War The Daily Wire Comes Under ‘Sustained DDoS Attack’ Intended To ‘Disrupt’ Premiere Of ‘What Is A Woman?’ - Don't worry I have mirrors

Screenshot 2022-06-02 17.16.40.png

The Daily Wire came under a sustained DDoS attack during the world premiere of “What is a Woman?” that was intended to disrupt people being able to access the highly anticipated film.

“We have confirmed that @realDailyWire experienced a significant and sustained DDoS attack tonight meant to disrupt the World Premiere of #WhatIsAWoman,” Jeremy Boreing, Co-CEO of The Daily Wire, said in a statement. “A million requests per minute at the peak flooded our system and created challenges for many viewers.”

“We are working to address these challenges in real time,” Boreing added. “Even so, the premiere had more viewers than any stream in the history of the site. A huge success for an amazing film. Someone doesn’t want you to see this movie. See it anyway. VOD up now.”

The attack began shortly after the start of the live-stream of Daily Wire’s Backstage program, which preceded the premiere and featured Daily Wire hosts discussing the making and meaning of the film. Many users encountered difficulty accessing the live-stream due to the malicious event.

Nevertheless, the event was the most trafficked live-stream in Daily Wire history, and the company added more paid subscribers than on any previous day since its founding as eager audiences overcame the challenges to see the feature documentary.

1654192293662.png

A distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack is a type of coordinated malicious campaign that seeks to shut down a targeted server by flooding the server with extreme levels of traffic coming from bots. The extremely high levels of traffic use up the server’s resources and prevent real users from being able to access it.

The film features The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh talking to ordinary citizens, medical professionals, and even African tribesmen in an effort to get answers to a question that has leftists triggered.

“The left will do whatever they can to make sure no one sees this movie,” Walsh said. “They know their ideology is based on lies and their logic is hollow and premiering the movie to a massive online audience will not only be an utter embarrassment to them but will send a message that they will not win this battle.”

1654192352671.png


In the documentary, Walsh sits down with the nation’s foremost advocates of radical gender theory, giving them the opportunity to state their case. Instead, they punt. Asked to defend Orwellian claims that natural sex and biology have nothing to do with a person’s identity, they instead deflect such questions to focus on Walsh’s supposedly “hateful” views.
What Is A Woman?” gives viewers a jaw-dropping look at:
  • Issues of gender dysphoria confusion that activists use to encourage sex-change operations on children not old enough to vote or drink.
  • Transgender (biologically male) athletes’ destruction of girls’ sports and the denial of opportunities for elite female athletes — particularly the case of NCAA women’s swimming champion Lia Thomas.
  • The Pronoun Police and the Left’s attempts to use character assassination and censorship to advance a radical agenda.
  • Absurd claims about “birthing persons” and that “having a penis doesn’t make one male” — along with other lies and doublespeak used to mainstream radical gender theory.
  • The disturbing case of male-registered sex offender Darren Merager, who claims to be female and who is accused of terrorizing under-aged girls by walking around the women’s locker room in a Los Angeles spa with an erect penis.
  • The three great casualties of this radical movement:
  1. Women, whose identities are being appropriated and erased by activists who shun science and biology.
  2. Children, who are, at best, being indoctrinated to believe lies about basic facts and, at worst, guided into harmful, irreversible medical “transition” procedures.
  3. And, ultimately, the truth.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-...tended-to-disrupt-premiere-of-what-is-a-woman (A)




Mirrors:

https://odysee.com/@Marsey:8/whatisawoman:5

https://dood.pm/d/gkl5o8mblfpc

https://slmaxed.com/v/4Jj8GzOQ72qnvPog

https://anonfiles.com/Bateq3mby9/What_is_a_Woman_The_Daily_Wire_mp4

https://videovard.sx/v/rj5lzpnw4hc7

https://1200388512.rsc.cdn77.org/WhatIsAWoman.mp4

https://marsey.s3.ir-thr-at1.arvanstorage.com/WhatIsAWoman.mp4
 
Last edited:
the intro is going to massively turn a lot of people off

if you've got kids you know that boys and girls are different but that pink and blue stuff is silly
It was to quickly and easily establish a point to viewers by clearly depicting traditional male/female behaviors and preferences. Then we can see how these groomers and freaks pervert the natural order. It's actually a good structure.

If you took "girls can only wear pink, ever" from the opening then you missed the point.

I bet you have lots of friends.
Quality over quantity, every time.
 
While I commend Matt Walsh and The Daily Wire for remaining steadfast and standing firm with this documentary while not caving to these people, I’m willing to argue that The Notorious B.I.G pretty much summed up the main reason why this “gay agenda” is all hype and no substance:


7: this rule is so underrated
Keep your family and business completely separated
Money and blood don't mix like two dicks and no bitch
Find yourself in serious shit
The troons were just an added ingredient that no one could understand how it worked.
 
Nice deletion.

In case anyone's wondering, our dear troon defender stated something along the lines of:

"There's this thing called growing up. He's now 23 though???"

Imagine calling that a he.
I got the comments mixed up, he was replying to my reply to the other person.
... And that was your scathing criticism of the whole documentary? That's it? There's no mention of her actually being 15 in that scene you're talking about
This is the same argument that pedos use for the anime children they whack off to "uh but they're actually 374659 years old", but with real people. That's a fucking nuclear hot take.
She posted it online for all to see. Was Matt scummy?
More than that, creepy.
 
Last edited:
I got the comments mixed up, he was replying to my reply to the other person.

This is the same argument that pedos use for the anime children they whack off to "uh but they're actually 374659 years old", but with real people. That's a fucking nuclear hot take.

More than that, creepy.
No one would care if it was a teenage boy's bare chest that they posted to the internet themselves. The fact you're trying to hem and haw over this proves like all troons, you don't actually believe your own shit at a core level.
Totally missed the point there's no evidence they're 15 in the photo, it just was shown in a segment where he was talking about girls as young as 15 having mastectomy's and then showed it as an example. Do you really think anyone buys this disingenuous "it's creepy!" horseshit?
 
No one would care if it was a teenage boy's bare chest that they posted to the internet themselves. The fact you're trying to hem and haw over this proves like all troons, you don't actually believe your own shit at a core level.
Totally missed the point there's no evidence they're 15 in the photo, it just was shown in a segment where he was talking about girls as young as 15 having mastectomy's and then showed it as an example. Do you really think anyone buys this disingenuous "it's creepy!" horseshit?
I know this isn't a perfectly good analogy, but here let's try: If person A thinks the age of consent should be 16 and person B thinks it should be 18 is it ok for person B to have sex with a 16 year old? Basically what I'm saying is it's scummy to go against your own morals.
 
I know this isn't a perfectly good analogy, but here let's try: If person A thinks the age of consent should be 16 and person B thinks it should be 18 is it ok for person B to have sex with a 16 year old? Basically what I'm saying is it's scummy to go against your own morals.
"No you can't hold me to my own words but maybe if I try I can hold you to yours, this isn't transparent at all"
 
I know this isn't a perfectly good analogy, but here let's try: If person A thinks the age of consent should be 16 and person B thinks it should be 18 is it ok for person B to have sex with a 16 year old? Basically what I'm saying is it's scummy to go against your own morals.
Ah, so this is a "well, I don't believe this, but, maybe if I use this argument on you, it will work!" type thing. But as explained before, her tits are gone, so no one cares. Especially when the person posted it to social media themselves. Clearly if it was actually considered CP it would have been removed.
No one actually buys that you really think it's creepy. It's just more disingenuous horsehit that you don't actually believe but think will convince others if you pretend to hard enough. Kind of like what's shown in the documentary.
:thinking:
 
"No you can't hold me to my own words but maybe if I try I can hold you to yours, this isn't transparent at all"
Because you know damn well I think it's fine (although scummy using a 15 year olds' pictures in a hit piece) but I know that it would only end up with you troglodytes calling me shit and not actually arguing.
Ah, so this is a "well, I don't believe this, but, maybe if I use this argument on you, it will work!" type thing. But as explained before, her tits are gone, so no one cares. Especially when the person posted it to social media themselves.
See above, love the group think going on here.
Clearly if it was actually considered CP it would have been removed
So you think that Matt Walsh believes trans men are men?
No one actually buys that you really think it's creepy.
It's kinda creepy to use pictures of anyone underage against their will, whether they are male or female.
 
In regards to the stupid bitch's chest: are we all finally in agreement that female breasts are inherently sexual and shouldn't be exposed in public (a la breast feeding)? Or are we agreeing that despite hacking your tits off, their sexualization is transitive somehow, despite being a 'true and honest' Male chest? So no matter how much you go under the knife, your original gender will always matter more?
Otherwise, what's the issue?
 
Because you know damn well I think it's fine (although scummy using a 15 year olds' pictures in a hit piece) but I know that it would only end up with you troglodytes calling me shit and not actually arguing.

See above, love the group think going on here.

So you think that Matt Walsh believes trans men are men?

It's kinda creepy to use pictures of anyone underage against their will, whether they are male or female.
Are you gonna get interviewed in the sequel? You're killing it right now.
 
Back