
=============================================================================
With Matt Walsh's new documentary "Am I Racist?" getting a nationwide theatrical release, many people may be surprised to learn that this is not Walsh's first documentary. His first and arguably breakout hit documentary "What is a Woman?" was released on Daily Wire's platform, Daily Wire+, in 2022 and made some waves and stirred a lot of controversy. While the documentary was notorious, it certainly didn't reach a wide audience compared to other well-known documentaries. Daily Wire hopes to change that in Walsh's new movie with the theatrical release. The topic of gender identity is still a heavily debated issue in society today. It raises questions about societal norms, personal identity, objective reality and the implications of these concepts on culture. "What is a Woman?", approaches this heavily debated subject with a bold, fearless, and some might say, heartless lens.
The Bold Approach of the Documentary
------------------------------------
Walsh's documentary is a fearless exploration of a contentious subject. Unlike many documentaries that may shy away from difficult questions, this film dives headfirst into the inquiry: "What is a woman?" This question itself serves as the central theme, guiding the narrative throughout the film.
By framing the documentary around this question, Walsh keeps the focus clear, in an attempt to prevent the discussion from becoming convoluted, even though it does. His approach is not just to provoke (which he certainly and deliberatly does) but to genuinely seek understanding; a tactic that allows viewers to engage with the material on a deeper level. It must be pointed out, though, that Walsh makes it clear from the beginning that he will not be swayed. Instead, he seeks to understand moreso how people can come to these different beliefs, rather than exploring the beliefs himself. This approach is the root of the documentary's humor though, which there is plenty of. One could expect "Am I Racist?" to follow a very similar philosophy.
Exploring Perspectives: Pro and Con
-----------------------------------
One of the striking features of the documentary is that is actually does a pretty good job to present both views of the transgender debate. Walsh interviews a range of individuals, including experts from both sides of the argument. This includes gender-affirming physicians and therapists, as well as critics like Dr. Jordan Peterson. On the other hand, some of the subjects interviewed could not be considered experts on either side of the issue. However, it's worth noting that in this realm, Walsh does seem to interview more "non experts" in the pro-trans camp. It should also be noted that Walsh had to essentially be "in disguise" when interviewing many of the "pro-trans" interviewees. Walsh and Daily Wire maintain that this is the only way they can get these people to talk to them. It's already been confirmed that Walsh goes under cover again for his new film.
While the balance may not be perfectly equal, it does provide viewers with a comprehensive understanding of the arguments surrounding gender identity. Many times, Walsh asks a simple question and allows the person he's interviewing to just talk and lay out their ideas, which in some cases are quite extreme.

The Rationalist Stance
----------------------
Walsh employs a rationalist approach throughout the documentary. He openly acknowledges his lack of expertise at the beginning, which lends an air of sincerity to his inquiries. This Socratic method encourages viewers to think critically about the answers presented to him.
For example, during a street interview, Walsh challenges a respondent who claims that a woman is someone who identifies as such. He counters with the question, "Are you a cat?" This line of questioning effectively illustrates the absurdity of defining identity solely based on self-identification without observable criteria.
At the same time, Rationalist thinking has one pitfall. It requires a foundational undertanding of the world around us, at least a perceived one. Walsh logic requires an agreed-upon understanding of the world around us. The cat example above relies on everyone acknowledging what a cat is. However, if our scientific understanding of "catness" were to change Walsh may have to change his view or update his thinking. That's not to say Walsh's reasoning is flawed. With the cat example, it's a pretty sure bet considering how the idea of what constitutes a cat is and has been fairly universal. If someone were to point to what we all universally agree is a dog and say to you that it is in fact a cat, most reasonable people would agree that this person is wrong. Their differing perception does not alter what a cat is or what a dog is. This is the foundation that Matt is relying on. In such basic examples, it's pretty sound. If, however, we enter more scientific areas then rationalism alone is often insufficient. Several completely rational hypotheses are proven wrong following new discoveries and information.

Critiques of the Documentary
----------------------------
While the documentary has its strengths, it is not without flaws. Some interviews, particularly those with individuals who are not experts in the field, can feel irrelevant or disconnected from the core topic, if not mean-spirited. For instance, an interview with a shop owner in Portland, while humorous, does not contribute significantly to the overarching discussion about gender identity.
Moreover, Walsh's persona can come off as provocative and somewhat pretentious, which might alienate some viewers. While this approach serves to engage audiences, it can also detract from the seriousness of the subject matter.
Editing Choices and Their Impact
--------------------------------
The editing of the documentary also plays a crucial role in how the message is conveyed. In some segments, particularly those featuring gender studies professors, the editing juxtaposes their lengthy responses with comedic cuts, which may undermine the weight of their arguments. This technique can leave viewers feeling as though important points were obscured for the sake of humor.

Addressing Trans Athletes
-------------------------
One of the most compelling segments of the documentary focuses on the issue of transgender athletes. Walsh presents interviews and footage that highlight the ongoing debate about the participation of transgender women in female sports. This section is edited effectively, showcasing the perspectives of both sides while emphasizing the lack of empirical evidence that unfair advantages don't exist. To a rationlist like Walsh, the differences are self-evident and he present them as such.
This segment not only informs viewers but also encourages them to consider the implications of policy decisions regarding sports and gender.

The Importance of Open Dialogue
-------------------------------
Ultimately, "What is a Woman?" serves as a vehicle for fostering dialogue about gender identity. Despite its biases and flaws, the documentary raises crucial questions that deserve attention. It challenges viewers to confront their assumptions and engage with differing perspectives.
In a society increasingly divided on this issue, such dialogues are essential. By presenting various viewpoints, Walsh encourages viewers to critically assess their beliefs and the information they encounter. It's a shame that many viewers who would be considered "left-leaning" didn't even see the film. While is there plenty to criticize with Walsh and his approach, without seeing the film his critics have nothing to say other than unsubstantiated claims of bigotry and transphobia. Unsubstantiated because they have not seen the film.
Conclusion: Likely More of the Same
-----------------------------------
Walsh will in all likelihood continue the style and path of "What is a Woman?" to make "Am I Racist?". As mentioned above, the documentary has its flaws, but the potential critics by in large didn't see the movie. Therefore all the relevent critiques of it have been positive because they are being made by those who agreed with Walsh before even seeing the film. "Am I Racist?" will likely follow with the same result, but a theatrical release may garner a wider audience and wider criticism. We shall see and we look forward to watching and reviewing "Am I Racist?" which premiered in theaters September 13th