90 Miles From Tyranny

Friday, March 3, 2023

Hershey’s Faces Backlash After Featuring Biological Male in Ad Honoring International Women’s Day

The Hershey Company is facing a backlash on social media after featuring a biological male dressed as a woman in a new ad honoring International Women’s Day.

The short commercial features Fae Johnstone, a “2SLGBTQUIA+ Advocate,” promoting a limited-edition Hershey’s candy bar with his image on it. (The acronym 2SLGTBQIA+ stands for “Two-Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and/or Questioning, Intersex, Asexual”).

The spot was released on Wednesday as part of Hershey’s Canada’s “Her for She” ad campaign for International Women’s Day on March 8.

In the clip, Johnstone provides a voiceover explaining the company’s “inclusivity initiative”: “My name is Fae Johnstone, I’m the executive director of ‘Wisdom to Action.’ We can create a world where everyone is able to live in public space as their honest and authentic selves,” the trans activist says.

The ad ends with the Johnstone laughing and posing with four biological women. His voiceover concludes with an invitation for viewers to view Hershey’s Canada’s International Women’s Day campaign on its website.

“See the women changing how we see the future at Hershey’s Canada,” the transvestite said.

A press release from Hershey’s Canada named the five women featured in its ad campaign: “This year’s HER for SHE initiative spotlights five Canadian women … Autumn Peltier, Indigenous Rights and Water Activist; Fae Johnstone, 2SLGBTQIA+ Advocate; Rita Audi, Gender and Education Equality Activist; Naila Moloo, Climate Tech Researcher; and Kélicia Massala, founder of Girl Up Québec.”

Hershey’s decision to use a biological male for its women’s day campaign immediately prompted a backlash among disgusted social media users, including threats to boycott the chocolate maker.

Anti-Woke Twitter account @LeftismForU tweeted, “@Hersheys is putting the face of a trans-‘woman’ on chocolate bar wrappers with ‘HerShe’ highlighted in honor of International Women’s Day. Hershey’s is erasing women.”

Pro-Trump account “Catturd” tweeted, “Why does @Hersheys hate women?”

The Federalist Editor-in-chief Mollie Hemingway blasted the candy maker with a scathing response, saying, “So @Hersheys is featuring a male in costume as a woman for its international women’s day ad campaign.”

Conservative author and transgender movement critic Oli London slammed Johnstone and the ad, tweeting, “This is a tweet from the new face of HERSHEYS International Women’s Day Campaign – a man who identifies as a woman! The whole ad campaign is designed to uplift women on women’s day- but instead is a complete disrespect to REAL Women!”

The Federalist co-founder and CEO Sean Davis wrote, “Hershey’s is ‘honoring’ women by featuring delusional, disfigured men on its candy bars. Feel empowered yet, ladies?”

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton commented, “@Hersheys embraces misogyny.”

Johnstone, who describes himself as a “queer, trans and feminist activist” on Twitter, has an online history of attacking feminists who oppose...

Morning Mistress

The 90 Miles Mystery Video: Nyctophilia Edition #1310

Before You Click On The "Read More" Link,

Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.

If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.

Please Leave Silently Into The Night......

The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #2010

You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?

It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,

from the beautiful to the repugnant,

from the mysterious to the familiar.

If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,

you could be inspired, you could be appalled.

This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.

You have been warned.

Girls With Guns

In its latest attempt to interfere in the electoral process, the Biden administration announced on Monday that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is planning to award millions of taxpayer dollars to local governments throughout the country for so-called “election security” purposes.

In an agency press release, the department revealed its plans to provide “more than $2 billion in funding for eight fiscal year 2023 preparedness grant programs,” which it claims are designed to “help state, local, tribal, and territorial officials prepare for, prevent, protect against, and respond to” so-called “acts of terrorism.” Under Joe Biden’s presidency, DHS has routinely identified targeting “domestic violent extremism” as its top priority. Of course, such proclamations are never in reference to violence carried out by leftist groups such as Antifa or Black Lives Matter, but rather right-of-center people and organizations that threaten the regime’s narratives and policy goals.

Included in the new DHS press release are six “national priority areas” for the 2023 grants, with one of the priorities being what the department calls “election security.” Under the directive, grant recipients such as the agency’s “Urban Area Security Initiative” are required to spend at least 3 percent of their total grant money on so-called “election security” efforts. As even the left-wing Bipartisan Policy Center admitted, federal funding for elections has never been conducted this way.

While the press release doesn’t specify what the agency means by “election security,” a separate report detailing the specifics of the 2023 grant program lists several vague “core capabilities” of election security, including “cybersecurity,” “operational coordination,” and “long-term vulnerability reduction.” The document also lists numerous examples of potential projects local election offices could invest their grant money in, such as “online harassment and targeting prevention services” and “physical/site security measures — e.g., locks, shatter proof glass, alarms, access controls, etc.”

Furthermore, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has indicated these grants will be directed toward primarily urban areas, where voters routinely favor Democrat candidates over Republican ones. Recall how private funding from partisan actors such as Mark Zuckerberg was injected into government election offices primarily in the blue, urban areas of swing states, creating what amounted to a Democrat...

Visage à trois #1317

Three Videos For Your Viewing Pleasure:

Three Additional Bonus Videos:

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #976

The NIH is Spending $241M to Push Ideology and Diversity Over Science

Defund the NIH.

And you thought the NIH was just bad during the pandemic. Post-pandemic, it’s aiming to wreck medical research for generations by spending $241 million to mandate ideological conformity and diversity over science.

In 2020 the National Institutes of Health created the Faculty Institutional Recruitment for Sustainable Transformation program “to enhance and maintain cultures of inclusive excellence in the biomedical research community.” The program will give 12 institutions a total of $241 million over nine years for diversity-focused faculty hiring. Under the terms of the grants, only candidates who demonstrate “a strong commitment to promoting diversity and inclusive excellence” can be hired through the program. To apply, candidates must submit a diversity statement.

Diversity statements play the same role as expecting Chinese research to quote from Mao’s Little Red Book or Soviet scientists to explain how they incorporate Marxism-Leninism into their work. It’s the bastard child of anti-racism and at its core, it mandates ideological conformity, punishes dissent and original thinking, and treats research as just another organizing point for its extremist creed.

The South Carolina and New Mexico rubrics call for punishing candidates who espouse race neutrality, dictating a low score for anyone who states an “intention to ignore the varying backgrounds of their students and ‘treat everyone the same.’ ” Applicants who are skeptical of DEI programming might choose to describe their commitment to viewpoint diversity. This too runs afoul of the rubrics, which mandate a low score for any candidate who defines diversity “only in terms of different areas of study or different nationalities but doesn’t mention gender or ethnicity/race.”

The rubrics likewise punish candidates for failing to embrace controversial diversity practices. They recommend low scores for candidates who “state that it’s better not to have outreach or affinity groups aimed at underrepresented individuals because it keeps them separate from everyone else, or will make them feel less valued.” These affinity groups exemplify a new kind of segregation, but expressing that view could imperil an applicant’s career.

This is typical of diversity statements whose express goal is to get candidates to disavow any notions of neutrality or equality, and to commit to viewing everything through the leftist lens of...