Normally when some influencer posts a video that I find annoying and I feel the need to respond to it, I save it for my Daily Cancellation segment. Today, however, I am going to break that rule. I am going to begin with a video from an allegedly conservative influencer named Emily Wilson.
What makes this video relevant, aside from the fact that it just simply annoys me, is that it echoes a message we’ve been hearing with increasing frequency from women on the Right with, in some cases, very large platforms. Emily’s platform isn’t very large, but it is sizable enough. She has half a million followers on Instagram. I’m sure she’s a nice person. I don’t know her and have no issue with her personally. But she represents a growing, or at least increasingly evident, problem on the Right. The problem, in a word, is feminism.
Feminism is not compatible with any meaningful definition of conservatism. Whatever conservatism is trying to conserve — like marriage, the family, western civilization itself — feminism militates against. And yet many feminists have become mouthpieces in the movement, and are accepted as such, as long as they wear a MAGA hat and say that they don’t like illegal immigration or whatever.
So with that in mind, let’s listen to just the latest submission to the ever expanding conservative feminist genre:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Not to pick on <a href="https://twitter.com/emilysavesusa?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@emilysavesusa</a> because I’ve been seeing a lot of girls on the right counter signaling the ‘trad’ stay at home mom lifestyle lately also, but I think this message is ridiculous.
Being a SAHM is not being ‘trapped’ by a man. That’s feminist BS. It’s also not… <a href="https://t.co/2iiwnYCb0T">pic.twitter.com/2iiwnYCb0T</a>
&mdash; Sarah Stock ✟ (@sarahcstock) <a href="https://twitter.com/sarahcstock/status/1917844165893018047?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 1, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Well, I am cringing. But not because of the trad wives. I’m cringing at this lame, half-baked attack on stay-at-home moms. And I’m cringing even more at the fact that women with these kinds of views are still embraced as “conservative.”
Try to imagine the opposite of this. Imagine a Left-wing influencer who advocates for every Left-wing policy under the sun but then comes out one day and says, “You know what? I think a woman’s proper place is in the home, raising her children.” It’s impossible to conceive of any Left-wing woman ever saying such a thing. And if she did, she would be immediately excised from the movement. That’s because leftists understand that supporting so-called traditional gender roles is fundamentally antithetical to their worldview. You literally cannot be a leftist and hold that view.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1588-member-exclusive?elementPosition=1&amp;row=2&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
The same is logically true in the reverse. Attacking gender roles is fundamentally leftist. Which means you cannot be conservative if you hold fundamentally leftist views. You have every right to express those views. But you should not be embraced as a conservative, much less listened to as a spokeswoman for the movement. 
Now let’s go through some of the specifics here. Emily says that a woman should have a job and her own income so that she isn’t “trapped” by a man. She envisions the relationship between husband and wife as inherently competitive. Marriage is a zero sum game where both husband and wife are competing for control. Again, this is a fundamentally leftist conception. It is a recipe for divorce. There is nothing in and of itself wrong with a wife earning money. As I’ve conceded many times, a family may feel that they need two incomes in order to survive. Or they may want a second income. Or the wife might have a job that doesn’t require leaving the house and going to an office every day. But if she’s earning money as an escape hatch because she doesn’t want to be “trapped,” that is a very bad sign.
If you want to understand why it’s a bad sign just imagine how it would sound if a man adopted this philosophy. A woman on X commented yesterday that a wife needs a “backup in case their man can’t fulfill his providing roles.”
Well what if a man decided to have a back up in case his woman didn’t fulfill her wifely duties? Most people would find that objectionable, for good reason. The whole point of marriage is that you are devoting yourself entirely to your spouse. Two become one flesh. It is not possible to make that level of commitment while at the same time actively building yourself a nest egg just in case you want to leave. Saying the vows and pledging yourself to your betrothed means not having an exit plan. It means you burn the boats like Cortés and turn towards that wilderness and journey into it together, come what may.
She also says that men want to be mentally stimulated. The implication is that stay-at-home moms are too stupid to provide that sort of stimulation because all they think about is their “sourdough bread.”
This is absurdly dismissive and insulting to millions of good, godly, intelligent women who, while staying home with the children, are also capable of having intelligent conversations with their husbands. It also assumes that a woman who sits in a cubicle all day will somehow have more interesting things to say to her husband at the end of the day. Having a job as a woman does not make you smart or interesting. I hate to break it to the working women of the world, but your husband is almost certainly not intellectually stimulated by your job or your stories about your job. If he was able to choose between listening to a story about your office drama or listening to a story about what you did with the kids that day, he would prefer to hear about the latter. This is the sort of thing you would know about men if you listened to them when they try to tell you what they want, instead of declaring what you think they should want.
But the biggest problem — and the objection you hear most often from these feminist types — is the claim that somehow the stay-at-home mom arrangement is implausible, or even impossible. Emily declares that your chances of finding a man who can provide for you while you stay home and raise the children are, “Slim to none. Actually none,” she says. There&#8217;s no chance that it works out for you. There’s no chance that it works out for you or anyone you know. And yet it has worked out for countless people. It’s worked out for my wife. It’s worked out for many families that I know personally. It’s worked out for billions of human beings across the globe and through history since the dawn of civilization. Emily has written off the most normal and historically common practice as not just difficult but, according to her, literally impossible. And not just impossible, but also absurd and grotesque.
There’s a lot of this kind of thing going around. During my conversation with Tucker Carlson this week, we talked about the absurdity of gay adoption and gay parenthood.
Here&#8217;s a clip of that exchange that Tucker&#8217;s team posted:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Should gay couples be able to adopt? Matt Walsh and Tucker Carlson discuss. <a href="https://t.co/q3I5vRRzVF">pic.twitter.com/q3I5vRRzVF</a>
&mdash; Tucker Carlson Network (@TCNetwork) <a href="https://twitter.com/TCNetwork/status/1918058750692180235?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 1, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Plenty of people on the Right, or Right-adjacent, took great exception to this. Glenn Greenwald is one of them. He tweeted in response: 
<blockquote>One has to be morally deranged — or totally ignorant of the grim realities of kids lingering without parents in orphanages, shelters and foster care, only to be expelled at 18 with no support — to believe that that dark hell is better for kids than being adopted by gay couples.</blockquote>
Morally deranged, he says. The view that two men should not be allowed to adopt children was held by nearly everyone in this country, and everyone across the world, until very recently. Barack Obama was against gay adoption when he first ran for president. So was every other elected Democrat. Any elected Democrat over the age of 50 was probably, at one point, opposed to both gay marriage and gay adoption. In fact, gay adoption was so obviously wrong to so many people for so long that it wasn&#8217;t even discussed. It wasn&#8217;t debated. It was just intuitively understood that children need a mother and a father. We won’t let two men adopt children for the same reason that we wouldn’t let a polyamorous polycule adopt a child. Children need a mother and a father. We are not going to deliberately put a child into a disordered environment where he is not only deprived of a mother or a father, but the role of mother or father has been replaced in an unnatural and confusing way.
This was always understood. Now, in the blink of an eye, what was always understood is &#8220;morally deranged.” The thing that everyone believed forever until approximately last Tuesday is not just wrong but shocking and upsetting and baffling. This is the game that&#8217;s played. And I, for one, am entirely sick of it.
Not everything that is old or traditional is automatically good, of course. Slavery is old and traditional — and still practiced in non-western countries. It&#8217;s also very bad. But there are basic truths about how human society is fundamentally structured. Truths that have withstood the test of time. Truths that have, while civilization held fast to them, it flourished and advanced in remarkable and seemingly miraculous ways. Truths that, minutes after our society abandoned, immediately led to decline and chaos and confusion. One of those truths is that a child needs a mother and a father. Only a man and a woman can have a baby, or should. Another one of those truths is that men and women are different, and so have different roles in the home and in society. This was an idea so basic that there wasn&#8217;t even a term for it. We only started labeling it &#8220;gender roles&#8221; at the moment that we decided to abandon it. And I would say that the results of that decision have not been good. Divorce, broken homes, declining birth rates, 60 million dead babies. And those are just the early returns.
That’s why we cannot be embarrassed to hold to a system that is ancient and timeless, and proven, tested, and vindicated by the testimony of our ancestors and by thousands of years of human experience beyond that. As conservatives, if that is not worth conserving, then nothing is.

Three businesswomen walking together in an office

Why ‘Conservative Feminism’ Is A Total Lie

Why 'Conservative Feminism' Is A Total Lie

Chemotherapy

Conservatives

Family Values

Fathers

Feminism

Husband

Marriage

Matt Walsh

Opinion

Parenting

Social Media

Women

Japan&#8217;s population plummeted for the 14th year in a row in 2024, declining by nearly 900,000 people despite massive government spending aimed at encouraging childbirth.
New data <a href="https://www.stat.go.jp/data/jinsui/2024np/index.html">released</a> on Monday by Japan&#8217;s Internal Affairs Ministry shows the number of Japanese nationals declining by 898,000, marking the steepest annual decline since authorities began keeping records in the 1950s.
Roughly a quarter of the decline came in the 15-64 age demographic, which fell by 224,000 in a severe blow to the nation’s tax base, according to Bloomberg.
The country&#8217;s fertility rate in 2023 stood at just 1.2 expected births per woman over her lifetime, far below the 2.1 needed to maintain a stable population, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-15/japan-s-population-falls-by-half-million-as-birth-rate-stays-low">reflected</a> in Japan’s child population declining to a record-low 11.2% of the population, 13.8 million, after a decline of 343,000 last year.
The sharp demographic downturn comes despite the Japanese government <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-15/japan-s-population-falls-by-half-million-as-birth-rate-stays-low">approving</a> a $25 billion package in late 2023 to expand child allowances, improve childcare, and increase education support, only for birth rates to plummet further.
Former Health Minister Keizo Takemi described Japan&#8217;s demographic outlook as &#8220;critical,&#8221; warning the country only has until the 2030s to reverse course, per Newsweek.
Surveys show many younger Japanese are reluctant to marry or have families, discouraged by bleak job prospects, rising living costs outpacing salary growth, and corporate cultures incompatible with dual-income parenting.
The nation&#8217;s population is <a href="https://apnews.com/article/japan-birth-rate-declining-population-82662ea061286cb907fd7d071e5b0b9b">projected</a> to shrink by approximately 30% to 87 million by 2070, when four out of every ten Japanese will be 65 or older, potentially placing a crippling strain on Japan’s extensive welfare state, according to the Associated Press.
Experts like Ekaterina Hertog, an associate professor at the Oxford Internet Institute and Institute for Ethics in AI who researches the societal impact of Japanese labor practices, are concerned that monetary incentives simply won’t be enough to increase fertility simply due to how Japanese culture has developed in the modern era.
&#8220;Marriage trends in Japan and South Korea are significantly shaped by economic conditions and their intersection with gender roles,&#8221; she told Newsweek.
The number of annual marriages on the island nation dipped below 500,000 for the first time in 90 years in 2023.
Hertog explained that Japanese women still have the expectation of prospective husbands fulfilling the &#8220;traditional male breadwinner” role, causing many lower-paid men to postpone marriage or skip it entirely.
&#8220;Another important set of factors are family norms, that prescribe children&#8217;s support of elderly parents and the difficulty of negotiating them in societies which have had low fertility rates for decades,&#8221; she added.
Ryuichi Kaneko, demographer and professor at Meiji University, told the Asahi Shimbun newspaper: &#8220;I believe one of the reasons Japan&#8217;s declining birthrate has become especially severe is that, in the postwar period, the country built a society that prioritized economic activity to an extreme degree.”
&#8220;We believe the declining births has not been effectively controlled,&#8221; Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi told reporters regarding the new demographic data, according to the Associated Press.
This trend has been reflected in other Southeast Asian countries post-World War II, with China, South Korea, and Taiwan all experiencing similar if not more severe declines in fertility following mass urbanization, demanding work cultures, and changing attitudes toward marriage.
Similar trends are emerging in the United States, where fertility rates have dropped to 1.67 births per woman — also below the 2.1 replacement level — despite various government incentives for families.
Both nations are discovering that financial packages alone may be insufficient to overcome deeper cultural and economic factors affecting family formation decisions.
With fewer working-age citizens supporting a growing elderly population, Japan&#8217;s traditional social welfare systems face unprecedented strain — creating economic challenges that many other developed nations may soon confront.

Elderly people seen during the concert at Ikebukuro

Marriage Crisis: Japan’s Birth Rate Falls To Record Low Despite $25 Billion Gov Intervention

Culture

Health

Japan

World

It’s been a rather ignominious couple of weeks for liberal women on the internet. Of course it’s been an ignominious last several decades for liberal women in general — on the internet or otherwise. But these past couple of weeks have given us one viral moment after another where this demographic is thoroughly embarrassing itself. For the sake of brevity, I won’t even include all of the many videos of liberal women vandalizing Teslas and shrieking at their drivers. The anti-Tesla brigade is, after all, almost exclusively women and gay men. These two groups also make up the core of the Democratic voting base. We’ll get back to that point in a moment.
But leaving the Tesla chaos to the side for now, this latest rash of viral humiliation started two weeks ago with footage of an altercation between a woman and a young man on a New York City subway. The woman was upset about the young man’s MAGA hat, which she demanded that he remove from his head. She attempted to take matters into her own hands. But the problem is that she apparently has all the speed and agility of a baby panda. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
NEW: The woman who face planted outside a New York City subway has been identified as luxury brand specialist Alberta Testanero, according to the New York Post.
The 55-year-old has become radicalized, according to a former colleague.
Testanero works with luxury brands including… <a href="https://t.co/WAYUnmovox">pic.twitter.com/WAYUnmovox</a>
&mdash; Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) <a href="https://twitter.com/CollinRugg/status/1905984158138298556?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 29, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
That was the glorious sight of the woman chasing a young man to steal his MAGA hat, only to trip and face-plant in the middle of the subway station. Thanks to some crack reporting from the New York Post, we now know that this woman’s name is Alberta Testanero and she is a “luxury brand specialist.” Which is exactly the kind of nonsense job that you’d expect a liberal woman in New York to have. I don’t even know what a “luxury brand specialist” does, but I know that this woman seems like the type to do it, whatever it is.
The following week, a woman who appears to be in her late 60s or 70s went viral with this public service announcement about her dating life:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Liberal says she will no longer be dating White men. Fellas, how do you feel about this? <a href="https://t.co/CU3CesygSw">pic.twitter.com/CU3CesygSw</a>
&mdash; Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) <a href="https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1906363322238202198?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
I know there are a lot of single young men out there who feel incredibly demoralized by the dating scene. If you’re in that category, I don&#8217;t mean to add to your frustrations. But if you’re looking for an elderly feminist grandma — if that’s your type — I’m sad to say there’s one less fish in the sea available to you. Unless you aren’t white. Then you might still have a chance. 
At the same time, another video has been making the rounds. This is a significantly younger woman named Zoe, telling the story of how she broke up with her boyfriend because he committed the unforgivable sin of being Republican:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Zoe’s cats are going to find her body when she dies. 
 <a href="https://t.co/uKyhkX9Unx">pic.twitter.com/uKyhkX9Unx</a>
&mdash; Former Congressman Matt Gaetz (@FmrRepMattGaetz) <a href="https://twitter.com/FmrRepMattGaetz/status/1906361021557579793?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
She broke up with him. That’s the end of the story. Why any man would ever date a woman like this in the first place is the greater mystery. Everything about her is aggressively unappealing. She’s the human embodiment of nails on a chalkboard.
She’s the type of woman who would no doubt describe herself as having a “big personality,” because she’s loud and obnoxious and uses the f-word a lot. But in truth she has no personality at all. She has an anti-personality. She speaks in internet lingo and has all of the mannerisms and affectations — not to mention the value system and political beliefs — of every other 20-something woman on TikTok. She professes the value of “doing your own research” but, I can guarantee, has never done anything resembling research in her life. Her research consists of watching TikTok videos.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1566-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
That said, she’s not wrong about her basic point: The relationship wasn’t going to work. It wasn’t going to work because their values were not aligned — to the extent that either one of them have values at all. And it wasn’t going to work because she is a raging narcissist and a deeply unpleasant person, who, barring some kind of miraculous personal transformation, will never have a functional and meaningful romantic or even platonic relationship with another human being in her life.
We joke about the fact that these kinds of women are always cat ladies. Indeed, in a follow up video this woman confirmed that she does have at least one cat. But the cat lady thing isn’t really a joke. There’s a reason why liberal women really do almost always end up alone with their cats. They prefer cats because cats require almost nothing from them. Change the litter box and pour some more food in the bowl, and that is the extent of the work and effort you have to put into your relationship with your cat. Feminists love cats because cats provide some measure of affection and fellowship without needing much of anything in return. No need for sacrifice or compromise or personal improvement. Successful human relationships require those things. A relationship with your cat does not. Of course the trade off is that you’ll never have anything approaching the depth of love and companionship that you could have with another person. You’ll also never have a family or children. You’ll die alone and your cherished cat will eat your carcass without a second thought.
Anyway, there is one more video in this tour. The singer Chappell Roan appeared on the Call Her Daddy podcast. As we know, Call Her Daddy is the number one podcast in the world for women. Which is a troubling fact, because the show, like its host Alex Cooper, is insipid, gross, and morally and intellectually bankrupt. It’s mostly just 95 IQ women sitting around talking about sex. There’s a reason you’ve never seen a viral clip from this show where someone says something interesting or intellectually provocative. The Joe Rogan podcast &#8212; the number one podcast in the world for men — has those kinds of moments all the time. Joe frequently talks to archeologists, astronomers, biologists, and all manner of interesting people about a wide range of academic, political, and cultural topics. Alex Cooper talks to women about sex. And that’s pretty much it.
In this viral clip, Chappell explains why she doesn’t want to have kids. Listen:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Chappell Roan: &quot;I don&#39;t know anyone who is happy with kids&quot; <a href="https://t.co/vQx6XI20at">pic.twitter.com/vQx6XI20at</a>
&mdash; End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) <a href="https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1906169065334272497?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
People with kids don’t have light in their eyes, says the dead-eyed consumerist zombie. The two dullest, least vibrant women you’ve ever seen in your life are concerned that people with kids don’t have light in their eyes.
Needless to say, Chappell is completely wrong. It’s not entirely her fault. I’m sure she probably does have some young mothers in her life who constantly complain about their kids. This is one of the dangers of venting, and why all of us — women especially, who are much more inclined to vent — should be doing a lot less of it. Using someone else as a sounding board for all of your frustrations is selfish, and enormously unpleasant and frankly pretty boring for the person forced to listen to your litany of complaints. Even worse, if that person is not in the same stage of life, you will be giving them a skewed, unfairly bleak impression of it. That’s why parents should only complain — if they’re going to complain at all — to each other. But mostly they should just stop complaining. It’s not that we’re trying to hide some deep, dark secret from the childless. It’s that a childless person has no context. They might not understand that, although you’re annoyed that your toddler woke you up at 4:00 am,  you are still filled with deep, abiding joy that you have a child to wake you up at all. It is possible to hold frustration and joy in your heart at the same time. But that is a depth that someone like Chappell Roan has never reached, cannot understand, and likely will never reach nor understand.
The point is that getting married and having kids will increase the daily annoyances and inconveniences in your life by a very sizable margin. But it also increases — not just increases, but reveals for the first time — a kind of meaning and purpose that you never had before. Meaningful pursuits will always increase your annoyances and inconveniences. Which is why you will never do anything meaningful in your life at all if your primary goal is to avoid inconvenience. Embrace inconvenience, or live a pointless, empty life. Those are your two options. There is no third option.
Of course, the opinion of some random pop star wouldn’t matter at all if they were being expressed in a vacuum. Unfortunately, they’re part of a much larger pattern, and a much grander agenda. All of the videos we’ve talked about are part of — or a result of — that agenda. In fact they represent the great cultural battle that will define and determine our future. That is the effort to convince women to abandon marriage and family life. The feminist agenda. Which of course isn’t new. But now it lies at the core of nearly all of our political and cultural divisions. As most people know at this point, the Democrat Party’s core constituency by far is unmarried women. Even in the last election, a landslide loss for Kamala Harris, she still won unmarried women by a margin of 61% to 38%. The continued existence of the Democrat Party, and their entire political program, rests on this demographic.
I’m not saying that Chappell Roan or Zoe from TikTok are paid agents of the Democrat Party, sent to go out into the world and convince women to reject marriage and family life. Although, who knows, they might be. What I am saying is that we’re about to see a whole lot more of this kind of messaging. This is the future of the culture war, and its past. And we have to be ready to fight back.

Elton John AIDS Foundation’s 33rd Annual Academy Awards Viewing Party – Press Conference

Pop Star Makes The Case For Why Women Shouldn’t Have Kids. Here’s Why She’s Wrong.

Pop Star Makes The Case For Why Women Shouldn't Have Kids. Here's Why She's Wrong.

Dating

Democrats

Leftists

Liberals

Relationships

Tesla

Maria Shriver opened up about the “devastating, life-altering blow” that was the end of her 25-year marriage to Hollywood star and former Republican California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
In Shriver’s new book of poetry titled “I Am Maria: My Reflections and Poems on Heartbreak, Healing, and Finding your Way Home,” the former anchor of the “Today” show admitted the end of her marriage destroyed &#8220;what was left&#8221; of her following years of loss, after losing her mom Eunice Kennedy Shriver (in 2009) and her father Sargent Shriver (in 2011), <a href="https://people.com/maria-shriver-i-am-maria-exclusive-excerpt-11701230">People magazine</a> reported. 
“Then a year and a half later, all hell seemed to break loose,” Shriver wrote, in an excerpt obtained by the outlet. “My First Lady job came to an end. My father died. And then came another devastating, life-altering blow: my twenty-five-year-long marriage blew up. It broke my heart, it broke my spirit, it broke what was left of me.”
“Without my marriage, my parents, a job — the dam of my lifelong capital-D Denial just blew apart,” she added. “Now, much has been written about the end of my marriage, and frankly I don’t feel like I need or want to discuss it here, or anywhere.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Maria Shriver details ‘brutal’ divorce from Arnold Schwarzenegger: ‘I was terrified’ <a href="https://t.co/ynSChdIPYQ">https://t.co/ynSChdIPYQ</a> <a href="https://t.co/vHPD4BLaIU">pic.twitter.com/vHPD4BLaIU</a>
— New York Post (@nypost) <a href="https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1904266747223650558?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 24, 2025</a></blockquote>
“I was consumed with grief and wracked with confusion, anger, fear, sadness, and anxiety,” Shriver continued. “I was unsure now of who I was, where I belonged. Honestly, it was brutal, and I was terrified.”
Shriver said she eventually, after trips to therapists, healers, psychics, and even to a cloistered convent, she started writing. 
She said through her poetry she “found a woman who was terrified of not being able to live up to her family’s legacy—scared of not being big enough, a good-enough daughter, sister, wife, mother, journalist. “
“I found a woman who had insisted on measuring herself by some impossible standard that guaranteed she’d come up short and feel bad about herself no matter what,” she added. “I found someone who had spent a lifetime avoiding grief. And I also learned that when that lifetime of dissociated grief and trauma is released, it rushes out like a tsunami.”
“I’ve made lots of mistakes. One of them was tying my self-worth to my achievements. Another big mistake was thinking that someone outside of me could guarantee my safety, my worth, and my peace,” Shriver continued, noting how she used to “believe that if you didn’t have a partner, you must be unworthy and unloveable. I’ve learned that nothing could be further from the truth.”
Shriver and Schwarzenegger tied the knot in 1986 and had four kids together. The movie star later admitted to his wife that he had had an affair with the housekeeper in 1996 resulting in the two having a son together, <a href="https://www.eonline.com/news/1415226/where-arnold-schwarzenegger-and-maria-shriver-stand-years-after-his-affair">E! News</a> noted. Shriver filed for divorce in July 2011, and their divorce was finally official in December 2021.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/arnold-schwarzenegger-opens-up-about-telling-maria-shriver-hed-fathered-a-son-with-housekeeper-in-new-documentary" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Arnold Schwarzenegger Opens Up About Telling Maria Shriver He’d Fathered A Son With Housekeeper In New Documentary</a>

Arnold Schwarzenegger Is Inaugurated For A Second Term As Governor

Maria Shriver Opens Up About ‘Devastating’ End Of Marriage To Arnold Schwarzenegger

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Celebrities

divorce

Hollywood

Love Affair

Maria Shriver

Former first lady Michelle Obama opened up about her marriage to former President Barack Obama and said she is &#8220;not interested&#8221; in ever running for office. 
During her appearance on Kylie Kelce’s “Not Gonna Lie” <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx9-v_cD8IY">podcast</a>, Michelle talked about being married to Barack since 1992, and said one area where they don’t agree is bedtime.
“Bedtime is the best time of the day,” <a href="https://x.com/nglwithkylie/status/1902389606999335409" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the former first lady said</a>. “My husband teases me about how early I can go to bed. He just doesn’t understand.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/MichelleObama?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MichelleObama</a> is not gonna lie: bedtime is the best time of the day!
Full episode drops on 3/20! <a href="https://t.co/vznStVndQi">pic.twitter.com/vznStVndQi</a>
— Not Gonna Lie with Kylie Kelce (@nglwithkylie) <a href="https://twitter.com/nglwithkylie/status/1902389606999335409?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 19, 2025</a></blockquote>
Michelle reflected on getting into “some good sheets” at night when it’s “cool.&#8221; But she insisted that if they have guests, she’s “game” and will stay up later.
“I’m talking but, you know, the minute we finish up, I’m just trying not to go to bed before the sun goes down,” Michelle added before sharing that her ideal bedtime is “anytime after dinner.”
The comments came following weeks of rumors about the Obama&#8217;s marital struggles, which were fueled by Michelle’s absence alongside Barack at former President Jimmy Carter’s funeral and President Donald Trump’s second inauguration.
Later in the interview, Michelle made it clear she wants to stay as far away from politics as she can, pointing to their daughters Malia, 26, and Sasha, 23, as the main reason.
“I was so glad when we got out of the White House,” the 61-year-old said, referencing when the Obamas family left the White House in 2017. “I wanted them [her daughters] to have the freedom of not having the eyes of the world on them.”
“They still are dealing with paparazzi and being who they are and trying to carve out their own identity,” she added. “So, when people ask me, would I ever run [for office], the answer is no. If you ask me that, then you have absolutely no idea [of] the sacrifice that your kids make when your parents are in that role.”
“Not only am I not interested in politics in that way but the thought of putting my girls back into that spotlight when they are just now establishing themselves, you know, I think we’ve done enough,” Michelle continued. “Question asked and answered. Never going to happen. They’ve already served their time. … It would be unthinkable. Nope.”
Despite the comments, Michelle was involved in the 2024 election, though an insider previously shared that the former first lady “showed up reluctantly for the election,” <a href="https://pagesix.com/2025/03/19/celebrity-news/michelle-obama-reveals-point-of-contention-with-barack-after-divorce-rumors/">Page Six</a> reported.
“They were united, but she doesn’t have to unify around [Trump],” the insider said in reference to her absence from Trump&#8217;s inauguration. “She doesn’t have to say anything. Her absence speaks volumes.”
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kid-rock-has-a-message-for-michelle-obama-after-she-decides-to-skip-trumps-inauguration" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Kid Rock Has A Message For Michelle Obama After She Decides To Skip Trump’s Inauguration</a>

Celebrities Attend The 2023 US Open Tennis Championships – Day 1

Michelle Obama Gets Candid About Marriage And Politics

Barack Obama

Democrat

Entertainment

Michelle Obama

Motherhood

Politics

Kim Kardashian said she was forced to return the engagement ring she wore during her second marriage even though she bought it for herself.
The 44-year-old celebrity was famously married to former NBA player Kris Humphries for just 72 days before divorcing. She discussed the status of the ring on the newest episode of “The Kardashians,” which was released today.
&#8220;I wonder what my next ring shape will be — on my last and final hoorah,&#8221; Kim said to her sister, Khloé, as she proceeded to reflect on her failed marriages.
“Number one was a cushion cut, 14-karat,&#8221; she said of the ring she wore during her four-year marriage to record producer Damon Thomas, per <a href="https://people.com/kim-kardashian-paid-for-majority-of-kris-humphries-engagement-ring-gave-it-back-divorce-11695573">People</a>. The pair wed in 2000 after eloping when Kim was 19. They divorced in 2004.
Humphries proposed with an 18-karat emerald cut ring from Lorraine Schwartz, Kim said, adding, &#8220;I didn’t keep that. I was pregnant with [daughter] North [West], still married to him and in order to divorce him, he said I had to give him the ring in my divorce.&#8221;
Kim explained that Humphries demanded to have the ring despite the fact that she paid for the majority of it. &#8220;He contributed a fifth,&#8221; she said.
&#8220;Jesus,&#8221; her hairstylist and friend Chris Appleton said, calling the move &#8220;savage.&#8221; Appleton said she was better off getting rid of it. Humphries and Kardashian married in 2011 and broke up the same year, but did not finalize their divorce until 2013.
The episode documented the Kardashians attending the Ambani wedding in Mumbai in July 2024. During the same episode, Kim said she had expected a trip downtown to resemble the 1992 animated Disney film “Aladdin.”
“I thought it was going to be, like, the marketplace,” Kim said. Appleton asked if it was a market, prompting Kim to reply, “No, this is like the streets.”
“We thought we were going to more of a marketplace, like a spice market,” she added, mentioning how she expected the experience to look like a scene from “Aladdin.” 
“What you see Aladdin going to and stealing the bread from,” she said, referencing the fictional city of Agrabah. “That’s where I thought we were going.”
Despite her disappointment, Kim and her sister Khloé did manage to find souvenirs for their kids.

Kris Humphries Kim Kardashian

Kim Kardashian Claims Husband Of 72 Days Refused Divorce Until She Returned Her Ring

Kim Kardashian Claims 72 Days Husband Refused Divorce Until She Gave The Ring Back

Kim Kardashian

Country legend Dolly Parton broke her silence on Thursday following the heartbreaking news on March 3 of the death of her husband of nearly 60 years, Carl Dean. He was 82.
&#8220;This is a love note to family, friends, and fans,” a post on <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DG3dkhBulhS/">Instagram</a> from the 79-year-old country singer and actress began.
“Thank you for all the messages, cards, and flowers that you&#8217;ve sent to pay your respects for the loss of my beloved husband Carl,&#8221; she added. &#8220;I can&#8217;t reach out personally to each of you but just know it has meant the world to me.&#8221;
&#8220;He is in God&#8217;s arms now and I am okay with that. I will always love you,&#8221; Parton continued, a likely reference to one of her biggest hits from 1973 titled, &#8220;I Will Always Love You.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Dolly Parton breaks her silence after husband Carl Dean’s death: ‘I will always love you’ <a href="https://t.co/UfM8BuDBTi">https://t.co/UfM8BuDBTi</a> <a href="https://t.co/LBXiYxtQia">pic.twitter.com/LBXiYxtQia</a>
— New York Post (@nypost) <a href="https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1897713003685929251?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
The post comes days after a statement was <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DGwdXPoPvoj/">posted</a> on her social media account that Dean had passed away in Nashville and will be laid to rest in a private ceremony.
“Carl and I spent many wonderful years together. Words can’t do justice to the love we shared for over 60 years,” the country singer shared in a statement. “Thank you for your prayers and sympathy.”
A cause of death has not been announced.
The Tennessee businessman and Parton met the day she moved to Nashville; she was 18, and he was 21. It was outside the Wishy Washy Laundromat, the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/dolly-parton-husband-carl-dean-dies-2b17ba0e44bcb864a3800bc17afdedeb?taid=67c648700119c30001f804d4&amp;utm_campaign=TrueAnthem&amp;utm_medium=AP&amp;utm_source=Twitter">Associated Press</a> reported.
“I was surprised and delighted that while he talked to me, he looked at my face (a rare thing for me),” Parton described of their meeting. “He seemed to be genuinely interested in finding out who I was and what I was about.”
Two years later, the two tied the knot at a small wedding in Ringgold, Georgia, on Memorial Day, May 30, 1966.
While Parton’s career took off, Dean remained mostly out of the spotlight, supporting her behind the scenes, even being the inspiration to one of her biggest hits ever, “Jolene,” per <a href="https://www.npr.org/2008/10/09/95520570/dolly-partons-jolene-still-haunts-singers">NPR</a>.
“She got this terrible crush on my husband,” Parton said of a bank teller who seemed interested in Dean. “And he just loved going to the bank because she paid him so much attention.”
“It was kinda like a running joke between us — when I was saying, ‘Hell, you’re spending a lot of time at the bank. I don’t believe we’ve got that kind of money,’” she added. “So it’s really an innocent song all around, but sounds like a dreadful one.”
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dolly-parton-shares-secret-to-her-56-year-marriage-it-was-meant-to-be" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dolly Parton Shares Secret To Her 56-Year Marriage: ‘It Was Meant To Be’</a>

The 53rd Annual CMA Awards – Arrivals

‘I Will Always Love You’: Dolly Parton Speaks Out Following Death Of Husband

Country Music

Death

Dolly Parton

U.S.

Love is a deep and profound concept, both at an individual level and in society at large. Though a marriage based on companionship and attraction was not a readily accepted idea until, arguably, the Victorian era, the first marriage ceremony took place over 4,000 years ago. The evolving and historical practice of marriage — and love’s role in it — is perhaps most easily mapped through literature, as it reflects societal norms of its time. To name a few, both Plato (428-348 BC) and Aristotle (384-322 BC) parsed thoughts on love, the book of Numbers tells of Zimri and Cozbi’s story (and subsequent demise), William Shakespeare constructed an entire play around star-crossed lovers with “Romeo and Juliet” (1597), C.S. Lewis drew on the Greeks and Christian commentators&#8217; thoughts to describe the types of love in “The Four Loves” (1960), and the “Twilight” series spent 274 weeks on the New York Times best-seller list in the early 2000s.
The stories of star-crossed lovers — Zimri and Cozbi, Romeo and Juliet among them — have enticed people to believe and even engage in relationships set up for failure, usually in the name of passion. After all, no records document Zimri and Cozbi as married, and Romeo and Juliet knew each other for all of 24 hours before their marriage ceremony. But what of relationships set up for <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/success" target="_blank" rel="noopener">success</a>? Vampire Edward and human Bella certainly seemed to be on a star-crossed path headed for doom, but they took matters into their own hands, setting themselves up for success. They found a way to make their relationship work “till death do us part” — or, in their case, for the long haul of immortality.
In more recent years, Dr. Jordan B. Peterson has contributed to history’s collection of tales on love and marriage, the most obvious of which being <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/success" target="_blank" rel="noopener">his series “Marriage”</a> in which he draws on both his clinical and personal experiences. In it, he teaches how to avoid a star-crossed path and, instead, pursue one that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/success" target="_blank" rel="noopener">leads to fulfillment</a>. Love is a complex notion. It takes a brilliant mind to discuss the role of one’s values in the act of love, to acknowledge the extent to which it affects consciousness, and to analyze how love can be applied practically in life. As an acclaimed clinical psychologist, author, educator, and Professor Emeritus at the University of Toronto, Dr. Peterson is that mind. Yet he is not of mind only. He is one of heart. Peterson approaches the subject of love as a father and husband, having married his wife in 1989 (two years before earning his PhD in clinical psychology). Even after all he has accomplished in his career, he still proclaims his marriage, his intimate relationship, to be the best part of his life.
You can divide your life into thirds: an intimate relationship (that is, marriage), family, and career — according to Peterson’s rule of thumb. In the present day, society generally views the trajectory of love between significant others as one which culminates in marriage. He believes a “profound and properly integrated and oriented intimacy” is found in the state of marriage, with love being a beautiful and foundational element to it. And he addresses love as both a verb and a noun. Merriam-Webster defines love as a verb meaning “to hold dear; to feel passion, devotion, or tenderness for; to take pleasure in; to touch or handle in a tender or loving manner.” The noun “love” is defined, “as in affection; darling; liking.” Essentially, marriage is an opportunity to act out love reciprocally in relation to the person with whom you have fallen in love.
In his “Marriage” series, Peterson parses thoughts on love in marriage, describing love as:
<h3>A Permeated State</h3>
Love is a “grace, a gift of God,” and when you fall in love, you experience what it is like to care for someone and receive care in return. When you enter into marriage, you engage in <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/success" target="_blank" rel="noopener">an act of faith</a>. In a marriage, you are given an opportunity, a chance to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/success" target="_blank" rel="noopener">arrange your life</a> with the person you have fallen in love. Then the “state of love” permeates the relationship and all that you do together.
<h3>Continual</h3>
Your conscience is an indicator of behavior. One way of learning how to pay attention to your conscience (i.e., behavior) is by devoting yourself to another person within the confines of marriage. In marriage, your conscience becomes an indicator of behavior in relationship to your partner in the long run. Since you will be with your husband or wife for years of your life, you have to treat them in a manner that is “reciprocal and productive, that grows positively over decades.” A productive, positive, decades-long relationship is made up of moment-to-moment interactions, and it is from these moments that continual love blossoms in a relationship. And you have the opportunity to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/success" target="_blank" rel="noopener">improve yourself</a> in relation to your partner.
<h3>An Infinite Wellspring Of Mystery</h3>
When you fall in love with someone, Peterson explains that you see an infinite wellspring of mystery. It is granted as a gift, a gift you are willing to devote yourself wholeheartedly. Together, you can foster that infinite wellspring to continually pour forth. Sometimes, people think they are <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/success" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bored with their partner</a>, but Peterson clarifies this, explaining that they are usually bored because of what they have forced the other person to become or because of their own lack of creative imagination on the intimate front. After all, people are infinite mysteries.
<h3>The Precondition For Marriage</h3>
Falling in love with someone is the precondition for marriage. You find them attractive, then you fall in love — both of which Peterson says are worthy of gratefulness. Your long-term partner is significantly more interesting than any plethora of short-term, shallow relationships, and life with an intimate relationship (marriage) is far more fulfilling than walking through life alone. The caveat? Living together is not commitment enough because “trying someone out” before marrying them — the equivalent of giving them a trial run — still allows for an option to leave. True commitment begins when you formally and publicly ally and bind yourselves <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/success" target="_blank" rel="noopener">together</a>.
<h3>Support During The Worst Times Of Life</h3>
Once married, you will go through the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/success" target="_blank" rel="noopener">worst times</a> of your life with your husband or wife. But you are better situated to survive those times with a companion who loves you. When the storms come, you are part of a joint arc because you are committed to each other in a fundamental manner. You can share in contending with the harsh realities of all dimensions of life.
In the end, you can be oriented toward love and life more abundant. But how do you know you are in love? How do you know you can be married? How do you know you are ready? Peterson’s answer is: You don’t know. You decide. That is the act of faith.

MixCollage-14-Feb-2025-02-21-PM-9969

Jordan Peterson On Love And Marriage

Bible

DailyWire+

Dr. Jordan Peterson

Shakespeare

How much difference can one word make? 
 
Some Virginia legislators seem curiously eager to find out—and if they do, the people of the commonwealth may be worse for the experiment. 
 
Senate Joint Resolution 249 (and its House counterpart, H.J. 9) is now working its way through the state’s General Assembly. If enacted by two consecutive legislatures and approved by the people, the proposed amendment would alter Virginia’s constitution to say that any lawful marriage must be recognized by state and local officials without regard to sex, race, or—and here’s that ominous word—“gender.”
What’s the difference between “gender” and “sex?” Well, the latter is fixed: a person is born and remains either a man or a woman. The former is fluid, distilled from the notion that one’s sexual identification is somehow different from (and more important than) one’s natural biology … and can change sometimes even over the course of a day.
Amending the state’s foundational document to put gender in the same category as sex and race in issuing marriage licenses would be a radical step—and there are five reasons for state legislators to think twice before taking it, especially now during National Marriage Week.
<h3>First, when government officials elevate gender and gender identity in law, we’ve seen chaos and the abuse of longstanding fundamental rights.</h3>
Look at some of the biggest cultural issues in America today: men in women’s sports, school officials withholding information from parents about their child’s gender confusion, and activists pushing puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for children. These were born out of legally separating sex from gender identity. Bad ideas—especially those enshrined in the constitution—have victims. And more often than not, it’s our children who suffer the most.
<h3>Second, passing this amendment will issue activist judges a license to pursue a radical agenda. </h3>
Adding “gender” to the Virginia Constitution could give these judges a basis for pushing a more comprehensive constitutional embrace of “gender” and potentially block legislators from passing laws that accurately reflect the distinctions between women and men.
<h3>Third, the amendment is unnecessary.</h3>
The sponsors of this resolution profess concern that rights to interracial and same-sex marriage might somehow be taken away. But both are already protected by federal law: Interracial marriage was settled by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Loving decision (1967); same-sex unions were affirmed in the high court’s Obergefell ruling (2015). What’s more, the Virginia General Assembly passed a law last year virtually identical to the one in question. What they want this amendment to do has already been done—and the legislators pushing this resolution have to know that. Which means …
<h3>Fourth, they must have another reason for pushing it.</h3>
If these legislators are—as they claim—only worried about preserving same-sex marriage, they could have just added the word “sex” to their proposed amendment. A person’s gender identity has never been the basis for holding back a marriage license. The whole argument for same-sex unions was to change the historic definition of marriage as the legal binding of two people of the opposite biological sex. Gender has never come into the discussion.
<h3>Fifth, this resolution includes a conspicuous exclusion. A prior version included religious liberty protections, but they were removed.</h3>
What can the reason be for excising religious liberty guarantees from the proposed amendment? Those protections ensure that those who sincerely believe marriage is the sacred union of one man and one woman are not compelled to assist or participate in other celebrations of marriage. The religious protections that were part of that near-identical law passed last year drew significant ire from opponents during a hearing related to the bill and now have been eliminated from the language under consideration. There’s no reason for that omission, apart from a deliberate intent to curtail religious freedom in regard to this issue.
All of which raises a lot of questions about the intentions of those sponsoring this far-reaching resolution. And those concerns give Virginians who value the rights, health, and safety of women—of engaged and caring parents wanting the best for their children—and of conscientious people of faith—a lot of reasons to look closely at Senate Joint Resolution 249 and its House companion. 
 
One word, carefully placed, could bring a great deal of unwanted change to Virginia. Here’s hoping a word to the wise is timely enough to change that.
 * * *
Gregory S. Baylor is senior counsel and director of the Center for Religious Schools with <a href="http://www.adflegal.org/">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (<a href="https://twitter.com/ADFLegal">@ADFLegal</a>).
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Richmond Virginia State Capitol

How A Single Word Is Poised To Play Havoc With Virginia’s Laws, Culture

How A Single Word Is Poised To Play Havoc With Virginia's Laws, Culture

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Constitution

Gender

Gender Identity

Transgender

Virginia

President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a> shared an incredible candid snap from his wedding to first lady <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/melania-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Melania Trump</a> to celebrate the couple’s 20th anniversary.
In a post on Wednesday on <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DFI3BS6xplb/?igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D">Instagram</a>, Trump posted a picture of him and Melania walking down the aisle of the <a href="https://www.palmbeachpost.com/story/news/2025/01/22/melania-trump-wedding-anniversary-mar-lago-ivanka-florida-barron/77866144007/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Episcopal Church of Bethesda-by-the-Sea</a> in Palm Beach, Florida, after their nuptials on January 22, 2005.
In the picture, the couple were smiling and holding hands as they waved goodbye to friends and guests at the end of their ceremony.
The president captioned his post, “Happy 20th Anniversary to Melania!”
Other images have surfaced on social media from their wedding, including one <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DFIq5jxPNK5/?img_index=5&amp;igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D">post</a> from Fox News showing a whole host of pictures from their special ceremony two decades ago.
<blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/DFI3BS6xplb/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14">
<div style="padding: 16px;">
&nbsp;
<div style="flex-direction: row; align-items: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div>
<div style="flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div>
<div style="height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div>
<div style="padding-top: 8px;">
<div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"></div>
<div style="flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;">
<div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px;"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 8px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent;"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: auto;">
<div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px;"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent;"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"></div>
</div>
&nbsp;
<a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DFI3BS6xplb/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by President Donald J. Trump (@realdonaldtrump)</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
One of the pictures showed Melania smiling and waving from the window of the car after the services. Another showed a beautiful picture from inside the church where they got married.
<blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/DFIq5jxPNK5/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14">
<div style="padding: 16px;">
&nbsp;
<div style="flex-direction: row; align-items: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div>
<div style="flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div>
<div style="height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div>
<div style="padding-top: 8px;">
<div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"></div>
<div style="flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;">
<div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px;"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 8px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent;"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: auto;">
<div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px;"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent;"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"></div>
</div>
&nbsp;
<a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DFIq5jxPNK5/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by Fox News (@foxnews)</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
In a lengthy thread on <a href="https://x.com/mamboitaliano__/status/1882089322834428415">X</a>, there were numerous snaps from before and after the wedding, including one that showed a stunning full view of the back of Melania’s wedding dress, before she walked down the aisle to marry Trump.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl=1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA.." target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl%3D1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA..&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1737044212122000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3mp2MZNwEXBk00lKmCtOss">CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT</a>
In a second <a href="https://x.com/mamboitaliano__/status/1882089386487280097">post</a> in the thread, it was noted, &#8220;1,000 hours of work were required, with 500 hours dedicated to embroidery, and 1,550 crystals and pearls. The dress used 295 feet of satin.&#8221; 
The look also included &#8220;a 13-foot train&#8221; for the dress and &#8220;a 16-foot veil,&#8221; as noted by <a href="https://www.palmbeachpost.com/story/news/2025/01/22/melania-trump-wedding-anniversary-mar-lago-ivanka-florida-barron/77866144007/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Palm Beach Post</a>.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Exactly 20 years ago, on January 22, 2005, in Palm Beach, Florida, Slovenian model Melania Knauss married businessman Donald J. Trump, wearing a dress that weighed 66 pounds
A Thread 🧵 of small curiosities
And Happy Anniversary to the Presidential Couple! 🎉 <a href="https://t.co/QdCdqPoYBc">pic.twitter.com/QdCdqPoYBc</a>
— Mambo Italiano (@mamboitaliano__) <a href="https://twitter.com/mamboitaliano__/status/1882089322834428415?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2025</a></blockquote>
On Monday, Trump and Melania looked just as happy when they walked into one of the many Inauguration Balls in Washington, D.C., hours after Trump was sworn-in as the 47th President of the United States.
The first lady stepped out wearing a custom strapless black and pearl-colored floor-length gown designed by Herve Pierre, who later revealed some of the behind-the-scenes details about the dress, as previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/designer-reveals-behind-the-scenes-details-about-melanias-inauguration-ball-dress">reported</a>.
In his post on Tuesday on <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DFE40bks7Tr/">Instagram</a>, the designer shared a sketch drawing of the stunning gown Melania wore to the balls. She completed the look with a black choker, which included a diamond brooch with a floral design.
The message on the sketch read, “Washington Monday January 20th 2025. Inauguration Night Gown designed for First Lady Melania Trump. Herve Pierre.”
He captioned the post, “It was such an honor to create the dress for the First Lady Melania Trump tonight &#8230; I can’t thank her enough … it was a wonderful project, a great collaboration … as always!!!”
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/president-trump-teases-melania-about-her-attire-says-she-almost-blew-away" target="_blank" rel="noopener">President Trump Teases Melania About Her Attire, Says ‘She Almost Blew Away’</a>

US-POLITICS-ELECTION

President Trump Shares Incredible Snap From Wedding To Melania To Celebrate Anniversary

Donald Trump

Melania Trump

Two <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/celebrities">child actors</a> who appeared together in the hit 2003 comedy “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/movies">School of Rock</a>” just tied the knot.
Caitlin Hale starred in the film as Marta, who went by the nickname Blondie. Angelo Massagli played her classmate Frankie. Their wedding celebration was announced by Rivkah Reyes, who played Katie, with a <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@rivkah.reyes/video/7456472190934994207">post</a> shared on TikTok.
“Celebrating the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/marriage">marriage</a> of CAITLIN &amp; ANGELO with my forever fam #schoolofrock #wedding,” Reyes wrote in the caption of the social media post. In the clip, several other cast members, including Brian Falduto, Joey Gaydos Jr., Rivkah Reyes, Robert Tsai, Maryam Hassan, Aleisha Allen, and Cole Hawkins, can be seen enjoying the festivities.
The TikTok video is set to the Stevie Nicks song “Edge of Seventeen,” which was featured in the movie.
Commenters were overjoyed to get a glimpse of the wedding. “The way I could still see all your little childhood faces in your adult faces and recognized all of you,” one popular response said.
“Y’all have no idea how much this means to me. School of Rock was INTEGRAL to my childhood,” another person wrote.
“It’s not tacky and I don’t hate it,” a third said, referencing a classic line from the movie. 
Actor Jack Black starred in “School of Rock” as struggling rock guitarist Dewey Finn, who is fired from his band and decides to work as a substitute teacher at a prep school. He recruits a group of fourth graders to form a musical group in a bid to win a Battle of the Bands competition, hoping to use the winnings to pay his rent. 
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN ’25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a>
Massagli had nothing but praise for his future bride when he spoke with <a href="https://www.insideedition.com/school-of-rock-stars-caitlin-hale-and-angelo-massagli-confirm-theyre-dating-18-years-after-films">Inside Edition</a> in 2021. &#8220;I remember my first audition for &#8216;School of Rock&#8217; like it was yesterday,&#8221; he told the outlet. &#8220;I get in there and the little blonde girl next to me, she gets called in first and she starts singing show tunes and just blows the roof off the place. It was excellent.&#8221;
Per <a href="https://ew.com/school-of-rock-cast-reunites-caitlin-hale-angelo-massaglis-wedding-8769666">Entertainment Weekly</a>, the pair stayed in touch via a group chat with other “School of Rock” stars. They started dating after Hale moved to Florida, where Massagli was living.
Both former child stars are no longer working in Hollywood. The outlet noted that Hale is an OB/GYN ultrasound technologist and Massagli graduated from the University of Miami School of Law in 2019.

School of Rock

‘School Of Rock’ Co-Stars Delight Fans By Tying The Knot

'School Of Rock' Co-Stars Delight Fans By Tying The Knot

Movies

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/jennifer-lopez">Jennifer Lopez</a> is reportedly ready to close the door on the “crazy chapter” of her life with Ben Affleck after she and the actor finalized their divorce — after just two years of marriage.
On Monday, the 55-year-old actress and Affleck finally reached a settlement for their divorce after Lopez filed for a dissolution of their marriage back on Aug. 20, 2024, <a href="https://people.com/jennifer-lopez-wants-to-close-the-door-after-ben-affleck-divorce-source-8770430?utm_campaign=people&amp;utm_content=likeshop&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_source=instagram">People magazine</a> reported. 
A source close to the superstar singer is now shedding some light on how the “Hustlers” star is doing as she grapples with the end of what she had previously labeled a dream come true, as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/love-is-patient-twenty-years-patient-jennifer-lopez-goes-all-in-with-ben-affleck-by-changing-her-last-name">reported</a> at the time.
&#8220;The fairy tale she was promised turned out to be a nightmare in the end,” the insider told the magazine. &#8220;She&#8217;s in a really good place and just wants to close the door on this crazy chapter.”
On the second anniversary of their southern wedding ceremony in Georgia, the “Selena” star put to bed rumors about their relationship troubles when she filed for divorce in Los Angeles County Superior Court without an attorney, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jennifer-lopez-devastated-about-ben-affleck-divorce-gave-her-all-make-work-source">Fox News</a> noted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck have settled their divorce. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BillboardNews?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#BillboardNews</a> <a href="https://t.co/3UYNSBu5UG">pic.twitter.com/3UYNSBu5UG</a>
— billboard (@billboard) <a href="https://twitter.com/billboard/status/1876754330755207168?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2025</a></blockquote>
At the time, a source told the outlet that the actress felt she “gave it her all to make this work” with Affleck and was “devastated” that she couldn’t make their marriage work — especially after they called off their first engagement in 2004 and then rekindled their romance in the summer of 2021.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN &#8217;25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a>
In the divorce filing, Lopez wrote that the separation occurred on April 26, 2024, <a href="https://people.com/ben-affleck-and-jennifer-lopez-divorce-live-updates-8699009">People magazine</a> noted.
On the same day reports surfaced that Lopez had filed for divorce, the “Gone Girl” star was spotted not wearing his wedding ring.
As to why she chose the anniversary of their wedding ceremony, a source told People magazine. “She was done waiting and the date she did it speaks a ton.” 
The move “gives her control of the process,” added the source. “It’s good that she did it.”
Last June, rumors surfaced that their marriage was over and a source at the time told the outlet that Affleck “started moving out a while ago. The marriage is completely over, and Jennifer is heartbroken. She loves love and wanted this to work so badly.”
Lopez and Affleck officially tied the knot in a legal ceremony in Las Vegas in 2022, before they celebrated their matrimony at a backyard ceremony at an $8 million Georgia mansion with family and friends a month later. It all happened 18 years after the couple first got engaged in 2002, calling it off in 2004.

Amazon Studios’ World Premiere Of “AIR” – Arrivals

Jennifer Lopez Ready To Close Door On ‘Crazy Chapter’ After Finalizing Ben Affleck Divorce: Report

Ben Affleck

Jennifer Lopez

Menu