Matt Walsh and The Daily Wire launched “What Is a Woman?” on Wednesday, and the documentary on transgender ideology is already causing waves.

While it includes a shocking interview with a teammate of Lia Thomas, the biological male swimmer who just won the NCAA women’s championship, perhaps the most interesting aspects, at least that I’ve seen so far, come via interviews with supposed “experts.” On that front, a clip is going viral that may be the most absurd, telling exchange of the production.

In it, Walsh tries to press a professor on what the truth is regarding the definition of a woman. Instead of getting an answer, he gets this.

This is brilliant. With simple, dispassionate questions, @MattWalshBlog reveals that mere curiosity about the truth is enough to offend people who've built their careers and lifestyles on the back of its suppression.
pic.twitter.com/yIpbqazv4O

— Seth Dillon (@SethDillon) June 2, 2022

The clip opens with the professor having just attempted to define a woman in a “social context,” which leads Walsh to clarify that he’s not asking about social context, but just wants to get to the truth of the matter. At that point, the professor says he’s “really uncomfortable with that language, like, getting to the truth.” From there, Walsh interrupts to ask “Why is that uncomfortable?” The professor’s answer? That it “sounds deeply transphobic” after which he threatens to cut the interview off.

In 40 seconds, the entire house of cards behind leftwing gender ideology collapses. Why? Because there is no actual truth behind it. Instead, its proponents rely on the self-given ability to constantly shift definitions to fit, as the professor admitted, whatever social context is currently present. In no way is that an objective means to define womanhood, and if it comes down to “Anyone who says they are a woman is a woman,” which is the most popular transgender position, then women simply do not exist.

Besides, in what other areas of life do we allow malleability to operate on such a ridiculous scale? Can someone be “trans-race?” If the answer is no, and the left would absolutely assert that the answer is no, why is the answer no? What’s the philosophical and biological difference between “feeling” like a different race and “feeling” like a different gender? At least in the former situation, a person might actually be 5-10% of the race they want to “identify” as.

But returning to this professor, his inability to answer basic questions about his ideology shows its shallowness. Underneath the transgender movement stands nothing at all. It simply floats on an unearned plain of social acceptance that can’t be defended with logic and reason. Walsh’s attempt to expose that is laudable.