Oct 9, 2022·edited Oct 9, 2022Liked by Holly MathNerd
It's also worth noting that, after Josh Duggar's later misdeeds came to light, Walsh wrote that he was "wrong about Josh Duggar being a repent man."
To those unfamiliar with Christian theology this may seem like a bland criticism - and Walsh was criticized for it. For those who are familiar, however, it is quite literally a damning one.
Sincerely impressed by your logical and reasoned response, Holly. Your opinions demonstrate maturity heightened by ethical standards I wish more of us could employ.
Every movement needs someone willing to be the asshole to put stuff out there. I'm glad Matt Walsh is taking on that role. I'm not supporting him financially, because he's irksome. It really bothers me when he presents himself as this guy who is taking risks to tell the truth. He has an entire media corporation backing him up. Parents being put on FBI lists by school boards are taking risks. Nurses and firefighters refusing in vaccine mandate states are taking risks. (Not to be a suck up) Holly Math Nerd and Glen Greenwald take more risks on a daily basis than Matt Walsh.
Regarding the adult, married and pregnant at 16 thing.
It is of course worth pointing out that even 50 years ago (less perhaps) it was common for boys and girls to leave school at about age 16 and go to work. Work for boys in the UK at least (I'm not sure about other countries but I do know the UK) certainly included joining the army or navy as well as all kinds of dangerous jobs like mining (or forestry/farming). At that age you could (needing I think a financial guaraontor) rent a flat, buy a car - or more likely a motor scooter given prices - and so on. It was possible to get married at 16 with parental permission. Essentially at 16 you were considered an adult under some kind of probation. We have gradually extended childhood, particularly in the US, and that's not really healthy.
Having said that, this is where I'm a little less forgiving on the Duggar thing. I agree with you that putting the fear of the law and jailtime into a 14 y.o. boy might well be enough to make that boy repent. If you think that a 16 y.o. is effectively an adult then logically you should think that a 14 y.o. is mature enough to understand consequences and good/evil and that therefore he should be forced to face up semi-publicly to what he did. But I do like his "I'm not sure what I'd do if it were my son" because I think that is absolutely spot on. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone etc.
It's an easy thing to pontificate on when you aren't the parent on the spot and very different when you have to consider the likely harms to your children. In an ideal world of course you'd involve the law. In the current world, where the law is frequently an ass, involving the law could end up being disastrous. For example (and I'm speculating here) I could easily see some Child Protective Services person and family court deciding that all your children, both abuser and abused, be taken away from you and put in the foster system (where of course they are likely to abused some more).
Great stuff, I think this is a very fair but critical take on Walsh. The only thing that I'd like to dissent to is the characterization of girls as "maturing" faster. I don't think it has as much to do with maturity as with conforming to social norms and being more sensitive to reputation. Perhaps this is not a meaningful distinction, but to me it's the difference between having long-term outlook and being agreeable and neurotic.
It's also worth noting that, after Josh Duggar's later misdeeds came to light, Walsh wrote that he was "wrong about Josh Duggar being a repent man."
To those unfamiliar with Christian theology this may seem like a bland criticism - and Walsh was criticized for it. For those who are familiar, however, it is quite literally a damning one.
Sincerely impressed by your logical and reasoned response, Holly. Your opinions demonstrate maturity heightened by ethical standards I wish more of us could employ.
Every movement needs someone willing to be the asshole to put stuff out there. I'm glad Matt Walsh is taking on that role. I'm not supporting him financially, because he's irksome. It really bothers me when he presents himself as this guy who is taking risks to tell the truth. He has an entire media corporation backing him up. Parents being put on FBI lists by school boards are taking risks. Nurses and firefighters refusing in vaccine mandate states are taking risks. (Not to be a suck up) Holly Math Nerd and Glen Greenwald take more risks on a daily basis than Matt Walsh.
Well written and argued Holly, thank you for the analysis.
Really needed a dose of sanity and reason this week.
Regarding the adult, married and pregnant at 16 thing.
It is of course worth pointing out that even 50 years ago (less perhaps) it was common for boys and girls to leave school at about age 16 and go to work. Work for boys in the UK at least (I'm not sure about other countries but I do know the UK) certainly included joining the army or navy as well as all kinds of dangerous jobs like mining (or forestry/farming). At that age you could (needing I think a financial guaraontor) rent a flat, buy a car - or more likely a motor scooter given prices - and so on. It was possible to get married at 16 with parental permission. Essentially at 16 you were considered an adult under some kind of probation. We have gradually extended childhood, particularly in the US, and that's not really healthy.
Having said that, this is where I'm a little less forgiving on the Duggar thing. I agree with you that putting the fear of the law and jailtime into a 14 y.o. boy might well be enough to make that boy repent. If you think that a 16 y.o. is effectively an adult then logically you should think that a 14 y.o. is mature enough to understand consequences and good/evil and that therefore he should be forced to face up semi-publicly to what he did. But I do like his "I'm not sure what I'd do if it were my son" because I think that is absolutely spot on. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone etc.
It's an easy thing to pontificate on when you aren't the parent on the spot and very different when you have to consider the likely harms to your children. In an ideal world of course you'd involve the law. In the current world, where the law is frequently an ass, involving the law could end up being disastrous. For example (and I'm speculating here) I could easily see some Child Protective Services person and family court deciding that all your children, both abuser and abused, be taken away from you and put in the foster system (where of course they are likely to abused some more).
Great stuff, I think this is a very fair but critical take on Walsh. The only thing that I'd like to dissent to is the characterization of girls as "maturing" faster. I don't think it has as much to do with maturity as with conforming to social norms and being more sensitive to reputation. Perhaps this is not a meaningful distinction, but to me it's the difference between having long-term outlook and being agreeable and neurotic.