Zachary Antolak, a/k/a “Zinnia Jones,” a/k/a “Satana Kennedy,” a/k/a “Lauren McNamara” is a transgender activist and Internet pornographer who has a verified “blue check” Twitter account, @ZJemptv. Rather than getting any further into the weird biography of Antolak/“Jones” now, I’ll just call attention to his/“her” unusual tattoo of a Satanic pentagram inside a transgender symbol.
To adorn yourself with the symbol used on the cover of Anton LaVey’s Satanic Bible is an anti-social gesture symptomatic of extreme alienation.
Speaking of extreme alienation, “pro sex” feminist Laci Green has become so disillusioned with the progressive social-justice movement that she is now dating anti-feminist YouTuber Chris “RayGun” Maldonado.
Laci Green’s apostasy touched off a huge online imbroglio, which Maldonado described on his YouTube channel: “A lot of social justice people and a lot of feminists are ostracizing her and putting her on blast, and a lot of anti-feminists and anti-social-justice type people are embracing her with open arms. Now, this is fascinating, because this is usually the exact opposite of how things normally go in this sphere of YouTube.” Maldonado’s fans believe love conquers all, but my reaction to the so-called #GreenRayGun romance was skeptical:
Does it seem plausible to you that Laci Green, hitherto an enthusiastic feminist proponent of masturbation, dildos and lesbianism, has for some reason now decided it’s OK to become a man’s “sex object”? Has she repudiated all her previous condemnations of male sexuality? And does it make sense that the person who has persuaded Ms. Green to embrace “unequal power in society” is a 24-year-old anti-SJW YouTuber?
Anything is possible, I suppose, but you’ll excuse my skepticism toward Ms. Green’s belated discovery of the pleasures of patriarchal domination. . . .
“Every feminist’s ideal boyfriend is a Hitachi Magic Wand.”
Expect this Laci Green “romance” to end badly.
Anti-SJW types are high-fiving each other in celebration of Maldonado’s evident triumph, but I’m withholding congratulations because I can’t believe Laci Green would abandon feminism for the sake of love.
Ask yourself this question: Why is transgender activist Zinnia Jones so obsessively concerned with Laci Green’s dating life? Could it be — and I’m just throwing this out there as a possible explanation — that the SJW community is against heterosexual relationships, per se?
This may seem like hyperbole, but when you consider (a) how feminist rhetoric demonizes heterosexual men and (b) how the only way any male can be accepted in the SJW community is to declare himself gay — or become a transgender “female” — the bias is obvious enough. Third Wave feminism is founded on the work of Judith Butler — the social construction of the gender binary within the heterosexual matrix — and “queer theory” (e.g., Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick), so that the war against “patriarchy” requires an implacable opposition to heterosexuality:
Until I started studying radical feminism, I never thought of “normal” as an achievement, but Feminism Is Queer, as Professor Mimi Marinucci has explained. Feminist theory condemns heterosexuality as “the ideology of male supremacy,” and denies that behavioral differences between men and women are natural. . . . Feminism seeks to abolish gender in order to achieve “equality” by establishing an androgynous society in which the categories “male” and “female” cease to have any significance.
This is why I’m so skeptical of the Laci Green/Chris Maldonado romance. Given the fact that Ms. Green has spent her entire adult life promoting this anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology — denouncing masculinity as “sexist,” a source of “exclusion and unequal power in society” that makes men “emotionally stunted,” teaching them “to see women as sex objects” — how could she ever possibly be attracted to a male? She has declared herself “pansexual” and produced numerous videos advocating lesbianism and masturbation, which would lead anyone to surmise that Ms. Green endorses the feminist consensus that males are sexually irrelevant, socially unnecessary and politically undesirable.
Why do you think 63 million people voted to elect Donald Trump, anyway? Wasn’t a major factor that the Hillary Clinton campaign so closely aligned itself with radical feminism? Do you think Americans are too stupid to figure out what feminist slogans actually mean?
So, is Chris Maldonado “alt-right,” a “white supremacist,” a “Nazi”? Or could it be that he is just a more-or-less normal guy who feels no need to apologize to SJW feminists for being a normal guy? And hasn’t Zinnia Jones constructed his/“her” worldview around hatred of normal guys?
There is no such thing as “gender confusion,” according to the transgender activist who began his/“her” YouTube career as a teenage atheist attacking Christianity in a weird robotic monotone voice. Less than two weeks into Zachary Antolak’s YouTube career, he replied to commenters who couldn’t figure out if he was male or female.
In fact, “gender confusion” appears to have been a lifelong personal issue for Antolak. According to a YouTube fandom site, Antolak’s parents divorced when he was young and his mother remarried to a man who “spoiled his biological daughter to no end,” but “would berate his stepson for not having an active interest in masculine activities like sports.” This mistreatment evidently inflicted a permanent sense of inadequacy on Antolak. Three months into his YouTube career, in February 2009, Antolak posted a video “coming out” as gay, but this proved somewhat problematic because a prerequisite to being a homosexual male, obviously, is that you must like men, which Antolak does not.
To skip ahead a bit in the story, Zinnia Jones wrote in the foreword of a recent book (You and Your Gender Identity by Dara Hoffman-Fox) that his sense of identity was “occluded by a dense fog of uncertainty, misconceptions, anxieties, and stereotypes,” which he/“she” blamed on “harmful cultural messages about what’s expected of different genders.” Because he could not “comfortably fit within a given gender assignment,” Antolak/Jones wrote, he found it “impossible to . . . mentally place myself anywhere,” and experienced “a blurry-edged separation from reality itself.” At the time of his 2009 “coming out,” Antolak used his YouTube channel to lecture the world about “sexuality” in a five-part Q & A series (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5).
“Notice the judgmental language — ‘genetically defective,’ ‘incomplete form of a species.’ That is the sound of prejudice. And I don’t mean that in the sense of, ‘Oh, someone doesn’t like me,’ I use it in the literal sense. This person has already made a judgment ahead of time, and now they’re looking to scrape together anything that sounds vaguely scientific to support this judgment. Basically, they’ve got it all backwards.”
— Zinnia Jones, “Sexuality (part 1),” April 3, 2009
At age 19, then, Antolak was representing himself online as an expert on sexuality, dismissing critics as “prejudiced” and “backwards.”
This is the same mentality which rejects ordinary expectations of male/female behavioral patterns as “harmful cultural messages.” In other words, if parents expect their sons to be typically masculine, or their daughters to be feminine, and especially if they expect their children to be heterosexual, this is “harmful.” Why? Because some children will fail to live up to such expectations and, therefore, everybody must adopt the perspective of the misfit children and condemn these “harmful cultural messages,” which hurt their precious feelings.
Where did Zachary Antolak get these ideas? From the Cult of Self-Esteem. For decades, our education system has been controlled by liberals who believe all childhood problems are a result of low self-esteem. Nothing is more important than teaching kids to feel good about themselves, according to the advocates of self-esteem. This dubious educational theory gets mixed in with a “progressive” egalitarian ideology which rejects ordinary social standards and value systems as invalid, because these values and standards damage the self-esteem of those who fail to succeed within such a hierarchical system. The Cult of Self-Esteem requires us to believe that it is a social injustice for the all-state linebacker to be more popular in high school than the boy who plays clarinet in the marching band. This is analogous to the feminist belief that it is wrong to admire women for their beauty. Just as there is no reason we should admire men who are tall and athletic, according to the egalitarian proponents of self-esteem theory, there is no reason why anyone should prefer supermodel Kate Upton to feminist Jaclyn Friedman.
Jaclyn Friedman, feminist (left); Kate Upton, supermodel (right).
Where does this egalitarian worldview lead? To the regime of Thought Police, who are constantly lecturing us that our opinions are wrong. The Thought Police act as cultural commissars, monitoring our words and deeds for evidence of beliefs that are sexist, racist or homophobic. Suppressing prohibited opinions results in a one-sided public discourse, where dissenters are demonized and silenced, where disagreement is labeled “hate speech” and criticism is forbidden as “harassment.” No one can be permitted to mention any fact that might be cited in contradiction of the Thought Police regime, nor is anyone allowed to question the authority of the Thought Police. No one is supposed to ask how certain people, simply by calling themselves “feminists,” acquire the authority to speak on behalf of all women. Who chose the leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement to represent the African-American community? Merely to ask such a question exposes the fundamental issue of authority claimed by the Thought Police. On what grounds do they claim the right to suppress opposing opinions? Who put them in charge and granted them the power to act as self-appointed prosecutors against those whom they accuse of prejudice? How is it that any 19-year-old with a YouTube channel can arrogate to himself the authority of the Thought Police?
If you want to know why our university campuses seem to be constantly erupting in lunacy (e.g., “Evergreen State College Students Reportedly Roaming Campus With Baseball Bats”) it is because our education system has promoted this Thought Police regime to enforce an egalitarian ideology by suppressing dissent. This incentivizes claims of victimhood because, in the social-justice calculus of “progressive” ideology, being a member of an oppressed victim group entails the right to attack whatever forces of “society” and “culture” you blame for your oppression.
“Believe it or not, there are plenty of gay men who have had sex with women, although I am not one of them. . . . Essentially, society tells men to find a nice woman to love and have a family with. That is what’s expected of them and there’s a lot of pressure for men to participate in this heterosexual lifestyle.”
— Zinnia Jones, “Sexuality (part 1),” April 3, 2009
You see? The only reason any man wants “to find a nice woman to love and have a family with” is because “society” tells him to do so. Because there is no objective reason why a man might wish “to participate in this heterosexual lifestyle,” Zachary Antolak lectured the world via YouTube in 2009, therefore men only have sex with women because they are under “a lot of pressure” from society to do so. This is simply a colloquial restatement of feminist “social construction” theory. There is no such thing as human nature, according to feminist theory. No pattern of behavior can be described as “natural” or “normal,” the feminist believes, because to do so would imply that other patterns are unnatural or abnormal and, as Zachary/Zinnia elsewhere says, such “misconceptions” and “stereotypes” produce “harmful cultural messages.”
Let’s ask a simple question: Who is responsible for the “pressure” Zachary/Zinnia describes? Who is it that “tells men” to marry women, form families and otherwise “participate in this heterosexual lifestyle”?
Zachary/Zinnia attributes this to “society,” but who is “society”? There are 7 billion people on this planet, 320 million of whom reside in the United States, so who among us is exercising this “pressure” that Zachary/Zinnia attributes “society”? Speaking for myself personally, I would not give a damn what Zachary/Zinnia does, were it not for his/“her” habit of telling other people what we are allowed to think. The only reason I’m taking time to write about Zachary/Zinnia today is because he/“she” has arrogated to himself/“herself” the authority to tell Laci Green who she is permitted to date. How did Zachary/Zinnia obtain such power? Who is in charge of hiring the Thought Police, and where do I go to apply for that job? Perhaps you see my point. But if not . . .
Zinnia Jones is in a polyamorous relationship with lesbian feminist Heather McNamara and transgender pornographer “Miss Robo.” This came to public attention in 2015, when Ms. McNamara forced her son “to write an essay on misogyny and its effects on society.” Yes, you read that correctly — Ms. McNamara is raising her son from a previous (heterosexual) marriage with the assistance of two transgender “partners.” Collectively, they are the “team” at Gender Analysis.
“For me and my partner of five years, Zinnia Jones, a transgender woman whom I love devotedly, things have recently become even more unpleasant. . . . Making it illegal for her to use the women’s room puts her in a unique situation. Anyone who looks at her would see a woman, but she’s also sometimes recognizable as an openly transgender activist. Does she use the women’s room and risk getting recognized, fined or imprisoned? Or does she use the men’s room and effectively out herself in a political environment that is suspicious, if not outright violent, toward transgender women?”
— Heather McNamara, “What ‘Trans Panic’ Means for My Family and Me,” Ms. Magazine, May 10, 2016
One supposes that Ms. McNamara, a self-declared Marxist feminist lesbian, could never “love devotedly” a heterosexual man, but the “transgender woman” formerly known as Zachary Antolak has by some strange magic qualified for inclusion in the McNamara “family.”
After first “coming out” as gay at age 19 in 2009, Zachary Antolak subsequently declared in April 2011 that he was a “she” in a decidedly weird way: “She’s my girlfriend and I’m her girlfriend. and I’m her girlfriend. The answer was right there: I’m a lesbian!“
Sure. Whatever you say, pal. Far be it from me to damage your self-esteem with any “harmful cultural messages.” To be honest, I never would have known Zachary/Zinnia existed, if Ms. McNamara had not assigned that essay about “misogyny” to her son in October 2015. That was four years after Zachary/Zinnia’s September 2011 announcement that he/“she” was moving to Florida. Why the relocation?
“In case you haven’t noticed, I’ve been a little busy recently. That’s because I’ve now assumed the role of stay-at-home mom. The reason I came to Florida was to help take care of my girlfriend’s children, and that’s what I’ve been doing for the past month. The younger one is not yet out of diapers, and the older one is in second grade. This has been an intense, hands-on learning experience, and probably the hardest thing I’ve ever done. . . . Surprisingly, raising children is not easy!”
— Zinnia Jones, “Zinnia’s Parenting Adventure,” Oct. 26, 2011
Heather McNamara divorced her husband, then got 22-year-old transgender “lesbian” Antolak to move in as “stay-at-home mom” to her two young children. Nothing to see here. Move along. Meanwhile . . .
In September 2012, Antolak began transgender “hormone replacement therapy” (HRT). How did that go? Zinnia explained in a 2015 video:
And again, in an August 2016 video:
Well, congratulations on the success of your “therapy”! Considering that Zach Antolak wasn’t exactly an impressive specimen of masculine vigor to begin with, I’m sure these . . . uh, therapeutic effects of long-term hormone treatment have been quite remarkable. But undergoing hormone treatment and being a “stay-at-home mom” hasn’t been the only excitement in the life ofZachary Antolak, a/k/a “Zinnia Jones.” Using his/“her” married name of Lauren McNamara, he/“she” was a witness in the 2013 trial of his/“her” friend Bradley “Chelsea” Manning.
Obviously, “stay-at-home mom” Lauren McNamara a/k/a Zinnia Jones a/k/a Zachary Antolak is an upstanding citizen with a respect for law and order. Anyone who suspects otherwise is probably some kind of transphobic right-wing bigot, because Lauren McNamara a/k/a Zinnia Jones a/k/a Zachary Antolak comes from a very respectable background:
My mother considered herself a feminist. (She’s not dead, I just don’t talk to her any more and she might as well be.) She was also bipolar and had a difficult time communicating things in a way that made sense, even though she was intelligent and thoughtful about a lot of things.
Looking back on my childhood, I realize that there were messages she sort of tried to teach me, but didn’t effectively teach me at all. To me, it just looked like more things fitting into her patterns of erratic behavior, but now I understand why she behaved the way she did about me wanting to shave my legs and wear makeup, and why she didn’t mind walking around the house naked after a shower. . . .
It always really bothered me that she would be naked in the house, in front of me and/or my brother. That, combined with her serial monogamy, led me to label her a Slut and grew the hatred I felt toward her. Didn’t she understand boundaries? Didn’t she understand that I didn’t want to see my mom naked? . . .
I think she might have exchanged sexual favors for drugs a few times, and I looked down on her for that, too. . . .
One time, I took a shower in her bathroom and freaked the hell out when I saw her vibrator in there. I thought it was dirty, I thought she was dirty, because of the number of her sexual partners. . . .
At the time, I just labelled her “crazy” and called her Satan behind her back. I knew that she was often noncompliant with her prescription medication and that she self-medicated with marijuana. I was a child being abused and I couldn’t understand why she was the way she was.
Someone with that excellent family background certainly could never be suspected of any kind of wrongdoing. However, Zachary/Zinnia says it is “creepy” for Laci Green to be dating Chris Maldonado, and also . . .
Well, well, well. Advocating the destruction of Laci Green for her alleged “sin” of dating someone of whom Zachary/Zinnia disapproves? Pushing her to the “breaking point”? As many people have pointed out, it is absurd to describe Chris Maldonado as “alt-right.” He supported the socialist Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democrat primaries. To call him a “white supremacist” or a “Nazi” is rather odd, considering his Puerto Rican ancestry (and Laci Green’s half-Iranian heritage). Is he an “MRA” (men’s rights activist)? No, as I say, he strikes me as just a normal guy who doesn’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with being a normal guy, but this is 2017. Feminists will not permit anyone to say a word in defense of normal guys, which makes Chris Maldonado so “controversial” that Laci Green has been excommunicated from feminism for dating him (see also, “Social Justice Warriors Dox, Publish Lengthy Dossier on Feminist YouTuber Laci Green”). As the biography of Zinnia Jones demonstrates, one doesn’t find many sane people in the feminist movement. In fact, it seems that mental illness is now required as a qualification for membership in the feminist movement.
What? Horse dildos?
How do horse dildos figure into the “feminist work” to which Zinnia Jones expresses such a zealous devotion? Why do Zinna Jones’s critics refer to him/“her” as “Queen of the Horse Dildos”? And why, in 2014, did Zinnia Jones write an article entitled, “Animal dildos: An ethical analysis”?
Do you really want the answers to these questions? Because when I tell you that Zinnia Jones produces pornography under the alias “Satana Kennedy,” you might be tempted to do a Google search, and discover the answers to these questions in a most unforgettable manner. You probably don’t want to do this, but if you succumb to foolish curiosity, keep in mind this fact: Zinnia a/k/a “Satana Kennedy” produces his/“her” pornography while functioning as “stay-at-home mom” for Heather McNamara’s two young sons. This is Zinnia’s “feminist work.”
There’s that tattoo again. “Satana Kennedy” — Zinnia Jones a/k/a Zachary Antolak, who tells feminists who they are allowed to date.
Gawker, the gay hard-left gossip website, was forced to shut down yesterday. Hulk Hogan won a $140 million dollar verdict against Gawker for violating his privacy rights when it published clips of a sex tape he made. He won so much money that Gawker had no choice but to be sold off and shut down, a humiliation for Nick Denton, the far-left founder.
Should we feel bad that a media site has been shut down? Should we feel worried about freedom of the press?
Normally, I would say yes. But Gawker was such a vile, hard-left site that they had it coming.
The articles on Gawker fell into several basic varieties:
1) Articles about how proud and virtuous anal sex is, which is the prime transmission source for AIDS.
2) Articles talking about how evil white people are.
3) Articles talking about how evil the police are.
4) Articles talking about how evil men (presumably, non-homosexual men) are
5) Articles talking about how oppressed Muslims are (but only oppressed by white Americans, not by other Muslims in the Middle East who are slaughtering them by the thousands).
While constantly spewing this toxic mix of racist, sexist, anti-American, pro-Islamic, and pro-AIDS agenda, there is little to feel sad for. Other news sources–The New York Times, The Washington Post, the major news networks, and more–have the same agenda, the only difference is that they are just a little bit less direct about it than Gawker, and a little bit less vile in the words they use. Perhaps the most commonly used word on Gawker.com was the word “shit”–perhaps the readers were in love with that word given it’s proximity to anal sex.
Gawker won’t be missed. Pass the popcorn.
Science proves that the LGBT feminazis are mentally ill!
Here is the world according to the LGBT Left: Just as there are black and white, there are gay and straight. One’s sexual orientation, like one’s race, is fixed and immutable at birth. The process of “questioning” one’s orientation isn’t a process of deciding but of discovering.
Similarly, when it comes to gender identity, there is “cis” and there is “trans.” A cis person’s gender identity matches the sex they were “assigned” at birth. A trans person — well, a trans person is any one of the fifty-plus other genders on the entirely reputable Facebook spectrum. This, you see, is science. Anyone who contradicts it — whether relying on ancient, discredited “holy” texts or outdated notions of morality — isn’t just ignorant, but bigoted. And when it comes to bigots, why draw minute moral distinctions? Is there really much difference between a Klan member and a Christian conservative? Such reasoning has been the source of much of the LGBT movement’s political force. It’s the narrative that dominates the academy, pop culture, progressive corporate America, and, lately, the Supreme Court. Justice Anthony Kennedy referred to the LGBT population’s “immutable” nature in his opinion constitutionalizing same-sex marriage. To those who live in the real world, this narrative has always run counter to observed reality. Human sexuality is not so neatly and cleanly divided and determined. Circumstances and culture matter, as does morality. So it should come as no surprise that — upon closer scientific examination — the LGBT Left’s case collapses. Sexual orientation and gender identity are nothing like race.
Yesterday, The New Atlantis released a comprehensive “study of studies,” taking a look at the accumulated body of credible scientific research on LGBT issues. The study is by Lawrence Mayer, a scholar-in-residence at Johns Hopkins University, and Paul McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital, and its findings destroy the narrative. First, regarding sexual orientation, the view that it is “an innate, biologically fixed property of human beings — the idea that people are ‘born that way’ — is not supported by scientific evidence.” Indeed, the authors highlight numerous studies finding that sexual orientation is often fluid, with one study showing high rates of abandonment of non-heterosexual identification as young men grew out of adolescence.
Second, “compared to the general population, non-heterosexual subpopulations are at an elevated risk for a variety of adverse health and mental health outcomes.” The numbers are sobering. Non-heterosexual populations have 1.5 times the risk of anxiety disorders and substance abuse, twice the risk of depression, and 2.5 times the risk of suicide. The transgender population also is at elevated risk for mental-health problems, with the suicide numbers particularly troubling: “The rate of lifetime suicide attempts across all ages of transgender individuals is estimated at 41%, compared to under 5% in the overall U.S. population.” Third, the idea that “gender identity is an innate, fixed property of human beings that is independent of biological sex — that a person might be ‘a man trapped in a woman’s body’ or ‘a woman trapped in a man’s body’ — is not supported by scientific evidence.” Indeed, only a minority of children who experience “cross-gender identification” will continue to do so as they get older.
The study is lengthy and comprehensive, and when you dive into its depths, it’s clear that McHugh and Mayer aren’t positing simplistic alternative explanations for human sexuality that would mirror and rebut the Left’s narrative. Instead, what emerges is a messy, realistic vision of human beings who are shaped by myriad social, cultural, and biological forces. To take one example, the authors spend considerable time talking about the high incidence of childhood sexual and physical abuse in the LGBT community. Do LGBT people experience higher rates of abuse and assault because of their orientation, or does the life-altering experience of abuse and assault contribute to the formation of an LGBT identity? As the authors note, the answer is not necessarily either/or. A person can be targeted because they’re perceived to be gay and “sexual abuse perpetrated by men might cause boys to think they are gay or make girls averse to sexual contact with men.”
Here’s the thing, the messy reality McHugh and Mayer describe has been experienced by humans since time immemorial. The LGBT Left’s narrative is the new nonsense. But in response to the new nonsense, there are sectors of American and European politics and culture that can’t kick away the old norms of marriage and gender fast enough, and they keep doing so in spite of the mountain of evidence that those who forsake the allegedly oppressive “Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement,” to quote Black Lives Matter, face far greater challenges than those hidebound bigots who stick faithfully to the heteronormative nightmare of traditional male-female marriage.
What’s even worse — what’s downright insane — is that some on Left want to end the debate. They want to keep selling their moral vision to the public without any competition. Here’s their vision, in a nutshell: Consenting adults should be able to do what they want with their bodies, and the resulting physical or emotional harm is either reasonably tolerable or can be alleviated through a combination of government programs and public re-education. The Judeo-Christian model, by contrast, is aspirational, calling on people not to do what they want, but what they should. Admittedly, this path is far easier for some than others, but there has always been some play in the cultural joints. The Left’s response is alluring, but it offers a self-indulgent path down which lies cultural ruin. The LGBT Left is driving us there just as fast as it can depress the gas pedal, but thanks to McHugh and Mayer, we now know they most assuredly are not doing so in the name of “science.”
Women’s fashion magazine Elle has decided to stop focusing on its four letter title, French for “Her,” and has placed Hari Nef, a 23-year-old man who graduated from the theater program at Columbia University last year on its September, 2016 cover. Hari was not available for comment, and therefore I am unable to confirm whether this is masterful acting by the cunning theater major Hari, able to troll photographers, makeup artists, editors, and publishers into believing he is a hot woman, or the staff of top selling Elle magazine forgetting what their nameplate means
Hari grew up in a single parent home in Massachusetts. His mother was a saleswoman, and he expressed some discomfort as a teenager, and after moving to NYC to study drama at Columbia, began dressing in “genderless clothes” and upon graduation landed a modeling gig and performed his first catwalk in 2015 during New York Fashion Week.
Apparently, Hari still has most of the associated cues of being a male. He states:
“I could have hidden in Boston and lived at home for 3 years, gone through my transition, taken voice lessons to make my voice more feminine, gotten gender reassignment surgery, and spent time to complete my transition, but I didn’t want to wait. I wanted to be in the world,”
He states that he still sounds, acts, and looks like a man, and likely has kept the frank and beans like role model Bruce.
Hari is attracted to and dates other men, stating
“in an ideal world, I wouldn’t have to change my body. I wouldn’t have to do all this stuff. I wouldn’t have to be pretty, or feminine, and people would respect that.”
Well, I wouldn’t go so far as to respect anything besides your privacy, but yes, if you just shut up and quietly lived your gay life without calling attention to yourself, and without the theatrics of pretending to actually be female, or “gender shifting” or any of the other 31 flavors of the month, then many people wouldn’t have a problem with you.
As recently as 15 years ago, this would be 100% pure humor. While I did chuckle at this story, and several of the photos are rather humorous, the fact is, today, this is taken seriously by much of America. As the film Zoolander parodied, models are not always dressed in the most feminine of clothing, and indeed many models have an androgynous look.
But the culture is changing so rapidly, that a post-millennial kid today would be confused by the plot of many top films of recent memory, such as Silence of the Lambs, which purposefully made the mass murderer Buffalo Bill a cross dresser, reinforcing his depravity and mental illness.
Feminism: Always The Enemy of Fun
But today, a man dressing as a woman is not seen as silly or humorous, as it has throughout most of Western history, but a Proud and Strong and Brave Womyn Expressing Her Inner Strength and Spirit. While 2001’s Zoolander was a critical and box office success, earning over $30 million in profit from theater sales alone, 2016’s sequel Zoolander 2 was a commercial failure, only barely covering its costs of production. Add humor to another item in the long list of things feminism has killed.
Where Does It Come From?
Elle Magazine (“Her” Magazine) is owned by a French conglomerate, and the American version is published by Hearst Media, a privately held and controversial publisher founded by William Randolph Hearst, that once held a monopoly on major media and today owns interests in hundreds of magazines, newspapers, and TV stations reaching 20% of US viewers, including ESPN, who has worked closely with the NFL in turning football gay. One can look into the history and background of the major media and see the common source which creates this garbage.
While there will certainly be backlash as elites attempt to define to us what is beauty, what is female, and what is good, the end result is that the vast majority of post-millennials will succumb to this propaganda and never know the truth. When the majority of their classmates are fat, gross, prepubescently-sexually active, and genderqueer, they will never be exposed to real beauty.
While corporations like Elle can save money by employing mentally ill workers that don’t have to be told to “look confused and depressed”, they are destroying the basic biological imperatives of humanity. Hari Nef has already been hired for television work and will be coming to a network near you soon. Throw away your TV and tune out the offensive degenerate media
The new Star Trek series is featuring a female lead and an officer who enjoys anal sex.
This should not be surprising since Bryan Fuller, who is creating the series, says he also enjoys anal sex.
The producers probably think it will be great to have a character who can show viewers, especially children, the joys of anal sex, to continue the promotion of this unhealthy lifestyle.
I just hope they have finally found a cure for AIDS in the 23rd century.
As for the woman lead, that is no surprise, like the Force Awakens, like Rogue One, like Ghostbusters, no men need apply.
Women are tough, women are leaders, men are sheep, men are followers.
Let the brainwashing continue.