Why Anne Curtis is a BETTER CHOICE for the MMK transgender role than Jake Zyrus

Fans of the now-male Jake Zyrus, the formerly-female singer formerly known as Charice Pempengco, are up in arms. According to them, he was passed over for a chance to play a transgender role in an episode of the popular TV show Maalaala Mo Kaya (“Would You Remember”) airing this Saturday.

“Why would they not cast a real transman for the role?”

It is a resounding voice exhibiting the now-familiar sense of entitlement the LGBTQ community have become known for. So, yeah, why indeed?

Well, lets step back and regard — with modern thinking — the business of producing television shows, shall we?

Firstly, Anne Curtis is a far more popular celebrity than Jake Zyrus. Second, Curtis is prettier. And, third, Curtis is an actress while Zyrus is a singer. If you were a TV exec, the choice would be crystal clear, wouldn’t it?

Anne Curtis is laughing all the way to the bank.

Recall that straight-as-an-arrow Tom Hanks played the seminal role of a gay guy in the 1993 film Philadelphia. He played the role exceedingly well as only a top-notch actor like Tom Hanks could. In so doing, the film paved the way for the immense attention gay issues attract today. That is thanks to a brilliant actor who happened to be straight being cast for the role of a gay character.

Simple logic right there. Jake Zyrus’s fans should learn how to think with their heads.

People seem to forget that the New People’s Army are an armed ENEMY force that kills Filipino soldiers

It seems being an apologist for a terrorist enemy army such as the communist New People’s Army (NPA) has become not just an acceptable position to take in polite society, it’s also become fashionable amongst snowflake “activists” like Inday Espina Varona as she demonstrates in a tweet today…

Well, there you go. The tyrant Duterte has just confirmed the genuinely progressive character of the NPA 🙂 Saludo! The NPA does not discriminate and accepts LGBTQs into their ranks. It even recognises same-sex marriage. 🙂

Earlier, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte made crack about the NPA quippping that “40 percent” of them are gay. Whether he meant that in a bad or a good way, the leader of a nation at war holds licensed to call the enemies of his people any way he pleases.

The NPA are terrorists and enemies of the Filipino people. So as far most Filipinos are concerned, nobody really gives a shit how open their ranks are to gay people.

Back in the day the people of REAL NATIONS were ONE in demonising the enemies they are at WAR with.

There are worse words than “bakla” to to call an enemy army and worse ways to shape their images in the minds of a people at war.

Joaquin Montes was likely a victim of his own psychological issues

Did you see how that Ateneo bully was fixing his hair before he beat the other kid? He was showing signs of narcissistic and psychopathic behaviour.

To be fair, Joaquin Montes, the bully from Ateneo knew his Taekawondo moves, but he shouldn’t be using them against kids who can’t fight back. He should only be using them for self-defence, not for hurting others who aren’t even provoking him.

But is Joaquin Montes into boys? Why did he threaten to make the other kid kiss his privates? The way I understand it, heterosexuals are not into that. Plus he seems to be frustrated about something and is taking it out on other boys. He could use some professional therapy.

SJW views on #MissUniverse reveal a confused position on “diversity” issues

For one thing, beauty pageants are all about pageantry. They’re not really platforms for sound political or philosophical discourse. Yet, the way the participants in this year’s Miss Universe pageant are being turned into avatars of the broader “debate”, you’d think beauty pageants are such deep wells of intellectual insight.

The current focus of today’s shrill “activist” rhetoric is Miss Spain, Angela Ponce. She is the first transgender (formerly male) Miss Universe contestant. She is there because, well, the Miss Universe rules now allow it. Trouble is, the debate rages anyway.

But, really, this is just the Miss Universe, folks. It’s a private enterprise designed to attract eyeballs and get the ratings. Controversy brings in those and the ad cash that comes with it. So perhaps a bit of perspective is in order. Winning a “debate” on how the Miss Universe pageant ought to be run won’t change the world. The only people laughing all the way to the bank will be the Miss Universe owners and their organisers.

Perhaps the ends of SJW liberals could be achieved by changing the definition of “woman” in the policy guidelines of a for-profit franchise such as the Miss Universe pageant. But, utltimately, the decisions that go into how this event is run are mainly driven by business objectives. And that is the inconvenient truth at work here.