Bruce Jenner transitioning into woman?

Ahead of the highly promoted two hour interview airing on ABC tonight, speculation is swirling that former Olympic Champion Bruce Jenner will reveal to the world that he is indeed transitioning into a woman. This morning on radio, Glenn reacted to the publicity of the interview and explored some of the national conversation.

Glenn felt true compassion for Jenner, saying that if he really is transitioning into a woman, "if that's true, what a hell his life has been. What an absolute tormented hell his life has been."

Glenn expressed that we should not "clam up" about these topics, but talk openly about them as adults and try to understand it. But, even more important is that we need to remember to love. "We are commanded, as people of faith, to love, not necessarily endorse, but always love."

See more of Glenn's powerful response below. Glenn's full response is provided in the transcript below:

Rough Transcript Below:

GLENN: Could I ask if we can do something as adults, as Americans, that we just don't do anymore, and that is have an open and honest conversation about a really sensitive subject, without hating each other, without throwing stones at each other. Just ask some honest questions, and really try to understand one another. There's this superhyped Diane Sawyer interview everyone is waiting for tonight, I guess, Bruce Jenner. He was spotted the other day wearing a dress, smoking a cigarette, in a full length dress. Quite honestly, I don't care what Bruce Jenner does. It does not affect my life at all. So if Bruce Jenner wants to be a woman, he wants to dress as a woman, he wants to change his sexuality, doesn't matter to me. It doesn't matter to me.

I think people are fascinated by this story because back in 1976, was it? He was a decathlon athlete, one on the best on earth, won the gold medal. He was on the Wheaties box. He was a man's man. So I

guess now to see him wearing a dress, you're like what? What? Did he feel that way then? What's happened? And I hope that we're not sickly fascinated like he wants to wear a dress. I don't think we are. I think we are to a point where we've liked this guy in the past, and so we feel for him and we're like what happened to you.

STU: Trying to understand.

GLENN: I want to understand, but I don't know if we can question anymore. So I'm going to try to have a real, open, honest conversation with you about this and about transgendereddism. I don't pretend to understand it. I don't understand it. Maybe it's totally fine, maybe it's not. I don't know. I don't know. What frightens me is if you don't blindly embrace, not just accept it, if you don't blindly embrace it, you are vilified and destroyed, an I think this is dangerous. I would say that about anything, anything. It's not just transgendereddism. A good friend of mine, Keith Ablow, has almost been destroyed. He's a doctor, psychiatrist. A year or so ago, he wrote, I don't see anything but toxicity from the notion of a person with a female anatomy feeling free to use the urinal in a boy's restroom while a boy stand next to her and uses one too. Well, he was viciously attacked. He was called a quack and worse, and he's not. He is a good, decent man.

Because he dared say that there were two genders, he was torn to pieces. Honest question: Who is the science denier here? Are there two genders? Or is everything fluid? And can anyone really claim that the bathroom situation is not a legitimate concern? This is new territory for humankind. So we're taking -- we should be taking baby steps and not runs towards anything, because we don't know. And we want to make sure we don't hurt people along the way. Either those who want to be transgendered or those who do not want to be transgendered. We don't want to do damage either way.

But are you telling me we all have is just blindly accept and embrace a male using a female bathroom and a female using a male bathroom, and then just -- we're all just supposed to blindly accept no genders. There's just go genders. You are not allowed to see any difference between a man and a woman. Now, this is a conversation that we can have as adults, and we should have, and we have to have as adults. And this is the situation with Bruce Jenner. Like I said, it doesn't matter to me. What happens with me doesn't matter, because Bruce Jenner -- whatever, man. Whatever. I'm an adult, he's an adult. I'm worried about our children. And NBC now is running a series on transgendered children, a series on this. Children.

The one I saw was a seven-minute segment on the "NBC Nightly News", and it was about a 4-year-old. And he's gone from girl to boy. He's 5 now. And I mean this sincerely. This is not hyperbole and this is not just a rhetorical question: Are you sure this is the responsible thing for a parent to do; to all of a sudden say to your 4-year-old, you know what; you are a boy. You didn't like being a girl. You are a boy. Wear boy clothes, Tut your hair like a boy, we are changing your name. Everyone will treat you like a boy. Again, I'm not asking you with the answer. I'm asking you as a person that doesn't study this stuff. We all heard in the 1950s we shouldn't discipline our kid. We should tell them they are all winners. We should all give them trophies and ribbons, and we are seeing how that's turned out. All that advice was garbage. Can we slow down and really think? Because we are screwing with children.

And again, I'm not saying stop, because maybe it is the right thing to do. They said their son was uncomfortable being a girl starting at 2, so they went with that. Now, I'm a dad of four, and I will tell you your kids are born with their personality. They are born with their personality. Doesn't really matter. I mean, it does matter what you do as a parent, but there's some things your kids come out with and that's who they are. And they're that way forever, at least till 27.

That's as long as I can go. But they are who they are. So maybe -- I don't know, but in this segment, there was a heart-wrenching statement from the kid I want you to hear.

VOICE: If you talk to gay and lesbian adults, the vast majority will tell you they knew they were gay or lesbian when they were children, and gawking about a gay child would seem taboo or terrifying or bizarre. No longer. There are transgender children across the country. NBC's Kate Snow talked to one family about what it means to make a world accept that.

VOICE: Saying things like why did God make me this way? Why did God make me wrong? A child shouldn't have to live like that.

GLENN: So this is the question. God doesn't make anything wrong. He doesn't make anything wrong. If he was making mistakes, then he'd be a pretty crappy God. And I mean that -- again, I am not trying to be jokey about it. I mean that. He'd be a really lousy God, if it was like oh, man I really screwed that one up. He wouldn't be God, but in all this hysteria, the Bruce Jenner thing, the kids highlighted in NBC, can we even question this? Just as you can't have a religious viewpoint that's contrary to the feelings on home mock sexuality that we now have coming from the media, and from the elites, you can't have those anymore. You are shouted down, silenced, fired from whatever

job you had. Now, can you even say there are two genders, that there are male and female?

There are two genders, male and female, with the exception of 33 hundredth of 1% of births, you could be born a hermaphrodite. So now what does that mean? Did God make a mistake? Is there something beyond hermaphrodite that maybe the parts are parts, but something -- I don't even know. I don't know how it works, but there's something else inside the body that makes them feel like they're a boy or a girl when they're the opposite? Maybe. I don't know. But there's no such thing as gender neutral. Gender fluid, gender questioning, gender nonconforming, pangender, cisgender. Facebook identifies 51 separate genders. 51 separate genders. Another site lays claim to 63 different genders. I'm talking to you as an adult here. The way I was raised, you have a vagina or a penis, and that identifies you, okay? Now, do we have to open our eyes and say there's more to it? Maybe. Maybe we do, but can we please have it in a non-shout people down, calling people names kind of things? I'm not going to call someone a freak because they -- I'm not making fun of Bruce Jenner. I'm not going to shout him down, I'm not going to judge him. Don't judge others who say now wait a minute, wait a minute, is this right, especially when we are talking about children. Can we even ask these questions? This is going to be a real test. Can Glenn Beck get on his radio show and ask these questions in a humble way, really, truly seeking answers and asking the most important question, can we all have an adult conversation and not just jam this down everybody's throat, one way or the other. Can we have this and remain on the air?

Think of this. Bruce Jenner, we all thought was born a male. He thrived for 64 years as a male. He's now telling us he was born a woman, living inside of a male. Well, if that's true, what a hell his life has been. What an absolute tormented hell his life has been. Can we ask questions? Can we watch Diane Sawyer and not gawk? Can wewatch Diane Sawyer and disagree, or do we need to shut up, sit down and applaud anyone who switches from male to fluid or female or pangender or one of the other 63 other genders. And do we really have to clam up about public bathroom usage during these transitions? I have daughters, I have sons. My son is 10. I don't want him going into a public bathroom because of the straight guys there, what might be child predators. Nothing about homosexual or transgender or anything else. I've got my hand full worrying about straight guys who want to touch my son. I worry about my daughters. Do we really have to shut up about this? Is there nobody that says hey, hey, hey, I understand. I do understand. Bruce Jenner is seriously confused. That's what he would have to say for his life. He was seriously confused for a while. Well, Bruce, that's the way the rest of Americafeels. We're seriously confused. We don't know what's right. I'm not gender confused. I'm just confused about the volume of genders

that there is now, and what we are supposed to do about it.

Stop acting, left and right, that this is just an open and shut case. I don't know of a time in human history when this has ever happened. This is new, because man can become God. Forget about male or female.

Man thinks he's God. The speed at which the world is changing is breath-taking, and quite honestly, when things change this fast, people tend to hold onto those time-tested virtues and values that are eternal truths, and many of those are found in our religious doctrine. And deeply held religious views do not change with the draperies. They don't change with the size of the pant leg or the length of skirts or the length of a collar, because if they did, they wouldn't be eternal. They wouldn't be from God. And none of this has anything to do with hate. People of faith are commanded to love. We must love Bruce Jenner, we must -- when we watch this tonight, if you watch this tonight, will your heart break or will you break the commandment and just flip by it and say, freak.

We are commanded, as people of faith, to love, not necessarily endorse, but always love. For those who want to shout religious people down, are you commanded to love? Can we have an actual conversation without shouting someone down, without destroying them, without driving them out of society? Or is that a bridge too far for this, quote, open-minded society?

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.