Re: Go Woke->Go Broke. Victoria's Secret

On 1/9/23 12:50 PM, Lustern wrote:
> Haha.
> Victoria's Secret is circling the drain.
> 
> <https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4122005/posts>
> 
> "As Victoria's Secret goes woke, so goes the bad fortune of its
> shareholders. This is the story:
> 
> Victoria's Secret brand CEO Amy Hauk announced that she will be leaving
> the lingerie giant after a brief stint at the company.
> 
> "Amy Hauk will be stepping down as CEO of Victoria’s Secret and PINK in
> order to spend more time with her family in Florida," the company said in
> a statement to Fox News Digital.
> 
> The once-loved brand has had a tumultuous few years with an attempted
> rebranding that implemented "woke" policies like removing the iconic
> "Angels" models as well as the yearly fashion show.
> 
> In 2020, Victoria’s Secret announced that it would permanently close
> around 250 stores in the U.S. and Canada after considerable profit loss.
> 
> We wish Ms. Hauk a lot of fun with her family.
> 
> Maybe she should take a little time to reread some of those business
> books about listening to and knowing your customers.
> 
> In other words, men and women walk into these stores to buy lingerie and
> other stuff. It could be a husband like me looking for an anniversary
> gift. Or it could be a wife looking to surprise her husband coming home
> from a business trip. I never heard of anybody who went to Victoria's
> Secret to hear a political message. Never. I guess that politics and sexy
> lingerie are never in the same sentence."
> 
> 

Well... the Feminists do tell us that women being sexy or trying to look 
good to anyone but themselves is falling into the trap of objectifying 
themselves and is a violation of a woman's human rights.  Neither women 
or anyone around them should objectify them as sexual beings until that 
woman decides that she wants to be the sexual target.  But if pheromones 
are a sexual trigger, then women may not know what signals they're 
sending out into the room. If women are triggering their own 
objectification, then who is really creating the issue?

Women aren't sex objects unless of course they're Transgenders putting 
on a sexually charged *Burlesque Show* for school kids and then it's sex 
education and it's required that you objectify the Trans as sexual 
objects that look like women in the most sexual terms which points out 
that the TRANS are targeting the children as sexual objects, and because 
they feel deep in their delusional mind that they are themselves women, 
we have to believe in that delusion with them and objectify them as 
women even if their DNA says they're something else.

But have kids under puberty even developed the nose to detect or glands 
to produce pheromones? Or does that only come into action after puberty, 
and isn't objectifying children as sexual objects and targeting them (in 
all their naive innocense) to explore sex... very much the 
objectification and grooming and activity of a pedophile that is 
objectifying the children? A prostitute on the other hand chooses to be 
seen ONLY as a sexual object to the people that pay, and isn't 
interested in getting to know you.

Do children even produce sexual pheromones and if NOT then aren't those 
TRANS and Pedophiles objectifying the children doing exactly what the 
Feminists were so opposed to, which was the objectification of people 
who weren't soliciting that sexual objectification and attention?




-- 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Reality Matters-


https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/09/elise-stefanik-twitter-lied-to-congress-about-shadow-banning-conservatives/
-------------------------------------------------------

And TWITTER and the FBI lied about working together as a part of the 
SHADOW GOVERNMENT to limit free speech.

They became the *Ministry of TRUTH* that was run by the *SHADOW* 
*GOVERNMENT* .

For those out there that said *the SHADOW GOVERNMENT is tinfoil hat* 
*territory*  ...you better stock up on tinfoil.