5 billion of them. Greysexuals are people who are sometimes sexually attracted and sometimes not. Another name for this group is “literally everyone” and it includes literally everyone (except for the seven asexuals, I suppose).

When he says “Budweiser explains” at the beginning of this paragraph, he is referring to this tweet in which Budweiser briefly explains what each color on one of their new Pride cups (the asexual pride cup) means. And Matt is correct that they explain each color as such:

Black is for asexuals who don’t feel sexual attraction to anyone. Grey is for grey-asexuals, who sometimes feel sexual attraction, and demi-sexuals who only feel it if they know someone well.

Now, let me explain something for any Matt Walsh fan that might have stumbled upon this blog: TWEETS AREN’T LONG ENOUGH TO INCLUDE ALL THE NUANCE NECESSARY TO FULLY EXPLAIN SOMETHING! Seriously. They are a maximum of 240 characters, and Budweiser had to fit a 4-part explanation into one tweet. Yes, some nuance was lost. So allow me to re-add that nuance right now.

Matt is correct about one thing: Asexuals are, indeed, people who do not feel any kind of sexual attraction. However, unlike Matt’s assertion that there are “approximately 7”, asexuals number about 1% of the world’s population which is approximately 73,462,350 people worldwide.

Matt then says that since Demisexuals “are those who are more likely to experience sexual attraction after they get to know someone” means that demisexual = women. I mean, we could talk about the inherent sexism present in this statement, considering that women don’t only have sex with people they are emotionally attached to (as can be attested by the fact that there are women in the world who have, and enjoy, one night stands). However, there is another problem with Matt’s reading of the tweet… and that’s the fact that he only read the tweet.

Let’s see what has to say about demisexuality:

Demisexuality is a sexual orientation in which someone feels sexual attraction only to people with whom they have an emotional bond. Most demisexuals feel sexual attraction rarely compared to the general population, and some have little to no interest in sexual activity.

Gee, Matt, that seems like a little bit more than just “they’re more likely to fuck if they know the person”. This lays out an orientation in which you are literally uninterested in sex unless you have an emotional connection to your mate. For all intents and purposes, being a demisexual means that you are an asexual unless you have an emotional bond with someone. 

Lastly, we get to the orientation which Matt seems most confused about, seeing as how he just labels Greysexuals “everyone” and moves on. Now, I will admit, I had never heard of Greysexuality prior to this article and Budweiser’s pathetic attempt to explain the orientation did not help. According to the tweet, a Greysexual is someone “who sometimes feels sexual attraction” and yeah, I have to admit that on its face that kinda sounds like everyone (except the sevenTY THREE MILLION asexuals in the world). 

However, tweets are terrible places to learn new things and unlike Matt, I decided to give it 5 seconds of googling to discover that according to The Asexual Visibility and Education network, Greysexuals “do not normally experience sexual attraction, but do experience it sometimes, experience sexual attraction but a low sex drive, experience sexual attraction and drive, but not strongly enough to want to act on them” and are “people who can enjoy and desire sex, but only under very limited and specific circumstances.” So, yeah, that’s not exactly everybody is it, Matt?

Matt goes on to ask a few rhetorical questions about why, if LGBTQ+ people are so persecuted, are businesses trying to cater to them and why they’re able to have parades. HE’S “NEVER SEEN OPPRESSION THAT WORKS LIKE THIS”, especially in the Civil Rights movement and in Nazi Germany.

What Matt has done here is created something of a Red Herring. See, he doesn’t want you thinking about the facts (of which he presents none), so he instead directs you to the most well-known fight for people to have the right to be considered people and one of the greatest mass-genocides the world has ever seen. The rest of the article is just that along with an argument that the reason letters keep getting added to LGBTQIA is because it is a special club for special people to join and feel special.

Well, Matt and Matt’s audience, allow me to bring some noteworthy points into this discussion as to why the LGBTQ+ community actually is persecuted in the US.

The absurdity of this reasoning knows no bounds, but ultimately that’s not what matters here. What matters is the worldview that Matt and his other hyper-conservative talking heads are working from. It’s a black-and-white worldview where they are the heroes fighting against a rising tide of socialism, immorality, and irreligion. Matt and his friends at the Daily Wire can’t afford to actually learn a little bit about what they are spewing hot takes about because then they don’t have to actually think about their own views.

And let’s be honest, there is way more money in upholding pre-existing beliefs than trying to actually make positive change in the world.


I grew up a devoted Christian. For a solid 26 years of life, I was dedicated to the gospel of Jesus of Nazareth and his atoning sacrifice for my sins. In fact, I apparently understood the message of Jesus’ birth, life, death, and resurrection well enough at the age of 6 to be able to commit my entire life to him. It didn’t pan out in the end as I discarded my faith about 3 years ago after a certain man-child became the republican nominee for President of the United States and made me rethink literally everything I once believed.

I made an eternal contract with what I believed to be the creator of the universe before I even fully understood the difference between Mega Man and Mega Man X and it was supposed to last my entire life. I understood nothing at the age of 6, and I certainly didn’t understand what that declaration of my undying devotion to Jesus would mean later on in life.

At that time, my biggest challenge in life was trying to figure out how to finally destroy Ganon and save Hyrule! I hadn’t even graduated from addition and subtraction in math class, I didn’t even know evolution was even a word, and I certainly didn’t know anything about the quite enjoyable process that leads to having a baby but I had already committed myself to an ideology that told me that all life was created in 7 days, that all humans and animals on earth could trace itself back to a boat, and that if I had sex before I got married, something bad would happen (never got a clear answer on that, and as of yet nothing bad has happened so…).

That brings me to my point: my then-minister claimed that he would not baptize anyone unless he was confident that the one being baptized understood the gospel and yet, there I was getting dunked at the age of 6. This is hardly an uncommon story, millions upon millions of people were baptized as part of making a covenant of fealty to the omnipotent creator of the universe before the 2nd grade. It’s insanity to expect to understand even the 10 commandments (what temptation is adultery when you haven’t even had a romantic partner?) much less the concept of eternal salvation from sins you haven’t even thought of yet.

It’s no surprise, though, that they target kids and try to get a commitment from them at an early age. There is a psychological effect in making a commitment to something, it makes it harder to just walk away from (that’s the reason Trump made people at his rallies hold up their hands and pledge to vote for him). It’s a big moment, arguably the first taste of what a kid imagines adulthood is like. Not only are you making a contract (what’s more grown-up than that) but you are surrounded by people who are very, very proud of you and you are more likely to stick with the religion even after you are old enough to recognize that Sampson using burning foxes to torch Philistine fields is just a little completely insane.

Because, let’s face it. Religion is crazy, and the easiest way to sell crazy is to sell it to kids.