Even Some Transphobes Feel the Daily Wire is Going Too Far
Who knew there were limits?
by Evan Urquhart
It’s been a big week for backlash to horrific things said about trans people by the big names of the Daily Wire. Last Saturday Michael Knowles called for the eradication of what he referred to as “transgenderism” (also known as trans people). Many people found the word choice reminiscent of Nazi rhetoric, conjouring images of mass death. (By the way, we’re of the mind that we should all stop picturing camps.) In addition, last Valentine’s day Daily Wire personality Matt Walsh (of “What is a Woman?” fame) released a video degrading TikTok star Dylan Mulvaney in cruel, dehumanizing terms.
This extreme rhetoric was, apparently, too much even for some of Knowles and Walsh’s fellow propagandists. Christina Buttons, who has been employed by the Daily Wire to spread misinformation about medical care for transgender youth, announced that she’ll be leaving the Wire over these comments in a Tuesday blog post. Buttons explained that her activism to stop children from recieving evidence-based medical care does not extend to stopping adults from making decisions about their own lives. Good for her?
screenshot from Buttons’ blog
An even more muted objection to the language employed by Knowles and Walsh was made today, by a conservative writer for the Washington Examiner. In an essay titled “This is not the way to argue against transgender ideology,” writer Julian Adorney complained that people on both sides are engaging in overheated rhetoric, singling out a 2017 article by a contributor to the Huffington Post titled "I Don't Know How To Explain To You That You Should Care About Other People," in which the article called conservatives selfish and cruel. It also criticized the treatmet of Mulvaney by Walsh, who once again said of Mulvaney, an individual human being, that “Everyone [who] looks at you will see something pitiable and bizarre.”
Sometimes the bothsides-ing is so brazen you have to stop a moment to catch your breath.
Adorney’s primary objection to this rhetoric isn’t that it’s cruel or dehumanizing to trans people (in fact he conspicuously avoids referring to trans people at all), but that being cruel and dehumanizing won’t help sway many cis people to their side, and in fact might put them off.
screenshot from the Washington Examiner
Perish the thought that opponents get the idea that gender-critical commentators look down on “transitioners” the word this author has chosen to avoid saying transgender people, lest he make trans people sound like human beings who are entitled to dignity and respect. He also, bizarrely, refers to the statements of Walsh and Knowles as “virtue signaling” implying that there’s something… virtuous… about insulting a trans woman’s appearance or evoking Nazi language by calling for the eradication of a group of human beings.
Still, the Examiner essay is instructive because it shows that some conservatives are not entirely immune to public opinion shifting against them. This is good news, and not necessarily something that has been clear until this point. Although Adorney’s smarmy, dehumanizing, bad-faith bothsidesing is almost as offensive as the comments of Walsh and Knowles, it’s important to know that he’s taking notice of public opinion and feels alarmed that ordinary people aren’t responding to its “virtues” the way he does.