This is feminism: Singer wears vagina pants and shows off fake pubic hair in video that “celebrates self love and sexuality”

janelle monae

I’ve never heard of this rapper/singer Janelle Monáe (pictured center in above photo), a 32-year-old American who has said she “only dates androids” which represent the new “Other.”

From Daily Mail: Janelle Monáe causes quite the stir with her new music video – not with the song itself, but rather the clip’s incredibly provocative content, that includes the singer dancing around in a pair of flamboyant vagina pants and flaunting fake pubic hair.

Indeed, the 32-year-old seems to have taken a great deal of inspiration from the female form when it came to creating the video for PYNK, placing vaginal imagery and innuendo front and center.

‘PYNK is a brash celebration of creation, self love, sexuality, and pussy power!’ Monáe explains on YouTube. ‘PYNK is the color that unites us all, for pink is the color found in the deepest and darkest nooks and crannies of humans everywhere… PYNK is where the future is born….’

Apparently, this translates to the singer and her backup dancers donning vagina-inspired outfits for a portion of the video, and invoking images associated with female genitalia courtesy of a raw oyster, a pink ring donut and a pink grapefruit sliced in half.

And the provocative feminine imagery certainly doesn’t end there. In another scene, Monáe can be seen dancing in a bedroom wearing a pair of panties featuring the words ‘Sex Cells’ embroidered on the front.

The camera also pans in on another woman wearing similar panties that feature the words, ‘I grab back’. 

Fans of her music have likened the video the work of American modernist artist Georgia O’Keefe, who rose to critical acclaim for her flower paintings that were likened to vaginas.

And even actress Elizabeth Banks took to Twitter to put forward her theory that the song was clearly about female genitalia. ‘Whoa, vagina pants,’ she tweeted to her 2.35 million followers.

Directed by Emma Westenberg, the video also features Thor: Ragnarok actress Tessa Thompson, who appeared in Monáe’s sexually charged Make Me Feel video in February.  In PYNK, Thompson can be seen emerging from Monáe’s thighs which are clad in the vagina pants.

And in Make Me Feel, Thompson plays Monáe’s female love interest as the singer flits between flirting with a man and a woman.

For months, there’s been growing speculation about whether Monáe and Hollywood star Tessa Thompson are in a romantic relationship.

However neither woman has issued an official statement to confirm or deny the gossip buzzing around the status of their relationship, and in 2013 when Monáe was asked is she was ‘into girls’ on the radio show Sway in the Morning, she refused to define her sexuality.

‘There’s nothing wrong with being bisexual. There’s nothing wrong with being a lesbian or gay. I am an advocate. I have friends who are in same-sex relationships. I think that love has no sexual orientation,’ she said.

Read the rest of the story and see the video here.

See also:

DCG

79 responses to “This is feminism: Singer wears vagina pants and shows off fake pubic hair in video that “celebrates self love and sexuality”

  1. I want to go on record as saying . . . I hate the fact that some women go on the record indicating such nonsense. I cannot even begin to understand how men feel about these brash, gross, ugly in your face supposedly extoling the virtues of the female sexual organs. This stuff is just monumentally vulgar, women who participate in this kind of sensational goings’ on are just low class.

    Liked by 10 people

  2. This is just another assault on normal sexuality. They are driving wedges between men and women. They are creating other forms of sexuality. The goal of course is that “normal” sex doesn’t happen.

    Miley Cyrus does this too. She claims to be “pan sexual”. Anything that was an article of faith is under attack. Anything “normal” is slated for destruction.

    Liked by 6 people

    • “Anything “normal” is slated for destruction.”
      It looks like America ended its Evolution in the middle/late 60’s;NOW we’re fighting off DE-volution. If we can’t stop the trend, America will be back to killing or defending with sticks and rocks,communicating with basic sign language,grunts and gestures and distance will again be gauged in the number of Suns away it is at walking speed.
      I lay ALL of this at the feet of LIBERALS,who have been working tirelessly to make it happen.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Yup, divide and conquer. (Eventually, the Leftists hope to pick up the pieces and rule whatever remains.)

        Liked by 5 people

        • They’re going to be the first to go. None I know are survivors or free thinkers. They do what they are told. Wear what they are told to wear, read what they are told to read, even eat what they are told to eat. Can you imagine them surviving a revolution? Or when S officially hits the fan? I can’t.

          Liked by 4 people

        • They’re setting their sights pretty low,aren’t they? Ruling whatever remains? Sorta like aspiring to someday be one of the dregs of society?

          Liked by 3 people

      • How true, truckjunkie, and incidentally regarding evolution, the video might qualify as a disconfirming instance of the Darwinian mechanism. Darwin said his theory rested entirely on the accumulation of imperceptibly small transformations over millions of years, right? yet here we have the supposed descent from monkeys to man reversed in only a few generations from man back to something like singing baboons.

        Liked by 4 people

  3. Marriage “is down” because men have learned that the juice ain’t worth the squeeze.

    Liked by 3 people

    • WELL-That was-weird.

      Liked by 3 people

    • That was just plain stupid. When you really looked at each of those females, there was not a one of them that was good looking, perhaps the only thing they have going for themselves is shocking the rest of society. They certainly do not have what anyone could call talent.

      Liked by 3 people

      • “Nuthin could be fina, than to be a big vagina, in the morn…..nin!”. That there is what they call a “political statement”……(not!). I’ve noticed lately that we now have ads with walking bladders, and a ditzy redhead dressed as a digestive system. I’m surprised they aren’t being chased by a giant tube of “Monostat”.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. Today’s feminists are either attention-whores like Janelle Monáe, or outright satanists. The early suffragettes must be spinning in their graves.

    Liked by 8 people

    • According to a new article from Michael Hoffman in his review of the book Satanic Feminism by Per Faxneld, who is a male feminist from Sweden and visiting scholar at Cambridge, the early Feminists have gotten their inspiration from the Occult. In his book Faxneld claims that the early feminists such as Eliza Farnham declared women were the superior sex ( she was a matron at Sing Sing) Her idea was that Eve following the serpents advise was proof of this. Henrietta Greenbaum Frank’s 1894 paper presents the same themes of Satan as emancipator of Eve – many more examples and history. It is an article worth reading, if not the book itself. The book, Satanic Feminism: Lucifer as the Liberator of Woman in Nineteenth-Century Culture: https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/satanic-feminism-per-faxneld/1126161663?type=eBook

      All this emphasis on body parts by these loser ” feminists” seems to support the thesis above about feminism being rooted in the Occult. These women are an embarrassment to themselves and their gender. After harping all those years about being a sex object, they present themselves and their concerns as nothing more than……a sex object, albeit and one that revels it’s pride and freedom to act like a whore and a libertine. What ever happened to character, achievement, sacrifice, and genuine unconditional love, and godliness…you know, spiritual attributes? Nope it’s all about the crotch. Pathetic losers.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Lana . . . . Bravo to you! That was an extremely insightful comment on just exactly what is going on today as far as these “feminists.” I agree they are “pathetic losers!”

        Liked by 3 people

      • At the risk of upsetting some, Freud would call this “penis envy”. After all, why so much concern about gonads if one already believes themselves superior, or at least “equal”.

        Why would one sex have to be “superior”? Is this a competition? I don’t try to order women around. I don’t think of them as “inferior”.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Regarding the book, I read the introduction. Is it true that women believe that men actually “subjugate” them? I have never heard The Fall used to “justify” women’s “subjugation”.

        I have heard the Lillith story. That would seem the opposite in that Lillith tried to be “superior”. So, even with that one, I read that as God’s rebuke to Lillith to not try to dictate to her husband.

        Like

        • You ask good questions Lophatt- and the answers may be more than can be said in a comment section.
          Subjugate is a pretty strong word, and yet in the past for some really independent women out there, it might have been a fitting description. There were certainly lot of attitudes that needed to be rectified in the culture where men looked at women as nothing but servants. At the council of Trent ( I believe) the cardinals voted as to whether women had souls. Women were voted souls by one vote. Can you beat that? Men voting a to whether women had souls. But these days for for all the whiners out there who use that word for life or relationships here in the West, it is absurd, esp. when the real subjugation is going on in all those third world hell holes like India and the ME where women really do have a problem.( and yet thee are the cultures they laud over Western culture) . I did feel powerless as a women at one time. If you get into reading some of these past feminists who express themselves in the manner ( hateful and superior to men) I think one can chalk it up to several things. Once again, there are the lesbians and men haters…..what do you think the odds are that the Feminist above who was a matron at Sing Sing was a feminine woman? Dollars to donuts she was a lesbian. A lot of these early feminists were Jews; not all but many. I need not go into the psychology there- it’s something you have already looked into I am sure, but suffice to say there are some really different and distorted things in Jewish culture that would give rise to this. Then as now, so many women who define themselves as Feminists and have been activists in that sphere are unhinged or hate men to begin with. Just look at the specimens who attend the NOW conferences. Sadly again, through the colleges and media they have spread their poison to the youth, esp. those that are not too bright.

          Liked by 3 people

          • Thank you. I suppose I’ve observed it more than “studied” it. It is hard for me to understand someone who hates the opposite sex. To me it always appeared to be a symptom of their overall unhappiness.

            A matron at Sing-Sing is almost certainly not a model of femininity. Again, I suspect that many with these afflictions would love to impose them on others. Misery loves company.

            But it is hard for me in our current culture to find many examples of gross inequality or subjugation. I have seen guys that were jerks. It doesn’t appear to be a systemic problem.

            Trying to tie this to the article, what sort of statement is she trying to make? Is she saying that vaginas are as good, if not better, than male equipment? If so, why? I don’t run around with some vague notion of “vagina inferiority”. Do others?

            Liked by 2 people

      • I have a sister and a sister-in-law that are living lesbian lifestyles. Both have been in “committed” relationships for many years. Both are completely self-absorbed and insular.

        As an example, they go to meetings all the time. These are gatherings of other lesbians. They have their own mythology, all centered around their dislike of men in general and their stated belief in their superiority.

        The reason I bring this up is that anyone, in my opinion, that spends that amount of time fixating on their gender, sexual persuasion, etc., can’t be stable. If, as a normal heterosexual man, I went around constantly talking about my sexual attractions and their value I would be deemed disturbed.

        I knew both of these women before they made their “declaration”. Both were married to men and had children. Both were making “political” statements. Both were dissatisfied and angry.

        Just as a general statement, blaming others for one’s emotional state is probably not healthy. People make themselves mad. Watching these two, and many others, over the years, that “blame” is a constant. They are not responsible for their own feelings. No amount of discussion will change this.

        So maybe I’ve answered my own questions. Perhaps this “projection” is endemic whether one is homosexual or heterosexual. I suppose blaming others is a responsibility avoidance maneuver.

        Liked by 2 people

        • I think you did answer most of your own questions, and I am in total agreement that this is a symptom of VERY, VERY, unhappy and disturbed people no matter what their sexuality preference is. ( homo or hetero).

          You asked:Trying to tie this to the article, what sort of statement is she trying to make? Is she saying that vaginas are as good, if not better, than male equipment? If so, why? I don’t run around with some vague notion of “vagina inferiority”. Do others?

          I can’t speak for others, only my own experiences, but my guess is that the display we see in the video is like so much of what we are seeing today – it is a distorted response to a genuine phenomena. ( much of which is engineered) My father did talk down about women. He did treat my mother as if she didn’t have a brain in her head even though she is 10 times smarter than he was. There historically have been many men ( not all, I know ) who do this. Women do not have sex with a man then go into a women’s locker room and talk in a a degrading way about the man they have been with, or about men generally in a degrading sexual manner. You personally may not do this, but I am sure you have been around men who do. Even as a woman, I have heard jokes about women that degrade them sexually. It has been a part of men’s culture for as long as the earth most likely. Women are acutely aware of the undercurrents of what seems like a disdain for women sexually. One need only look at the slang words that men come up with for starters. So I think, And I could be wrong, that there is a misguided attempt on some of these young women’s parts to take back the words that men have used to degrade women and try to use them as something they will define in “what they think” is a positive way.
          One might think I am an apologist for these idiots. I’m not. I think they are pathetic, and act as equally degrading and empty as the men they seem to be taunting while sporting their clown sized gonads.

          In my last comment I accidentally edited out part of what I referred to as feeling powerless at one time in my life. So to clarify…. I could say I had a general anger at men, but it was never hatred or looking down, or feeling superior. And subjugated is just not even a word that I relate to, then, or now. Women ( then at least) could still be very physically intimated by men as well. So if you were already feeling dominated by a man, there is something about the sheer physical power that most men have that can add to that dimension of powerlessness. I don’t know how young women these days perceive those physical differences between the sexes though. They don’t seem to let much get in their way and like most modern lefties, cry victim while bullying their perceived enemy.
          Gawd…hope this didn’t seem like psychology 101 but, there it is…

          Liked by 3 people

          • No, it doesn’t seem seem like “Psychology 101”, I’m glad you’re willing to share personal information as it helps to understand something that can’t be understood otherwise.

            I completely understand what you’re saying. I will say, however, that I never discussed my relationships with lovers in my life. In fact, it would be extremely unusual to hear another man do that in my experience. The men I knew didn’t do that.

            I don’t know all men, of course. But honestly, I can’t think of episodes of that. I think if I did I would be very uncomfortable with it. It is none of anyone’s business. Any such discussion would be in order to help someone with a problem, maybe, and in a generalized way not “telling tales out of school”.

            I’m sorry if your father did that with your mother. Mine did not. There was very much a division of labor in my house, but my mother was always treated with respect. Even though they eventually divorced, I never heard either of them raise a voice to each other.

            So, from my experience, if you asked me, I’d say men don’t talk about their lovers. Maybe some do, but I haven’t met them. In fact, one of the fights I got into in high school was related to that. I had a girlfriend that another boy was saying bad things about and it pissed me off. We were “intimate” but it was none of anyone else’s business.

            Liked by 1 person

            • All of your experiences and conduct are just a testament to your gentle-manliness. And i know there are many many true gentlemen out there as well. Unfortunately there are the others too. So much of what we think is true is based on our own experiences. Truly our minds are like software and they get programmed so easily in early life, but as I mentioned before, if they are bad experiences they can all be healed or balanced with self examination etc. With God all things are possible and all things are made new. And when life hands you lemons, make lemonade! . But these days, as you pointed out, there is this group think that so many weak minded people want to be a part of. I am at a loss to explain that one at all. I guess just a sign of the times. All I know is that our journey here is about us as individuals, and our relationship to God, and nothing else. I see all the group think, and collective guilt OR responsibility as sheer madness.

              Liked by 2 people

      • Well Lana, I’m sure you’re right. It has been proven to me many times over that some can have impeccable arguments based on erroneous premises and not truth can come from that.

        I can usually make a “logical” argument from just about anything. If, however, my premise is incorrect, no matter how logical my argument, my conclusion can’t be confirmed.

        With these leftist positions, they seem to begin with everyone assuming that the rhetoric is real. Men don’t value women. It’s a “patriarchal” society. Women are oppressed.

        Out the thousands they can coerce to attend rallies and such, I doubt if any of them ever seriously questions the premises. If they did they would be expelled from the group. That’s the allure here. Acceptance.

        This identity politics is ruining families. This depends on ideology and rhetoric over logic. Relationships are destroyed because the parties won’t examine what they claim are their beliefs out of fear of rejection.

        So, what are we seeing? Everything is being divided, and divided again. Each division has an opposite. Every pairing brings chaos. Disruption is the name of the game. Gender or sexuality are only two elements in the game of breaking up society into its component parts and destroying any sense of cohesion.

        Liked by 2 people

      • It is true actually Lana, feminism is tied to the occult, and ultimately gnostic/kabala gnonsense, and the “mystery schools” garbage that predated them, consider the likes of sibilla aleramo/rina faccio who was a bi-sexual, as well as a member of steiner’s occult anthroposophical society, (and a feminist/suffragette) margaret murray who is a large part of why there is so much “goddess”-centric malarkey in modern pagan movements and “wicca” (thanks to her “witch-cult hypothesis, she too was a feminist/suffragette), florence farr, an actress who also happened to be much into the occult at various levels, part of the isis-urania temple, blavatsky’s theosophical society, and the hermetic order of the golen dawn, as well as being a rosicrucian, and into kabala as well, also a “women’s rights activist” (and a feminist). Then there was ida craddock, claimed to have an “angel” (as in literal spiritual being) as a husband, was a member of blavatsky’s theosophical society, the american secular union, the “church of yoga”, the brooklyn philosophical association, the ladies liberal league of philadelphia, boston’s american unitarian association, and the spring garden unitarian society, a practioner of sex magic, a spiritualist, was into tantra, and use of ouija boards, as well as yoga… and on top of that promoted the false doctrines of nephilim, and gnosticism (she was a fan of the book of enoch, and also a feminist), as well as spectrophilia (Unfortunately she also was associated with the quakers, but then their group seems to have occultic origins as well). Then there was margaret fuller, a transcendentalist, and pusher of the same, who wrote “woman in the nineteenth century” the 1st feminist publication in the U.S., and also was the first editor of the transcendentalist journal “The Dial” back in 1840. Finally, one margaret mead, a “cultural anthropologist”, whose bogus research on peoples in the south pacific was utilized as an apologetic to normalize pedophilia, and other deviant sexual practices, it also helped spur the “sexual revolution”, “back to nature” and modern feminism movements, etc.

        In modern times theres also the lesbian-promoting, male-hating occultist zsuzsanna emese mokcsay/budapest.
        Suffice it to say, the truth about feminism is that it is misanthropy, for it hates women for being women, and hates men, thus it hates the whole of humanity, and its sole purpose isn’t equality, (and likely never has been, but it uses this as a pleasant camouflage to curry favor, and use as a shield against any attempts to expose it) but hatred, and serving the devil’s aims of ruining lives, both of women and men, its likely one of the “spiritual weapons of mass destruction” the devil cooked up way back. (Along with it’s mirror image which might be called “masculism”, homosexuality, pedophilia, transgenderism/transexualism, veganism, and other nasties.)

        Liked by 2 people

    • Let’s not forget stupid. I’ll wager she couldn’t explain what any of this meant or why she did it.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. To equate vagina pants with the great artistry of Michelangelo is not only tragic, it’s downright retrograde.

    Liked by 3 people

    • I would have an extremely hard time reading “this drivel about genitals” and the name of Michelangelo in the same sentence. Sorry, the crap these tasteless young women are displaying is a big fat nothing as far as “art is concerned.” The women are not good dancers, they certainly do not sing well, and their costume is atrocious. No sane person would pay even 25 cents to see or hear them perform.

      Liked by 4 people

    • I wonder what ever happened to Mike’s vagina pants?

      Liked by 1 person

  6. When they turn around, do they have bunghole bloomers?

    The things that pass for “talent” these days…

    Liked by 4 people

  7. I’ve been wondering what happened to Pubic Hair, I just thought shaving was a trend started by the Globalists to make all the Females appear Prepubescent….and now it’s back..Pheeeew, that was a close shave! Now I hope everyone realizes why I’m a life long Bachelor, and always will be, these types of Females disgust me.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Stovepipe . . . . Although I am a woman, I have a very hard time believing that the majority of well adjusted males in our country would find “these types of Females {anything but} disgust(ing.) They even disgust us women. In fact it raises the hackles on the back of my neck to see females parading around like they just got loose from the town’s bordello, and wanted to frolic.

      Liked by 4 people

  8. So what happens in the future when a 13 or 14 yr old child of theirs see this and ask what is going on Mom. I can see the look on her face. The actions we take have consequences you’ll suffer for stupid actions on down the road.
    Or better yet there parents see this and were will that lead.
    All the sexual hoopla is about the attack on Gods first accomplishment with a man and woman becoming one in flesh. Satan on parade for all to see and its to the point your not to say anything or your a sexist one way or another.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Brian . . . . I certainly do agree with you, but I think I would take it even further than that. What about little 13-14 year old girls out in society that see this kind of crap, and think that this is N-O-R-M-A-L . It certainly does slant one’s view of female sexuality, and if your sexuality was still in the formative stage–viewing this kind of garbage may be injurious to young people.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Her website indicates that she considers herself some sort of “cyborg”. Apparently, her speech patterns and actions are modeled on that. So her basic philosophy has to do with God making “junk” and her friends “enhancing” it to suit them.

        So she thinks she’s a sort of “mechanical vagina”. Nice.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Yep, that’s what happens with Miley Cyrus and Katy Perry and the like. The little teeny-boppers end up customers for Planned Parenthood.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Spot on Auntie think of how long will it take them before they figure out why they are not happy. It will be years before they do find a normal life. satan and sin have a way of stealing the joy of life that God had intended for us to live and enjoy.

        Liked by 3 people

  9. As women we all have vaginas. How original! BFD. What creativity! How avant garde! No, it’s low brow, it’s cheap, it’s crass. It’s gutter scum. It’s plain retarded. This is not about prudery as you seem to be suggesting. As I mentioned above what about glorifying the spiritual attributes of a woman instead of lowering her importance to the sum total of a body part and what she does with it. This video and others like it are not even about the general beauty of a woman’s body as you tried to equate it with in your comparison to Michelangelo statue of David in its nudity. I have an idea. Let’s have a video where men prance around with big penise flapping around while singing about how they can do what they want with them……No? A women’s version of it is no better.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Lana . . . . Thank you. I think you hit the bulls eye with this comment. Very well said. I am in complete agreement.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Thanks Auntie- you could read through all my spieling errors? Aagh, I always see them afterwords!

        Liked by 1 person

        • Lana I know how you feel with the typing lol I’ve become Docs step child with all my errors as if he doesn’t have enough on his plate. But very thankful for any admin help,♥ other sites I go to are not so nice ☻

          Liked by 2 people

          • Well glad I’m not the only one! I’m so bad with typos, one or two rechecks is never enough. If I made sure things were perfect they would never get posted. I just pray everyone knows what the heck I’m talking about.

            Liked by 1 person

    • I was going to say something similar but you beat me to it. A woman is more than the sum of her parts. This isn’t ingenious, funny or even entertaining. It’s just weird and demeaning.

      Apparently she thinks that people are just sex organs and everything else is attached.

      Liked by 2 people

      • “I was going to say something similar but you beat me to it”
        That’s a switch! You know it’s me who usually says why bother after your posts- all has been said, or said WAAAY funnier!
        Yup, I really have a hard time believing these moronic women think they are being cutting edge. They are just being….well……. morons. It’s actually sad and pathetic to know that this is what being a woman has come to for so many young ones these days…a body part?

        Liked by 4 people

  10. I do believe the woman’s private is a Holy place, and should be revered as such (being as it should be the portal we all use to enter this world). That said, that is not the intention here. Just as procreation, is a gift from God, and has been turned into something grotesque, that is exactly what is happening here. Taking something that is Holy, and chitting all over it (by the you know who’s). It’s blasphemy at its finest.

    Just my opinion.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Well said. Behind the monkeys in the video, who’re no more than performing circus animals who get a banana when they’re done, who might controlling the message?

      Liked by 3 people

      • Those who side w, “Louie Cypher.”
        I’m tired of giving them any of my energy, by even saying any of their names. So, say aloud.

        Like

      • Dan . . . . That is the 64 thousand dollar question! When you really think of these young women cavorting around in the manner they did–it is not such a stretch to consider them as “performing circus animals.”

        Liked by 1 person

    • Well it is demeaning and dehumanizing which is exactly WHY they do this. They are pushing some sort of “machine enhanced” creature. That way they become “god” and create what they wish.

      How insulting.

      Liked by 3 people

      • lophatt . . . . I agree with you. No doubt about it, they are definitely following the whisperings of the Father of Lies, in an attempt to discredit what God the Father created as a Holy and Sacred act in the lives of his spirit children.

        Liked by 4 people

    • solejahway . . . There is no doubt but what you are 100% correct in pointing out the sacredness of human sexuality when used in the appropriate manner. God Bless you for offering such an excellent comment to this discussion.

      Liked by 5 people

  11. Pingback: This is feminism: Singer wears vagina pants and shows off fake pubic hair in video that “celebrates self love and sexuality” — Fellowship of the Minds – NZ Conservative Coalition

  12. “””And even actress Elizabeth Banks took to Twitter to put forward her theory that the song was clearly about female genitalia. ‘Whoa, vagina pants,’ she tweeted to her 2.35 million followers.”””

    See, this is where I get lost…or confused…why do 2 million plus people ‘care’ what this woman, Banks, has to say–oh, I know who she is, but why care what she says??

    Liked by 4 people

  13. She better get that looked at by a doctor, she has a serious infection going on.
    I hate to think there is even a women in this country that would denigrate herself is such a way. She does not speak for most women.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. Come to think of it that trash I just put in the dumpster, is not trash at all!! I feel soooo baaaad for those black girls, aaall thaaaat talent wasted in a meaningless production, oh well considering the source you could not expect a Vegas show, they know no better than the lessons they learnt in the hood.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. I’ll bet not one of those girls could take hammer and chisel and make a statue. Art of the human anatomy is beautiful what this video depicts is not art form it’s more like burlesque stage performance not in the same category.
    And the tone is not of importance here morality is in the sense of how we view our selves in society of what is acceptable. Maybe I’m out of bounds here but if that’s art then I surly missed something in school.

    Liked by 2 people

  16. grown females encouraging masturbation, oral sex, and homosexuality…there’s a reason this d’eamon (“monae” spelled backwards with a “d”) always wears black and white and red in videos: illuminati.
    and what do you get when you combine white and red?…pink.
    maybe her next “song” should be called “stink” and it could be an homage to all those who’ve gotten infections (esp. the drug resistant ones) from the masturbation, oral sex, and homosexual perversions….or maybe, just call it “stink” because she is (and her record producers) foul to the bone for putting out such filth.
    these progs always fail to mention the magnitude of consequences from their deviant behaviors….their utopia is a sea of ignorant, infected, pathological narcissists living in a pipe dream.
    I pray for today’s generation and all of the evil that is constantly heaped upon them every day; those who repent and find comfort, strength, redemption, and protection in the Lord will be saved.

    Liked by 2 people

    • ok, I tweaked the spelling of “monae” a bit…but I think my version is a bit more accurate 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

    • Her real name is Janelle Robinson, born in Kansas City, Kansas, daughter of a janitor mother and a truck driver father, Michael Robinson Summers.

      During a 2011 interview with London Evening Standard, Monáe said bewildering gibberish — that she “only dates androids” [whatever that means]… “I speak about androids because I think the android represents the new ‘Other’. You can compare it to being a lesbian or being a gay man or being a black woman… what I want is for people who feel oppressed or feel like the ‘Other’ to connect with the music and to feel like, ‘She represents who I am.'” She added that she would talk about her sexual orientation “in due time”.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janelle_Mon%C3%A1e

      I repeat my previous comment: Just another fame-attention whore.

      Liked by 2 people

  17. I just retired as a Scoutmaster after 9 years. 16 boys of my troop reached Eagle during that time. I am helping 3 more finish up thier projects as a mentor this year.
    What changed for me is BSA has allowed young girls to join scouting this year. We always had 14 and up girls in Venturing, Explorers and Sea Scouts. Starting this year they are merging them into cub scouts, then boy scouts the following year.
    Personally, I think its nonsense. But my humble opinion is too old fashion and outdated for most of these modern thinkers.
    I raised an independant daughter who is 23 yrs old and saved up her own money to put down on her first house.
    I would never in a million years, put my daughter in Cub Scouts. She wanted to do cheerleading, odyssey of the mind, FFA, and dancing. As a parent all of them require a huge time commitment.
    With that said.. You would never see my daughter wearing pants like that. She asked me to fix her car a couple years ago. She over heated it and cracked the block. I told her on one condition.. She had to help. I found a used block on craigslist and we rebuilt the motor together over two weeks in the evenings. Since then she has swapped the motors on 3 different vehicles. Without my physical help, she did asked questions. She fixed them up and sold them for a nice profit.
    We NEED to find the time to spend with our children. Not pass them onto someone else. We learn to do that.. all this nonsense would go away.
    Love and Peace to Fotm

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Marlene Dietrich said it best: “In America, sex is an obsession. In the rest of the world, simply a fact.”
    I agree that Monae is most likely a satanist. A satanist with the emotional level of a spoiled seven year old.

    Hey, Monae, Not Today. GET A LIFE. A REAL ONE.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. I thought we weren’t supposed to label genders with specific colors, especially pink for females. Ah, the hypocrisy.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. This stuff could make a guy swear off involvement with women.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. CARE? NOT!
    As I often invite my argumentative/other-worldly/other-minded children when they want to challenge me about their seating assignment during instruction time….or any other “other-minded” during my “regular” 58-minute instruction time of 37 OTHER children: ‘You are free to come and discuss this with me AFTER SCHOOL on your time, but NOT during my mandated instructional hours on your collective classmate’s time. I am NOT/WILL NOT engage in a one-on-one private discussion with YOU. I will donate my after school hours to your concerns. So, meet me in this room after school and I will spend as much time as needed to meet your needs. ”

    I’ve NEVER EVER had a kid OR PARENT take me up on this offer. WHEN it is THEIR time that they have to use—instead of MY instructional time…or instead of their peers in the classroom at the time…….there are NO TAKERS!

    Pretty much, I feel the same about these “famous people” who try to intrude into our spaces….including legislative spaces……They take up my PERSONAL and PROFESSIONAL time by intruding into my personnal space, they influence our most impressional kids at such young ages, so that they believe they have a “power” to challenge even their seating assignment in my classroom or other riduculous things…..at 11, 12, 13-years old…..and when they “grow up,” to maybe 7th grade, they think they can kneel during the “Pledge of Allegience” even tho’ they DO NOT KNOW WHY they are doing it…..(& they do NOT EVEN KNOW the history behind the Pledge…OR their OWN PERSONNAL HISTORY, let alone the History of the USA….)…..

    Bottom line….don’t care about your sexual visual representations, Janelle. I don’t care about whom you do the “wild thing” with….I don’t care what you have to do to make a living/generate interest/income through a cheap trick. I just care that I get MY MIDDLE SCHOO KIDS through an instructional day without copying YOUR attitude or visual representation during my 58-minute period with them. I don’t want to see your vagina scrawled on my art projects, & I don’t want to deal with kids kneeling during the pledge …. neither of which know in the LEAST a reason why they are exhibiting this behavior…..But, they SEE it on TV an YOUTUBE…& they think it is “real.”

    Liked by 3 people

    • I can relate to that. I am a big fan of stand up meetings. I took over a division once that had grown accustomed to prolonged, unproductive meetings. The first thing I did was remove the chairs.

      The next thing I did was go around the table and those who liked to monopolize everyone’s time by drawing attention to themselves were met with the same approach you just described. I’d say, “interesting”, everyone has a busy day today. Why don’t you see me after the meeting and everyone can get back to their duties”.

      No one EVER came to see me and life went on.

      Liked by 2 people

  22. LOVE your supporting testimony, lo, to the human nature that would gladly take up your time, or the allotted time for anything…or their peer’s time….BUT NEVER show up to give THEIR PRIVATE TIME to discuss the issue at hand (according to them) ON THEIR OWN TIME. You can’t see it, but I’m smiling ear to ear b/c someone else, you, noticed/ experienced/ voiced this same thing. I am NOT a judgmental freak of nature…….

    Liked by 1 person

  23. This behavior is disgusting and abnormal. Hopefully they extinct themselves.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Lest we forget michaelangelo likely had alterior motives for the statues as well (pederasty was one of the chief sins of so-called “civilized” society, both greek & roman, and probably the reason why David looks more boy than man in anatomy, even if michaelangelo wasn’t a pederast himself, there was no reason to make a nude sculpture of such a figure.) As I recall, he was also someone who detested Christianity.

    However, I’m one of those folks that believe “art” is no excuse for public nudity, that is, I think nudity is something that should only be shared between a husband and wife, (excusing accidents, and toddlers who go through that “nakey” phase of wanting to keep off all clothing, as they likely don’t get the concept.) both as a private gift, (which is cheapened and degraded when showcased, whether for a “thrill”, to satisfy a fetish like voyerism, or for money) and a means of showing respect to others by not causing them to stumble or lust. I also think that showcasing nudity via “art” has been one of the chief means of garnering protection for showcasing porn, and the pornification of society in general… after all isn’t “art” always the excuse used for such displays, even when its making “art books” of “naked children” clearly aimed (despite beign denounced by the so-called “artists”) at giving a pedophile demographic a “legal” means of feeding their vile desires?

    The dresses are stupid, and there is no reason to showcase them, the same as there is no reason for people to walk around with penis hats, or wear a shirt made of penile motifs… what happened to making clothes that had, say, plants or animals as a basis, no?

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s