#Milo yiannopoulos husband

[heroesrolli]

Milo yiannopoulos husband

MILO YIANNOPOULOS HUSBAND HOW TO

His debt doesn't finish here, Yiannopoulos is due to pay $400,000 to the Mercer Family Foundation, $20,000 to the Cartier which is a luxurious brand. He was in a $2 million debt and owed $1.6 million to his company. He not only lost his deal with Simon and Schuster, but Yiannopoulos was also in huge debt. Is drowned in more than $2 million debtĪfter giving a speech about pedophilia, which sounded like he was supporting it, Yiannopoulos was in huge trouble as things weren't in his favor. Yiannopoulos once told that if someone cut off his hands than that person would be able to buy a house. He also wore 50 karat gold jewelry and Tiffany earrings worth $40,000. Yiannopoulos said he always wear branded clothes and accessories from Dolce, Gabbana, Louis Vuitton, Balmain, Tiffany, and more. Always Wear Expensive Brands Clothes Milo Yiannopoulos who always wears expensive clothes. Then he made a London technology scene with a motive to raise money for 'Take Heart India' by organizing London Nude Tech Calendar. The grant was to provide equal scholarships for women and minorities. In August 2016, Yiannopoulos took part in an online telethon for his privilege grant and raised $100,000 for the grant in donations and also made $250,000 in additions. Later, he withdrew his charges against Simon & Schuster in February 2018. Because of all the losses faced by Wagner, he sued Simon & Schuster for braking the contract by charging $10 million in damages. Then in February 2017, due to the several ongoing controversies of Wagner, Simon, and Schuster declined to publish his book which led Wagner to resign from Breitbart. Sued Simon and SchusterĪs Wagner is a re-known author, he received an advance payment of $80,000 from a book publisher, Simon and Schuster.

MILO YIANNOPOULOS HUSBAND HOW TO

Yiannopoulos then kept on publishing his books Diabolical, Middle Rages, How To Be Poor, How To Be Straight, and Forbidden Thoughts which got outstanding reviews and ratings from the people. Then he released his second book 'SJWs Always Lie' which also has its sequel part named 'SJWs Double Down'. In 2017, he published his first book 'Dangerous' which sold 200,000 copies. Yiannopoulos has published seven books till now and has been gaining a satisfactory amount of money from being an author. He also said that Tesla doesn't even have gold chrome in the entire world nor have any options to choose. Yiannopoulos said the gold plated car cost him a fortune of $330,000. Bought Tesla for his Husband Milo Yiannopoulos golden chrome Tesla which he bought for his husband.Īfter marrying his husband John, Yiannopoulos bought an expensive gold chrome Tesla. He has earned his worth from working with Breitbart for three years from 2014 to 2017 and from being an author, tours, and various camps work. Milo Yiannopoulos has an estimated net worth of $4 million.įrom his multiple involvements in several professions, Yiannopoulos has earned a whopping net worth of $4 million. He always wears expensive clothes and always follows brands. Yiannopoulos is also an author and has written seven books. He has an estimated net worth of $4 million from his varied career. Milo Hanrahan who is widely known as Milo Yiannopoulos and Milo Andreas Wagner is a political commentator, writer, and public speaker.

[silvermoon424]

I'm just gonna say it. I straight-up do not believe in "muh free speech" anymore. I used to be a dumb centrist/turned lib who thought you could debate Nazis and fascists in the free marketplace of ideas but over the past couple of years I've realized deplatforming is the way to go.

You know why conservatives rail so hard against deplatforming and cling so hard to "muh freeze peach", or claim that deplatforming will just make things worse? Because they know deplatforming fucking works. Deplatforming extremists who spout hate speech stops them from radicalizing other people and takes a sledgehammer to their influence. Remember how Milo Yiannopoulos basically dropped off the face of the planet after he got deplatformed? The same thing is happening to Andrew Tate now (although he's still desperately trying to cling to relevancy).

The right-wing social media platforms where they end up never get them a fraction of the relevancy because no sane person goes on those places, they're fucking disgusting. The extremist's power lies in being able to radicalize people on normal social media sites where they may stumble on a video/post unintentionally or are being fed content through a pipeline/algorithm.

There is just absolutely no value in hate speech against marginalized groups or dogwhistles that lead to stochastic terrorism, such as the recent attack on Nancy Pelosi's husband or mass shootings targeting POC. Just start fucking banning and deplatforming basically all right-wing influencers because they're all complicit in this shit. People like Matt Walsh shouldn't be deplatformed because they believe in lower taxes and deregulation or whatever, they should be deplatformed they do shit like encourage people to call in bomb threats against children's hospitals.

[batsarebetterthanpeople]

The lipstick racist just went on a rant against they/them pronouns. My brother in christ you are a amab person who uses he/him pronouns but has been wearing wigs heals and a full face of makeup in your day to day life since myspace was the social media of choice and you've publicly dated straight men and stood between the male and female bathrooms to post a joke about not being able to remember which one you are. Like just hand the gun to the transphobes and put yourself up against the wall why don't you? This is so fucking funny. Guess when you can't rehabilitate your image with the libs because there's footage of you using the N word and threatening to hate crime black women you have to resort to pretending there's only two genders when you yourself are evidence that that's not true. This is Milo Yiannopoulos pretending to be a reformed ex-gay trad cath while still living with his ex husband levels of pathetic.

[calder]

My events almost never happen. It’s protests, or sabotage from Republican competitors or social media outcries. Every time, it costs me tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. And when I get dumped from conferences, BARELY ANYONE makes a sound about it — not my fellow conservative media figures and not even, in many cases, you guys. When was the last time any of you protested in the street at the treatment meted out to me or Pamela Gellar or Mike Cernovich or Alex Jones? I have repeatedly put myself in harm’s way in service of American values. My annual security bill amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars — just so my husband and I don’t get killed going for sushi.

make milo yiannopoulos hysterical with mortal fear again

[rebeleden]

REVEALED: Kanye West’s Presidential Committee Paid Milo Yiannopoulos $31k for ‘Campaign Wrap Up Services'

AND KANYE IS A PPP LOAN THIEF

STOP VANILLA ISIS

[thingstrumperssay]

Dave Rubin is a conservative who has a conservative audience, but he also happens to be gay and is expecting two children. I don’t like him but when I saw the two pictures I smiled a pretty big smile. I’m legitimately happen for them. Unfortunately their audience is not.

Milo Yiannopoulos has been claiming that he went to gay conversion therapy, claimed that it was successful and that his husband is “just a roommate.” He’s saying that Dave Rubin and his husband should executed for paying two women to be surrogates to their children.

Not only are they helping those women out financially, but they could be helping them out in general.

Most women don’t know what it will be like for them when they’re pregnant until after they’re pregnant (unless they know that they have a blood disorder that clots the blood when a spike of estrogen is introduced) but a lot of women know that being pregnant will most likely lessen their periods. (Like lighter cramps and flows.)

Aaand people are saying shit like “they’re stealing children” and “they should be killed.” And Rubin’s pathetic response was to explain what a surrogate mother is as though his audience doesn’t already know. And it’s just sad to see, really. But whatever they need to do to get money for their children I guess?

[meawslove]

Milo Yiannopoulos urges Australians to vote ‘no’ to equal marriage – just weeks after marrying his boyfriend

#Australia #Equal_Marriage #Gay_Marriage #Husband #Milo_Yiannopoulos

The disgraced media personality ...

[eroticcannibal]

Delighted to learn that Milo Yiannopoulos is being cucked by his husband housemate

[bigmeansweatydyke]

in regards to gay conservatives, i wanna say that sexuality is not and will never be a political stance, and being gay has absolutely no bearing on one's morals; it is a neutral thing. you could be the absolute worst motherfucker in the world but if you're gay, you're still gay. homosexuality is not a monolith.

that being said, i don't necessarily think gay conservatives are doing right by themselves or other gay people, and that's because conservatives have basically shown time and time again that in their eyes, gay conservatives are not the rule but merely the exceptions when it comes to gays. essentially "those other fucking queers are disgusting but you're alright". you're not changing their homophobia, you're just showing them that there are some gay people willing to prostrate themselves.

and often times i've seen that gay conservatives are NOT very happy. a lot of them in a cycle of trying so hard to be Not Like The Other Gays™ and lashing out at them that they alienate themselves from other gay folks, or they feel the need to place themselves into a position where they are depriving themselves of romantic relationships in order to please the religious right they so desperately want the approval of. hell, in an extreme case there's Milo Yiannopoulos who's essentially trying to put himself through conversion therapy, calling himself an "ex-gay" and saying he's "demoted" his husband to "housemate" status (and as shitty of a person as he is i don't like to joke as conversion therapy a lot because it's a horrifying thing that i wouldn't wish on any gay person). for years he was the token only to see that there were and are STILL so many conservatives who hated people like him; he didn't change their minds, he was just an exception.

in conclusion, if you're a gay conservative i'm not going to act like your sexuality is automatically invalid. literally the only qualification for being gay is to be exclusively attracted to the same sex, and if you fit that then you're gay! that's not gonna stop me from thinking you're an asshole and a bootlicker though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[mostlysignssomeportents]

#1yrago Using information security to explain why disinformation makes autocracies stronger and democracies weaker

The same disinformation campaigns that epitomize the divisions in US society -- beliefs in voter fraud, vaccine conspiracies, and racist conspiracies about migrants, George Soros and Black Lives Matter, to name a few -- are a source of strength for autocracies like Russia, where the lack of a consensus on which groups and views are real and which are manufactured by the state strengthens the hand of Putin and his clutch of oligarchs.

In a new Harvard Berkman Center paper, Common -Knowledge Attacks on Democracy, political scientist Henry Farrell (previously and security expert Bruce Schneier (previously) team up to explore this subject by using information security techniques, and come to a very plausible-seeming explanation and a set of policy recommendations to address the issue.

Farrell and Schneier start by exploring the failures of both national security and information security paradigms to come to grips with the issue: Cold War-style national security is oriented around Cold War ideas like "offense–defense balance, conventional deterrence theory, and deterrence by denial," none of which are very useful for thinking about disinformation attacks; meanwhile, information security limits itself to thinking about "servers and individual networks" and not "the consequences of attacks for the broader fabric of democratic societies."

Despite these limits, the authors say that there is a way to use the tools of information security to unpick these kinds of "information attacks" on democracies: treat "the entire polity as an information system with associated attack surfaces and threat models" -- that is, to think about the democracy itself as the thing to be defended, rather than networks or computers.

From there, they revisit the different disinformation styles of various autocracies and autocratic movements, particularly the Russian style of sowing doubt about what truth is and where it can be found (infamously, Russia's leading political strategist admits that he secretly funds some opposition groups, but won't say which ones, leaving everyone to wonder whether a given group is genuine or manufactured -- there's some excellent scholarship contrasting this with the style used by the Chinese state and also with techniques used by authoritarian insurgents inside of democracies, like Milo Yiannopoulos).

In the paper's framework, the stability of autocrats' power requires that the public not know how other people feel -- for there to be constant confusion about which institutions, groups and views are genuine and which ones are conspiracies, frauds, or power-grabs. Once members of the public discover how many of their neighbors agree that the ruling autocracy is garbage, they are emboldened to rise up against it. Tunisia's dictatorship was stable so long as the law banning dissent could be enforced, but the lack of enforcement on Facebook allowed Tunisians to gain insight into their neighbors' discontent, leading to the collapse of the regime.

By contrast, democracies rely on good knowledge about the views of other people, most notably embodied by things like free and fair elections, where citizens get a sense of their neighbors' views, and are thus motivated to find solutions that they know will be widely viewed as legitimate and will therefore be sustainable.

So when information attacks against democracies sow doubt about the genuineness of movements and views -- when Soros is accused of funding left-wing movements, when Koch Industries' name is all over the funding sources of right-wing think-tanks, when politicians depend on big money, and when Facebook ads and its engagement algorithm pushes people to hoaxes and conspiracies -- it weakens democracy in exactly the same way that it strengthens autocracy. Without a sense of which political views are genuine and which are disinformation, all debate degenerates into people calling each other shills or bots, and never arriving at compromises with the stamp of broad legitimacy.

It's not a coincidence that the right's political playbook is so intertwined with this kind of disinformation and weakening of democracy. A widely held belief on the political right is that the most important "freedom" is private property rights, and since rich people are always outnumbered by poor people, subscribers to this ideology hold that "freedom is incompatible with democracy," because in a fair vote, the majority 99% will vote to redistribute the fortunes of the minority 1%. In this conception, the rich are the only "oppressed minority" who can't be defended by democracy.

This gives rise to the right's belief in natural hierarchies, which are sorted out by markets, with the best people rising to the top (Boris Johnson: "As many as 16 per cent of our species have an IQ below 85, while about 2 per cent have an IQ above 130. The harder you shake the pack, the easier it will be for some cornflakes to get to the top.").

The right's position, fundamentally, is that the "best" people should boss everyone else around for their own good: kings should boss around commoners (monarchists); slavers should boss around enslaved people (white nationalists); husbands should boss around wives and kids (Dominionists); America should boss around the world (imperialists); and rich people should boss around workers (capitalists).

So when Reagan started cracking wise about "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are 'I'm from the government, and I'm here to help,'" he was kicking off a long project to discredit the US and its institutions in favor of autocrats, the mythological heroes of Ayn Rand novels whose singular vision was so true and right that it didn't need peer review, checks and balances, or anyone who might speak truth to power. He was initiating the process that led the Trump administration's army of think-tankies to dismantle the US government's multibillion-dollar institutions charged with defending us from food poisoning, plutonium spills, unsafe workplaces, tornadoes and starvation: in the autocrat's view of the world, these institutions' word cannot be taken at face value, because every institution is just a pawn for its bosses' and workers' personal ambitions, featherbedding and pocket-lining.

Unsurprisingly then, Farrell and Schneier's recommended countermeasures for disinformation campaigns cut directly against the right's most cherished policies: get rid of Citizens United and the idea that secret money can fund US political campaigns; limit financial secrecy and make it harder for anyone to claim that US political movements are the inauthentic expression of manipulative foreign disinformation campaigns.

Alongside financial transparency, the authors suggest that vigorous antitrust enforcement, possibly with reclassification of online services as public utilities, would help curb the deployment of ranking algorithms that elevate "engagement" over all else, leading to spirals that drive users to ever-more-extreme and unfounded views and communities (weirdly, this is the one highly selective instance in which the right is calling for a return to pre-Reagan antitrust fundamentals).

https://boingboing.net/2018/11/27/autocracy-loves-confusion.html

[solacekames]

Just as the Trump presidency has inspired a wave of women and people of color to run for office in 2018, it’s also opened the door for candidates motivated by white nationalism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, misogyny and racism. Seemingly emboldened by Trump’s divisive rhetoric – and the GOP’s mute indifference to it – this new class of candidates is testing the appetite for bigotry in public life among constituencies across the nation. As white supremacist and admitted pedophile Nathan Larson, who campaigned for Congress as an independent, explained: “A lot of people are tired of political correctness and being constrained by it.” Here are eight such candidates who could soon. wind up in office.

RUNNING

Joe Arpaio, Republican U.S. Senate – Arizona The former Maricopa County Sheriff first rose to prominence in 2005 for instructing his officers to demand proof of citizenship from any person suspected of being undocumented. He stubbornly stuck to the policy even after courts ruled it constituted racial profiling. He was convicted of contempt of court in 2017, but pardoned by President Trump before he was even sentenced, paving the way for the once-vocal birther’s bid for Senate.

John Fitzgerald, Republican U.S. House – California’s 11th District A Holocaust-denier who believes 9/11 was a Jewish-orchestrated conspiracy, Fitzgerald netted more than 36,000 votes in his California district’s June primary – enough to earn him a slot on the ballot in November. Since then, he’s been making media rounds, promoting his campaign on neo-Nazi and anti-Semitic podcasts where he’s reiterated his promise to expose “the truth about the Holocaust and how it’s an absolute fabricated lie.”

Seth Grossman, Republican U.S. House – New Jersey’s 2nd District The former city councilman and county freeholder from Atlantic City has written that gay men should have been quarantined in the ‘80s and called Islam “a cancer.” On Facebook, he’s shared posts by Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer, anti-Islam agitator Pamela Geller, alt-right posterboy Milo Yiannopoulos as well as racist memes, including one that suggested Arabs, like Obama, want to “move to your country, rape our women, bomb your buses, riot in your streets, and demand that you accept [their] religion.”

Arthur Jones, Republican U.S. House – Illinois’ 3rd District A former member of the American Nazi party, Jones lost seven bids for Congress before finally securing the GOP nomination this year at the age of 70 to the chagrin of the state’s Republican party, which paid for robocalls warning voters to “stop Illinois Nazis.” Twenty-thousand Republicans nonetheless pulled the lever for Jones, whose campaign website calls the Holocaust was “a greatly overblown nonevent.”

Steve King, Republican U.S. House – Iowa’s 4th District (Incumbent) King – considered a shoe-in for an eighth term this November – has approvingly retweeted prominent bigots like Geert Wilders, Mark Collett and Viktor Orbán, proudly displayed a Confederate flag on his desk for years, once said white people contributed more to civilization than any other “subgroup” in history, and has casually characterized immigrants having “calves the size of cantaloupes” from hauling drugs across the desert.

Paul Nehlen, Republican U.S. House – Wisconsin’s 1st District The self-described “pro-White” congressional candidate has palled around with ex-KKK Grand Wizard David Duke and signal-boosted Daily Stormer founder Andrew Anglin. He’s been permanently suspended by both Twitter (for making a racist joke about Meghan Markle) and the alt-right’s favorite social network, Gab (for doxxing a right-wing troll). His views are so toxic that he’s not only been condemned by the state GOP and Paul Ryan, whose seat he’s seeking, but even on the alt-right platform of Breitbart, which once championed his candidacy, too.

Corey Stewart, Republican U.S. Senate – Virginia At the height of the debate over Confederate monuments last year, Minnesota-born Stewart declared on Twitter, “Nothing is worse than a Yankee telling a Southerner that his monuments don’t matter.” More recently, he’s asserted his disbelief “that the Civil War was ultimately fought over the issue of slavery.”

Russell Walker, Republican U.S. House – North Carolina’s 48th District Walker, who has declared “God is a racist and a white supremacist” and all Jewish people “descend from Satan,” won the Republican primary in May. Since then, he’s appeared on the white supremacist Stormfront Action podcast where he was scolded by the show’s host for using the n-word to describe voters in his district. Walker will face an African American minister in November general election.

DEFEATED

Nathan Larson, Independent U.S. House – Virginia’s 10th District The failed Libertarian, who created a series of websites for likeminded pedophiles and involuntary celibates, told HuffPost there was “a grain of truth” to his posts about father-daughter incest and spousal rape. His campaign manifesto envisioned a country where a “benevolent white supremacy” ruled, incest and child pornography were legal, the Violence Against Women Act was repealed and replaced by “a system that classifies women as property, initially of their fathers and later of their husbands.” Larson got less than two percent of the vote in the primary, but he’ll have a second shot when he appears on the general election ballot in November.

Patrick Little, Republican U.S. Senate – California Little campaigned for the chance to challenge Sen. Dianne Feinstein under the slogan “Liberate the US from the Jewish Oligarchy.” His platform included a promise to have the U.S. formally declare the Holocaust “a Jewish war atrocity propaganda hoax that never happened.”

Roy Moore, Republican U.S. Senate – Alabama As chief justice of Alabama’s Supreme Court, Moore deflected criticism of his racist, anti-gay and transphobic views for years. His Senate bid was tanked, though, by multiple credible accusations of sexual misconduct with underage girls.

[gotinterest]

Y’know I don’t actually think that Milo’s “African-American Husband” even exists. If so, why is Milo on a visa and not a green card? Also, if he is so proud of having a black partner, why has he been so secretive about his identity?

Also! He’s keeping his partner’s ID a secret, so why would he go out in public with him for sushi as he claims in that post?

Milo is virulently anti-gay and says he wishes he wasn’t gay. Why on earth would he opt to be in a relationship with another man if he thought homosexuality was wrong? Every other anti-gay gay man I’ve heard of actively avoids being in gay relationships beyond casual hookups.

Also why would another gay man want to be married to someone who thought homosexuality was wrong?

Milo Yiannopoulos is a troll. That’s his Brand. Trolls will lie and say anything they can to get a rise. I wouldn’t be shocked if his husband turned out to be a lie as well.

[spanishmossshea]

So this was a response I had to a reddit post asking where "detrans" comes from and it turned into a dissertation. TW: EXTREME TRANSPHOBIA, HOMOPHOBIA, MENTION OF KILLING, MENTION OF CONVERSION THERAPY

Or, as I find is more often the case, it is specifically part of a delegitimization campaign fronted by tokenized right-wingers.

For example, the recent controversy surrounding Milo Yiannopoulos, where he "came out as ex-gay." Is he really no longer gay and once was? Is it that he never was gay in the first place? It's hard to say. He did have a husband, but in his own words that man was recently "demoted to housemate."

What is easier to say is that he is definitely surrounded by and on the side of people who see gayness (and frankly, any other minoritized quality) as an inherently bad thing. It's not hard to look to the right-wing crowd and find many examples of people being homophobic, transphobic, what have you.

So it's not hard to imagine that through either internalizing those same views of those who surround him as "gay = bad," or he's conscious of this bias and is merely conforming to his peers as part of a grift, to ingratiate himself to the bigots who pay his bills.

What's worse is that either way, it's allowing him to push an incredibly harmful, anti-LGBT message: "Conversion therapy works." It gives right-wingers an example to point to and go "See? We can fix the gays! And you already know how we feel about the 'should'!"

I'm sure I don't have to delve into just why that's a terrible and also incorrect message, but I can and will should someone need me to. But even if we know how terrible that is, many people either don't know and will be swayed by this faulty logic, or they are already actively pushing it, both of which set our community back leagues.

I personally don't know of any detransitioners, but I think I can predict one; Blaire White.

Now for those who don't know, Blaire White is a conservative transgender woman who creates YouTube content. Some of her recent videos include taking a political compass quiz and lying about the results to make herself seem further right-wing than her answers would indicate, and another going to bat for the recent super-straight movement (pronounced "Not-see bul-shit") where she spouted the rhetoric behind said movement, that trans people aren't the gender that they, for lack of a better term, identify as (I'm sure they mostly mean trans women because that's who the bigots almost always focus on).

Less recently, her channel is usually dedicated to the same sort of delegitimization of trans people in much the same vein as Milo does for gay people. She'll spout transmedicalist bullshit, point out whenever a trans person does anything bad, back up TERF talking points, etc. Basically, much the same as Milo, trying to (virtue) signal to the right that "You're right to think trans people = bad, except me that is, pick me, I'm on your side.'

And if that weren't bad enough, the most recent thing I've seen involving Blaire was a right-wing debate panel featuring herself, Karlyn Borysenko, a self-proclaimed "conservative liberal" who by her own admission is only a right-winger because she went to a Trump rally and people were nice to her, John Doyle, unabashed fascist chud who recently made a two-hour video on "why porn bad", and Lauren something-or-other (idk, her last name was probably "Braun" or something like that judging by her views), a mostly unheard of nazi and looks-wise, literally Hitler's wet dream.

Now you may be wondering; how can so much cringe exist in one place without passing critical mass, creating a black hole, and swallowing the solar system, leaving not even a memory? Scientists are still stumped to this miracle of physics, so don't feel bad if you don't know either.

Anyway, why I think Blaire is going to eventually, if not soon, be the next detransitioner to be decrying trans people as a concept, is that she already was in this debate. Several times during the panel, Lauren brought up incredibly mask-off criticisms of Blaire and trans people in general, citing the "40%" statistic, saying that Blaire was encouraging children to be trans, and at one point literally saying (SKIP TO THE NEXT PARAGRAPH IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE EXTREME TRANSPHOBIA, also I'm paraphrasing a little at the end) "the best thing you could do [for the republican party] is to grow out your mustache and stop pretending to be something you're not."

Now, in the face of such horrid hatred, did Blaire stand up for herself, or indeed other, possibly even conservative, trans people? Nope. Capitulated to her point. Said that she was the biggest advocate for children not to transition. That she didn't want people to be like her. And it was like this for the entire gut-wrenching panel. Two fascists and a fascist-friendly moderator berating and laughing at anything that wasn't white, cis, and hetero, versus one idiot arguing (ironically pretty pragmatically) for a bigger-tent strategy, and a token trans woman buttoning her lip as she and everyone like her were being barraged with hatred.

So, it seems Blaire, and other right-wing trans people like her, are faced with a choice: Either A) Realize that these people hate her guts and will gladly take her vote and then legislate against her existence, and stop associating with them at the very least, B) Continue to air-headedly go to bat for these people while dissonantly holding onto her identity, right up until the day it's her own turn in the showers, or C) and I think you know what's coming here: Detransition to ingratiate herself to the people who hate her for existing but pay her bills. And I'd like to think it's not hard to imagine how likely option A is. And when she inevitably takes option C, those same nazis will have another example to point at and say "See! We can fix the transes!"

So to cap it off, I think that's essentially where the bulk of "detrans" comes from. Don't buy into it. If someone really does realize they weren't really trans, then good for them. But I think it would be worth it to examine whether those are genuine feelings, and where they're coming from.

Sincerely,

A Proud and Out Trans Woman

[sutrala]

Milo Yiannopoulos declares himself ex-gay and says he’s ‘demoted’ husband to housemate in bizarre new interview

[gettothestabbing]

Some things do change.  Thanks to BuzzFeed, I have been crowned the world's leading gay Jewish disabled immigrant with a black husband who's also a sexist, a racist, a homophobe, a transphobe, an Islamophobe and a neo‑Nazi.  Well, I'm here to tell you only Islamophobe is true.  And maybe transphobe, but aren't we all really?

Milo Yiannopoulos

[lol-jackles]

What is your opinion on Milo Yiannopoulos?

I think this gay Jewish dude with a black husband was unfairly slandered as a homophobic racist Nazi, but that’s on par for the radical Leftist to label everybody who is not one of them as racist, homophobic Nazi.  

If you want to know why gays and atheists are increasing defecting over to Trump’s new conservative party that is full of pro-Israel Christians, look no further than Milo’s number one cause: free speech.

Milo is cunning and articulate, he is talented at employing his quick wit  humouristically to destroy an enemy and use his words to pursuade a large audience.  This is a dangerous talent and I think that’s why he called himself the “Dangerous Faggot.