Model and actress <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/emily-ratajkowski">Emily Ratajkowski</a> posted a video promoting the benefits of being divorced by the age of 30.
The 32-year-old split from <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/entertainment">producer</a> Sebastian Bear-McClard after four years of marriage in September 2022. The former couple has a 2-year-old son, Sylvester Apollo.
She posted a video to TikTok on Wednesday explaining her thoughts on the situation just after actress Sophie Turner, 27, announced she was ending her <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/marriage">marriage</a> with singer Joe Jonas. 
“So, it seems that a lot of young ladies are getting divorced before they turn 30,” Ratajkowski said in the <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@emrata/video/7275780895607491882">video</a>. “As someone who got married at 26 [who] has been separated for a little over a year [at] 32, I have to tell you, I don’t think there’s anything better.&#8221;
&#8220;Being in your 20s is the trenches,&#8221; the “Gone Girl” actress went on. 
“There is nothing better than being in your 30s, still being hot, maybe having a little bit of your own money, figuring out what you want to do with your life [and] everything, and having tried that married fantasy and realizing that it’s maybe not all it’s cracked up to be,” she went on. “And then you’ve got your whole life still ahead of you.”
Ratajkowski said no one should be “feeling stressed” about “being divorced.&#8221;
&#8220;It’s good,” she insisted. “Congratulations.”
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
The model wrote in the video caption, &#8220;Personally I find it chic to be divorced by the age of 30.”
While many Instagram users agreed with her take, there was some pushback. 
“Emily Ratajkowski (who has a personal net worth of at least 8 million dollars) is glamorizing divorce and says marriage is a ‘fantasy’&#8230;Completely out of touch and delusional,” podcast host Josh Lekach wrote on X. “Sadly, women look up to her.”
Ratajkowski previously discussed her feelings on her divorce. 
“I feel all the emotions,” she <a href="https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/a41616069/emily-ratajkowski-podcast-interview-november-2022/">told</a> Harper&#8217;s Bazaar in November 2022. “I feel anger, sadness. I feel excitement. I feel joy. I feel levity. Every day is different. The only good thing I know is that I’m feeling all those things, which is nice because it makes me believe that I’ll be okay.”
While speaking to the publication, Ratajkowski said her mother divorced in her early 30s before she met the model’s father. 
“She always romanticized that time in her life,” the “Entourage” actress explained. “So I’ve expected this decade to be the best decade, even if I didn’t see it going this way.”

Emily Ratajkowski

Model Emily Ratajkowski: ‘I Find It Chic To Be Divorced By The Age Of 30’

Model Emily Ratajkowski: 'I Find It Chic To Be Divorced By The Age Of 30'

Celebrities

divorce

Marriage

U.S.

&#8220;Saturday Night Live&#8221; alumni Pete Davidson is reportedly seeing Sports Illustrated Swimsuit model Emily Ratajkowski following his split from reality TV star Kim Kardashian.
The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/pete-davidson">28-year-old</a> comedian and Ratajkowski are reportedly &#8220;seeing each other&#8221; a source close to Davidson told <a href="https://people.com/style/pete-davidson-emily-ratajkowski-are-seeing-each-other-source/">People magazine</a> in a piece published Tuesday.
The &#8220;SNL&#8221; star, who has become known for dating some of Hollywood&#8217;s well-known stars such as actress Kate Beckinsale, singer Ariana Grande, and of course &#8220;The Kardashians&#8221; <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/kim-kardashian">star</a> — before their <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kim-kardashian-and-pete-davidson-call-it-quits-report">split in August</a> — reportedly was spotted recently spending time with the 31-year-old model in New York City, <a href="https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/pete-davidson-and-emily-ratajkowski-are-dating-details/">US Weekly</a> noted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
A look back on Pete Davidson&#39;s dating history &#8211; from Ariana Grande to Kate Beckinsale to Kim Kardashian <a href="https://t.co/8djY19mBhU">https://t.co/8djY19mBhU</a>
&mdash; Daily Mail Celebrity (@DailyMailCeleb) <a href="https://twitter.com/DailyMailCeleb/status/1592496938049736704?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 15, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Davidson was most recently linked with the 42-year-old reality star following her divorce from 45-year-old rapper Kanye West — now known now as &#8220;Ye.&#8221; Kim and West divorced in 2021 following nearly seven years of marriage. She and Ye share four children together.
The two dated for nine months and reportedly split because of traveling demands for their respective careers, as previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kim-kardashian-and-pete-davidson-call-it-quits-report">reported.</a>
&#8220;Kim and Pete have decided to just be friends,&#8221; an insider close to Kardashian explained. &#8220;They have a lot of love and respect for each other, but found that the long distance and their demanding schedules made it really difficult to maintain a relationship.&#8221;
He was also romantically linked for a short time with Beckinsale, the 49-year-old English actress, the outlet noted. The two dated for a few months and shared some public displays of affection before things cooled off, as <a href="https://pagesix.com/2021/11/04/kate-beckinsale-praises-pete-davidson-amid-kim-k-dating-rumors/">Page Six</a> noted.
Before that, the comedian dated Grande and the two even got engaged in 2018 before the superstar singer called things off several months later, <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/now/pete-davidson-emily-ratajkowski-dating-012600303.html">Yahoo.com</a> noted.
The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/emily-ratajkowski">swimsuit model</a> made headlines in September after reports surfaced that she had filed for divorce after four years of marriage from husband film producer Sebastian Bear-McClard. The two share a 20-month-old son together.
During a recent interview for Variety magazine, Ratajkowski talked about her new found &#8220;freedom.&#8221;
&#8220;I&#8217;m newly single for basically the first time in my life ever, and I just feel like I&#8217;m kind of enjoying the freedom of not being super worried about how I&#8217;m being perceived,&#8221; the SI Swimsuit model shared.
RELATED: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/charming-martha-stewart-responds-to-those-dating-rumors-involving-pete-davidson">&#8216;Charming&#8217;: Martha Stewart Responds To Those Dating Rumors Involving Pete Davidson</a>

Pete Davidson_Emily Ratajkowski

Pete Davidson Reportedly Seeing Swimsuit Model Emily Ratajkowski After Kim Kardashian Split

Dating

Entertainment

Kim Kardashian

Pete Davidson

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/sports-illustrated" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sports Illustrated</a> Swimsuit model Emily Ratajkowski said she doesn&#8217;t &#8220;really believe in straight people&#8221; after recently filing for divorce from husband film producer Sebastian Bear-McClard.
The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/emily-ratajkowski" target="_blank" rel="noopener">31-year-0ld</a> model made the comments during a wide-ranging interview for <a href="https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/a41616069/emily-ratajkowski-podcast-interview-november-2022/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Harper&#8217;s Bazaar</a> when she was asked about a recent TikTok in which it appeared she was identifying as bisexual.
&#8220;I think sexuality is on a sliding scale,&#8221; Ratajkowski shared. &#8220;I don&#8217;t really believe in straight people.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Emily Ratajkowski doesn&#39;t &#39;believe in straight people&#39; <a href="https://t.co/xk60VkyNef">https://t.co/xk60VkyNef</a> <a href="https://t.co/TNEjXQSkq6">pic.twitter.com/TNEjXQSkq6</a>
&mdash; Page Six (@PageSix) <a href="https://twitter.com/PageSix/status/1587465864529543168?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 1, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;My girlfriend came over and was like, &#8216;B****, have you seen the green-couch thing?’” she added. &#8220;She was laughing at me because my green couch is so big.&#8221;
&#8220;I want to be able to have fun with how I present myself in the world without feeling like I&#8217;m a bad feminist or a good feminist,&#8221; Ratajkowski continued. &#8220;Duh. I don&#8217;t want to be a part of your club if you don&#8217;t want to have me. It&#8217;s fine!&#8221;
In the <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@emrata/video/7152973396052053290?is_copy_url=1&amp;is_from_webapp=v1&amp;item_id=7152973396052053290&amp;lang=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener">TikTok</a>, the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/emily-ratajkowski-says-she-stayed-silent-about-robin-thicke-groping-allegation-because-she-wanted-to-be-famous" target="_blank" rel="noopener">swimsuit model</a> revealed that she owned a green velvet couch in response to a meme claiming that ownership of a green couch means one identifies “as bisexual,&#8221; according to <a href="https://pagesix.com/2022/11/01/emily-ratajkowski-doesnt-believe-in-straight-people/?utm_source=like2buy.curalate.com&amp;crl8_id=b028a641-8a8c-470d-9085-46ab74e8ccca" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Page Six</a>.
In September, the activist model filed for divorce from Bear-McClard after four years of marriage. The two share a one-year-old son, as Page Six noted.
At one point in the Harper&#8217;s Bazaar article, Ratajkowski admitted she feels anger over the divorce after Bear-McClard reportedly cheated on her.
&#8220;I can tell you that I have never been single before,&#8221; the model shared. &#8220;I feel all the emotions. I feel anger, sadness. I feel excitement. I feel joy. I feel levity. Every day is different. The only good thing I know is that I&#8217;m feeling all those things, which is nice because it makes me believe that I&#8217;ll be okay.&#8221;
Even though Ratajkowski didn&#8217;t want to talk about her divorce, she did confirm reports that she&#8217;s dating again.
&#8220;I have gone on dates,&#8221; the swimsuit model explained, noting she&#8217;s steering clear of dating apps for now. &#8220;But give me time.&#8221;
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/we-obsess-over-dead-girls-actress-and-model-complains-that-marilyn-monroe-film-fetishizes-female-pain" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8216;We Obsess Over Dead Girls&#8217;: Actress And Model Complains That Marilyn Monroe Film &#8216;Fetishizes Female Pain&#8217;</a>

Emily Ratajkowski-2

Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Model Says She Doesn’t ‘Really Believe In Straight People’

Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Model Emily Ratajkowski Says She Doesn’t ‘Really Believe In Straight People’

Model

Sexuality

Sports Illustrated

I’m going to use today&#8217;s column to answer a question from a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe-plus">Daily Wire+</a> member:
“Did you see that Meghan Markle said that she felt like she was treated like a bimbo on ‘Deal Or No Deal’? Thoughts?”
Well, what did she expect? My husband and I talk about this sort of thing all the time.
In today’s world, you have a bunch of women who decide to prostitute themselves — in some way or another —  to help their careers and find success. 
That’s basically what they do. Prostitution is the oldest trade in the book.
So they essentially say, “I&#8217;m going to sell my body so that I can be seen, rich, and famous.”
And that’s what Markle did on that show. She decided to stand in skimpy clothes on “Deal Or No Deal.” She was content to be looked at and play the sexy woman who opens a briefcase because she was desperate to be famous.
Now when women like Markle achieve fame, they pretend that their earlier selves were victims. Nobody forced Markle or anybody else to be on “Deal Or No Deal.” She made a decision to exchange sex appeal for attention, publicity, and fame.
But, then these ladies class up, so to speak.
In order to make it seem like they had nothing to do with their former selves, they recast their history through the glorious light of their own victimhood.
Right? So Markle can’t admit that she made the decision.
She wants you to believe she now realizes she was being objectified. She realized it as she was doing the show — and not when they told her or when she applied for the job to stand in a bikini. Maybe she had an agent who said, “Hey, this is good, you could break out in your career,” but she didn’t realize what would be required of her.
In reality, she got the job and knew exactly what was happening.
Now she’s married to a prince. So she has to look backward and feign outrage saying, “I was never that trashy human being. Actually, what happened is I was being objectified.”
Another great example of this is Emily Ratajkowski. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/is-it-cheating-emily-ratajkowski-and-why-your-online-avatar-needs-to-match-your-real-world-behavior">I talk about her often</a>.
Ratajkowski wrote an entire book that basically said that every single time she has traded sex for views — which she still does — it was because she was being objectified.
Right. What a shocker.
Do you remember how she hit the scene? It was Robin Thicke&#8217;s music video for a song called “Blurred Lines.” Ratajkowski was literally butt-naked dancing next to a musician in that video.
And Ratajkowski wrote a book and she basically said, “I can&#8217;t believe I&#8217;m being objectified. I took off all my clothes and men were looking at me. I&#8217;m going to write this book and say to you that all of the Hollywood publicists and all the managers and everyone that I have worked with for my entire life have just been objectifying me. That&#8217;s it. That&#8217;s what happened. I don&#8217;t want you guys to think I&#8217;m a prostitute.”
Well, guess what? I do think you are a prostitute. I think you are all prostitutes of sorts.
It is a form of prostitution. You sold your sex and your body for views, clicks, and a paycheck.
So maybe you are fooling some people, but you are not fooling me Meghan Markle and Emily Ratajkowski.
Be sure to watch my new documentary aimed at uncovering the truth about Black Lives Matter: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/the-greatest-lie-ever-sold#">THE GREATEST LIE EVER SOLD</a>.

Candace_516x9 copy 26

Sex Sells: Meghan Markle Knew Exactly What She Was Doing On ‘Deal Or No Deal’

Candace Owens

Greatest Lie Ever Sold

Meghan Markle

Readers Pass

Model and actress Emily Ratajkowski complained that &#8220;<a href="https://dailywire.com/news/blonde-star-says-she-doesnt-get-why-marilyn-monroe-semi-biopic-scored-nc-17-rating/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Blonde</a>,&#8221; Netflix&#8217;s new Marylin Monroe film, &#8220;fetishizes female pain.&#8221;
Ratajkowski made the complaint in a video she shared on TikTok on Friday, saying the fascination with the tragic life of the <a href="https://dailywire.com/news/planned-parenthood-fumes-over-abortion-scenes-in-marilyn-monroe-flick-blonde/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">late actress</a> — whose name is practically synonymous with the term &#8220;blonde bombshell&#8221; — was just another example of society turning a woman&#8217;s pain into something &#8220;sexy.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="tiktok-embed" style="max-width: 605px; min-width: 325px;" cite="https://www.tiktok.com/@emrata/video/7149095837077949738" data-video-id="7149095837077949738">
<section><a title="@emrata" href="https://www.tiktok.com/@emrata?refer=embed" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@emrata</a>So done with the fetishization of female pain and suffering. Bitch Era 2022<a title="♬ original sound - Emrata" href="https://www.tiktok.com/music/original-sound-7149096249378179886?refer=embed" target="_blank" rel="noopener">♬ original sound &#8211; Emrata</a></section>
</blockquote>
<script async src="https://www.tiktok.com/embed.js"></script>
&#8220;I’m not surprised to hear that it’s yet another movie fetishizing female pain, even in death,&#8221; Ratajkowski said, despite admitting just as the video began that she had not yet seen the movie herself.
&#8220;We love to fetishize female pain,&#8221; she continued, referencing public obsessions with famous women whose personal struggles had become front page news. &#8220;Look at Amy Winehouse. Look at Britney Spears. Look at the way we obsessed over [Princess] Diana&#8217;s death, the way we obsess over dead girls and serial killers. Watch any &#8216;CSI&#8217; episode and it&#8217;s like this crazy fetishization of death and female pain.&#8221;
&#8220;And I think as women — I mean, I can say for myself for sure — but I’ve learned how to fetishize my own pain and my own hurt in my life so that it feels like something that can be tended to and that&#8217;s kind of sexy and I&#8217;m like this, oh, f***ed-up girl, whatever,&#8221; Ratajkowski said, noting that society often seemed to elevate women who were flawed and damaged — and that the resulting perception was that the damage was, in itself, &#8220;sexy.&#8221;
&#8220;I think we do that in many, many different ways. But I want that to change,&#8221; she added.
&#8220;But I was thinking about it and &#8230; you know what&#8217;s kind of hard to fetishize? Anger. Anger is hard to fetishize. So I have a proposal. I think we all need to be a little more pissed off. I&#8217;m going to be in my witch era. 2022, baby, is my b**** era. I think we should all be in our b**** era,&#8221; she concluded.
She repeated her suggestion as she ended the video: &#8220;So, yeah, I&#8217;m just going to get angry.&#8221;

Pitti Immagine Uomo 102 – Superga Party

‘We Obsess Over Dead Girls’: Actress And Model Complains That Marilyn Monroe Film ‘Fetishizes Female Pain’

Model And Actress Emily Ratajkowski Complains That Marilyn Monroe Film 'Fetishizes Female Pain'

Film

Marilyn Monroe

Netflix

Have you accidentally created an avatar for yourself? More specifically, have you created a life in the online universe — on social media, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok — that has nothing to do with you in your real life?
I think about this all the time when I examine how women behave online. The essential question being, would they do this if they were actually face to face with somebody?
Consider Emily Ratajkowski — an American model — who alleges that her husband is cheating on her, that he is a “dog,” and that she’s going to leave him.
As I’ve pointed out before, Emily posts naked photos of herself all the time for men and women who don’t know her. Whenever there’s an article or anything about her online, she’s revealing herself in some way. This is what she does for a living.
If someone like Emily Ratajkowski, who exposes herself to individuals online, were to physically enter a room full of men while topless — would she consider that cheating? Hopefully the answer is resoundingly yes. Yet, if she does the same act on Instagram, sharing topless pictures of herself — she, and the culture with her, perceives no fault.
Take another celebrity example in Madonna, who I believe is facing a very real mental health crisis. She recently posted a few pictures on her personal Instagram, in what I think was supposed to be a seductive post.
She&#8217;s wearing fishnet tights. She has her boob out. She is in leather and she is biting the end of her metal bed. She’s half naked.
I look at these photos and I ask myself, would she do this in real life? Imagine you&#8217;re looking to buy a mattress and you&#8217;re going through the mattress store. Suddenly, you see a 63-year-old on top of one of the beds, in fishnets and moving her hips, gyrating in “sexy poses.”
This topic comes to mind because it came up on <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/daily-wire-backstage-open-borders-just-kidding">Daily Wire’s backstage</a>, where all the hosts, including myself, sit down and discuss various topics in long form. The conversation continues behind the paywall on Daily Wire+. It was here that my point above — about online behavior and behavior in real life — came up. I think it was one of the most interesting discussions of the night.
Some of the hosts considered the online world to be different, in that it varied in its level of sin. In other words, watching pornography online is not the same as engaging in a real-life affair.
I didn&#8217;t necessarily agree with that, and neither did my colleague Matt Walsh. To quote him, “if you found out that your husband went to a motel room and was the third party in some sort of sexual dalliance, but he didn’t do anything; he just kind of sat there in the hotel room watching it. I think we’d all agree that that is cheating.”
This is the crux of my argument. Most people online make a differentiation between actions in life and online. But how? In pornography, you’re watching two people — neither of which are your spouse — have sex. What makes it so different through a screen versus without a screen in life?
Virtual reality only furthers my point. I tried on VR glasses once and I was shocked at how real they felt. I was on the edge of a precipice, and I was unable to jump because my physical body felt that it was too real to jump. I felt that I would have been actually falling off a 50-story building.
Now imagine watching pornography in that situation. You’re now able to put yourself in a situation, where it feels real, and you can be surrounded by and have virtual sex with naked women and men. Would it be considered — by Emily, by the culture, by you — an act of infidelity to engage in such behavior in VR?
Many may say no. I say yes.
We keep lowering the bar on expectations in relationships and behaviors because we create a weird mental separation between the online and the real. It’s morally acceptable to post revealing photos of yourself for likes, but you can’t do the same in real life. You can watch whatever porn you like, but you can’t watch two people having sex in real life. You can engage in sexual activities in VR and have that feeling of doing it for real, but you are only culpable for it if you do it in an actual bedroom.
Again, I ask — what’s the difference?
If you haven’t already been forced to answer the question in your relationships, with the way things are progressing, you will eventually have to.

Candace_416x9 copy 23

Is It Cheating? Emily Ratajkowski And Why Your Online Avatar Needs To Match Your Real World Behavior

Madonna

Pornography

Virtual Reality

Model Emily Ratajkowski said this week that she stayed silent about a groping allegation against musician Robin Thicke for nearly a decade because she feared coming forward would derail her dreams of becoming famous.
Her new book &#8220;My Body&#8221; detailed the alleged groping incident on set of the &#8220;Blurred Lines&#8221; video in 2013. According to Ratajkowski&#8217;s account, an intoxicated Thicke groped the model&#8217;s bare breasts without consent.
“I was an unknown model, and if I had spoken out or complained, I would not be where I am today; I would not be famous,” the 30-year-old <a href="https://people.com/music/emily-ratajkowski-reveals-why-she-didnt-protest-after-robin-thicke-allegedly-groped-her/">told</a> People magazine.
“I wrote a book about the evolution of my politics, and that includes a lot of different experiences from my career and my life, and the way that I felt and thought about those experiences [has] evolved,” Ratajkowski said. “I hope people are able to read the essay and understand the nuance behind these kinds of situations.”
An <a href="https://pagesix.com/2021/10/05/why-emily-ratajkowski-stayed-silent-on-robin-thicke-allegations/">excerpt</a> from Ratajkowski’s book detailed the alleged groping incident, Page Six reported:
<blockquote>“Suddenly, out of nowhere, I felt the coolness and foreignness of a stranger’s hands cupping my bare breasts from behind. I instinctively moved away, looking back at Robin Thicke,” she writes in the book, set to be released next month.
Ratajkowski was one of three models who appeared in the video, which also starred Pharrell Williams and T.I.
What started as an experience she enjoyed quickly deteriorated when the “Back Together” crooner, now 44, allegedly began to act boorishly.
“He smiled a goofy grin and stumbled backward, his eyes concealed behind his sunglasses. My head turned to the darkness beyond the set. [The director, Diane Martel’s] voice cracked as she yelled out to me, ‘Are you okay?’” the book states.
Martel confirmed the incident, according to the Times’ report, and said she didn’t believe Thicke would have done it “had he been sober.”</blockquote>
Thicke has not yet responded to Ratajkowski’s accusations.
Throughout her career, Ratajkowski has become increasingly political, demonstrating in left-wing protests, such as the objections to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
In January, Ratajkowski <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/emily-ratajkowski-slams-big-tech-censorship">spoke out</a> against Big Tech censorship, floating an unfounded theory that Trump supporters were allowed to breach the United States Capitol so platforms like Facebook and Twitter could justify a “rollout of censorship.” The impending further crackdown on free speech, she warned, could be a “Patriot Act 2.0.”
“Anyone else feel like proper amount of capitol police being absent/letting Trump people in/providing insane visuals of MAGA dudes on the floor of the house was wildly convenient to justifying big tech’s rollout of censorship?” posed Ratajkowski online.
“This gives Facebook/tech/Zuck THE MOST POWER. If he can shut the president up/off he can shut any of us up/off,” she added. The model noted that she was aware her view was “unpopular,” but nonetheless “worth pointing out.”
Ratajkowski emphasized that she was concerned about a crackdown against the political Left. “My concern is that this gives big tech the opportunity to shut down ‘leftist extremists’ who are important political organizers,” she said.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/emily-ratajkowski-slams-big-tech-censorship">Emily Ratajkowski Slams Big Tech Censorship, Floats Capitol Breach Conspiracy Theory</a>

The 2021 Met Gala Celebrating In America: A Lexicon Of Fashion – Arrivals

Emily Ratajkowski Says She Stayed Silent About Robin Thicke Groping Allegation Because She Wanted To Be Famous

Model and actress Emily Ratajkowski is the latest prominent figure to be selling a “nonfungible token,” or NFT. The piece, titled “Buying Myself Back: A Model for Redistribution” is being auctioned at Christie’s on May 14.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Buying Myself Back: A Model for Redistribution. This NFT will be available at auction <a href="https://twitter.com/ChristiesInc?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ChristiesInc</a> on May 14. <a href="https://t.co/lyiHPpG8EI">https://t.co/lyiHPpG8EI</a> <a href="https://t.co/BLJtHpHZmV">pic.twitter.com/BLJtHpHZmV</a>
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1386711836322635777?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 26, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“As Ms. Ratajkowski chronicled in a widely read essay published in The Cut last fall, she’d been surprised to find out, in 2014, that a nude photograph of herself was hanging in the Gagosian Gallery on Madison Avenue. As part of his &#8216;New Portraits&#8217; series, the artist Richard Prince had taken one of her Instagram photos and printed it on a large canvas, priced at $90,000,” reported <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/23/style/emily-ratajkowski-nft-christies.html">The New York Times</a>.
“Ms. Ratajkowski tried to buy the piece but a Gagosian employee bought it for himself. After contacting Mr. Prince’s studio directly, though, she was able to obtain a second &#8216;Instagram painting&#8217; of herself, featuring a photo from her first appearance in Sports Illustrated’s swimsuit issue. She had been paid $150 for the shoot, she wrote, and a &#8216;couple grand&#8217; when the issue was published,” the Times added.
https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1392852522927333376
The image which will be attached to the NFT being auctioned is a “digital composite showing Ms. Ratajkowski, photographed in her New York apartment, posing in front of the Richard Prince painting that hangs in her Los Angeles home.”
NFTs have revolutionized the ownership of digital works, allowing such products to be “signed” with unique identifiers in the item’s metadata using blockchain technology — the same technology which underpins the security of cryptocurrency transactions — thereby guaranteeing their originality.
“As somebody who has built a career off of sharing my image, so many times — even though that’s my livelihood — it’s taken from me and then somebody else profits off of,” Ratajkowski told The Times.
What makes the issue more complicated when compared to other notable NFT sales is that “The composite artwork being NFT-ized contains two discrete images: the first is a photo of Ratajkowski in her apartment, the second is (what appears to be) a digital copy of a &#8216;painting&#8217; by Richard Prince,” explained by <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/24/22399790/emily-ratajkowski-nft-christies-copyright-nightmare-richard-prince">The Verge</a>.
“Someone owns the foreground photo of Ratajkowski in her apartment (possibly the photographer, possibly Ratajkowski herself). Ratajkowski owns a physical copy of the painting by Richard Prince, but she likely does not own rights to digitally reproduce it,” the article stated.
As is the case with most NFTs, Ratajkowski will receive a portion of the sales value every time the NFT is resold in the future.
In late April, the model tweeted about the NFT, writing, “In a step toward my ongoing effort to reclaim and control my image, I’m thrilled to announce my first conceptual artwork to ever come to market, an NFT entitled Buying Myself Back: A Model for Redistribution.”
“The digital terrain should be a place where women can share their likeness as they choose, controlling the usage of their image and receiving whatever potential capital attached. Instead, the internet has more frequently served as a space where others exploit and distribute images of women’s bodies without their consent and for another’s profit. Art has historically functioned similarly: works of unnamed muses sell for millions of dollars and build careers of traditionally male artists, while the subjects of these works receive nothing,” she continued.
“Using the newly introduced medium of NFTs, I hope to symbolically set a precedent for women and ownership online, one that allows for women to have ongoing authority over their image and to receive rightful compensation for its usage and distribution,” she later added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
In a step toward my ongoing effort to reclaim and control my image, I’m thrilled to announce my first conceptual artwork to ever come to market, an NFT entitled Buying Myself Back: A Model for Redistribution.
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1385710264050454529?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
s of women’s bodies without their consent and for another’s profit. Art has historically functioned similarly: works of unnamed muses sell for millions of dollars and build careers of traditionally male artists, while the subjects of these works receive nothing.
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1385710897939816451?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This work will be at auction <a href="https://twitter.com/ChristiesInc?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ChristiesInc</a> Post War and Contemporary Art Day Sale on May 14.
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1385712162883227649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;

Emily Ratajkowski To Sell Controversial Art As NFT At Christie’s Auction

Cryptocurrency

Last week, after the appalling violence at the US Capitol building, Twitter announced that they would be suspending President Donald Trump’s account “for repeated and severe violations of [Twitter’s] Civic Integrity policy.” Then, citing the supposed “risk of further incitement of violence,” Twitter announced that they had “permanently suspended” Trump’s account.
Subsequently, the Big Tech giants also rallied to shut down Parler, a popular alternative outlet among conservatives.
While many celebrated Trump’s suspension, there were others — even some on the Left — who criticized Twitter’s decision and the impact it would have on free speech in America.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
Only a few days after Twitter’s announcement, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) — who are often vocal critics of conservatives and conservative principles — released a statement raising concern over the “unchecked power” of Big Tech, and the impact it could have on minority voices.
“For months, President Trump has been using social media platforms to seed doubt about the results of the election and to undermine the will of voters. We understand the desire to permanently suspend him now, but it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions – especially when political realities make those decisions easier. President Trump can turn to his press team or Fox News to communicate with the public, but others – like the many Black, Brown, and LGBTQ activists who have been censored by social media companies – will not have that luxury. It is our hope that these companies will apply their rules transparently to everyone,” <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/aclu-worries-about-social-medias-unchecked-power-to-remove-people-from-platforms-after-twitter-facebook-ban-trump">the ACLU wrote</a>.
Angela Merkel
On Monday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, through her spokesman Steffen Seibert, criticized Twitter’s actions as “problematic.” According to the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/merkel-trump-twitter-problematic-dc9732268493a8ac337e03159f0dc1c9">Associated Press</a>, Seibert said that the freedom of opinion is a fundamental right of “elementary significance.”
“This fundamental right can be intervened in, but according to the law and within the framework defined by legislators — not according to a decision by the management of social media platforms,” Seibert told reporters. “Seen from this angle, the chancellor considers it problematic that the accounts of the U.S. president have now been permanently blocked.”
Emily Ratajkowski 
Model, actress and Leftist activist Emily Ratajkowski — admittedly while “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/emily-ratajkowski-slams-big-tech-censorship?%3Futm_source=twitter">floating</a> a conspiracy theory that Trump supporters were allowed to breach the United States Capitol” — expressed concern that censorship could later be applied to “any of us.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This gives Facebook/tech/Zuck THE MOST POWER. If he can shut the president up/off he can shut any of us up/off
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347247385152405504?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
My concern is that this gives big tech the opportunity to shut down “leftist extremists” who are important political organizers.
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347254272686084096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Alexei Navalny
Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny condemned Twitter’s suspension of President Donald Trump as “an unacceptable act of censorship.” In a lengthy Twitter thread, Navalny described Twitter’s ban as “a decision of people we don’t know in accordance with a procedure we don’t know,” which was “based on emotions and personal political preferences.”
He also questioned the claim that Trump was “banned for violating Twitter rules,” saying that he receives “death threats here every day for many years, and Twitter doesn’t ban anyone (not that I ask for it).”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
1. I think that the ban of Donald Trump on Twitter is an unacceptable act of censorship (THREAD)
&mdash; Alexey Navalny (@navalny) <a href="https://twitter.com/navalny/status/1347969772177264644?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 9, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Andrés Manuel López Obrador
Mexican President and Leftist Andrés Manuel López Obrador also <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mexican-president-andres-manuel-lopez-obrador-condemns-tech-companies-for-censoring-trump">condemned</a> Big Tech for their decision to censor President Donald Trump.
“I don’t like anybody being censored or taking away from the right to post a message on Twitter or Face(book). I don’t agree with that, I don’t accept that,” López Obrador <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/mexico-leader-condemns-twitter-facebook-for-blocking-trump/2021/01/07/e454ed32-514f-11eb-a1f5-fdaf28cfca90_story.html">said</a>.
“How can you censor someone: ‘Let’s see, I, as the judge of the Holy Inquisition, will punish you because I think what you’re saying is harmful,’” he continued. “Where is the law, where is the regulation, what are the norms? This is an issue of government, this is not an issue for private companies.”
Writing on Twitter, Presidential spokesman Jesús Ramírez elaborated further on the position.
“Facebook’s decision to silence the current leader of the United States calls for a debate on freedom of expression, the free exchange of information on the web, democracy and the role of the companies that administer (social) networks.”
Mateusz Morawiecki
Poland’s Prime Minister spoke generally on the issue of censorship in response to recent events, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/polands-pm-social-media-need-anti-censorship-regulations/2021/01/12/c5a25132-551d-11eb-acc5-92d2819a1ccb_story.html">saying</a> that “Algorithms or the owners of corporate giants should not decide which views are right and which are not,” and that “There is no and can be no consent to censorship.”
According to the Washington Post, Morawiecki also said Tuesday that social media corporations should not censor views that they don’t share and called for new regulations that would govern the use of Facebook, Twitter and Instagram in the European Union.
In Poland, “the functioning of Facebook, Twitter and Instagram are regulated by law,” and Morawiecki said that “The owners of social platforms cannot act above the law. We will suggest that similar regulations are also put in place in all of the European Union.”
Michael McCormack
Acting Prime Minister of Australia, Michael McCormack, “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/senior-ministers-take-aim-at-trump-social-media-silencing-20210111-p56t7n.html">blasted</a> [Twitter’s] move as censorship of political speech when the company had not suspended other views on its site.”
“I don’t believe in that sort of censorship. But, you know, I mean, there’s been a lot of people who’ve said and done a lot of things on Twitter previously that haven’t received that sort of condemnation or, indeed, censorship,” said McCormack. “That’s a matter for Twitter. They’ve made that call. They’ve got a company, they’ve got a business to run and they’ve made that decision.”
Keri Hilson
Singer, songwriter, and actress Keri Hilson described Twitter’s actions as “dangerous.”
“This may be funny. But it is a little dangerous too,” <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dangerous-singer-keri-hilson-criticizes-trump-twitter-ban-responds-to-criticism">Hilson posted in an Instagram story</a>. “Take Trump out of it for a moment…A democracy must include freedom of speech. Imagine other leaders or popular figures not being able to voice their opinion if it opposes majority of world leaders…Our freedom of speech being taken from us.”
“Slowly but surely (censorship),” she warned. “If the leader of the ‘free world’ can be removed. Imagine that same right of civilians. Imagine believing every time you read ‘false information detected’ and propaganda, deceptive reports, and flat out lies being the only thing we see.”
Elon Musk
Elon Musk, the world’s richest man and CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, has criticized Leftist policies on several occasions. In response to the wave of censorship triggered by Big Tech, Musk condemned the “West Coast high tech” for becoming the “de facto arbiter of free speech.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
A lot of people are going to be super unhappy with West Coast high tech as the de facto arbiter of free speech
&mdash; Elon Musk (@elonmusk) <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1348688644173934593?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
This is not the first time Musk has weighed in on the subject of censorship. In June, he criticized Amazon <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/elon-musk-weighs-in-on-big-tech-censorship">for</a> “reportedly censoring the publication of a book about the coronavirus.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Time to break up Amazon. Monopolies are wrong!
&mdash; Elon Musk (@elonmusk) <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1268603809409888256?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Ian Haworth is an Editor and Writer for The Daily Wire. Follow him on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/ighaworth">@ighaworth</a>.

Leftist Celebrities, World Leaders, And The ACLU: Who Condemned Twitter’s Censorship of Donald Trump?

ACLU

Angela Merkel

Donald Trump

Elon Musk

Social Media Censorship

Model, actress and left-wing activist Emily Ratajkowski caused a stir online Thursday after floating a conspiracy theory that Trump supporters were allowed to breach the United States Capitol on Wednesday so Big Tech platforms like Facebook and Twitter could justify a &#8220;rollout of censorship.&#8221; The impending further crackdown on free speech, she warned, could be a &#8220;Patriot Act 2.0.&#8221;
&#8220;Anyone else feel like proper amount of capitol police being absent/letting Trump people in/providing insane visuals of MAGA dudes on the floor of the house was wildly convenient to justifying big tech’s rollout of censorship?&#8221; posed Ratajkowski on Thursday afternoon.
&#8220;This gives Facebook/tech/Zuck THE MOST POWER. If he can shut the president up/off he can shut any of us up/off,&#8221; she added. The model noted that she was aware her view was &#8220;unpopular,&#8221; but nonetheless &#8220;worth pointing out.&#8221;
Ratajkowski, who has demonstrated in left-wing protests, such as the objections to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, emphasized that her unfounded theory was driven by concern over a crackdown against the political Left.
&#8220;My concern is that this gives big tech the opportunity to shut down &#8216;leftist extremists&#8217; who are important political organizers,&#8221; she said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Anyone else feel like proper amount of capital police being absent/letting Trump people in/providing insane visuals of MAGA dudes on the floor of the house was wildly convenient to justifying big tech’s rollout of censorship?
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347247031895552000?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This gives Facebook/tech/Zuck THE MOST POWER. If he can shut the president up/off he can shut any of us up/off
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347247385152405504?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Know this is going to be an unpopular take but seems worth pointing out
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347247613033152512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
My concern is that this gives big tech the opportunity to shut down “leftist extremists” who are important political organizers.
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347254272686084096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
When a Twitter user suggested it is leftists who have been &#8220;blacklisted&#8221; for &#8220;decades,&#8221; Ratajkowski responded: &#8220;I’m aware. And before tech leftists were being blacklisted by other means. People responding to my tweet somehow do not understand what license this gives big tech to continue to do so this time with people cheering. Patriot act 2.0?&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I’m aware. And before tech leftists were being blacklisted by other means. People responding to my tweet somehow do not understand what license this gives big tech to continue to do so this time with people cheering. Patriot act 2.0?
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347261881006714881?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Are you alleging collusion between Trump and tech platforms? Or that tech companies actually want to implement censorship on their platforms? I think the correlation that you&#8217;re presenting here doesn&#8217;t hold up,&#8221; one Twitter user asked the model.
&#8220;I’m saying it’s very convenient to justify taking away more rights &amp; privacy,&#8221; she replied.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I’m saying it’s very convenient to justify taking away more rights &amp; privacy
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347267398403911681?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Ratajkowski added that Big Tech now has &#8220;the country cheering&#8221; as they crack down on speech, seemingly acknowledging the current censorship of the Right, and warning of room for a crackdown on left-wing voices.
&#8220;Social media is an incredible tool to organize grassroots movements as proved by this summer’s protests,&#8221; she pointed out.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Correct now they have they’ll have the country cheering as they do tho&#8230;
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347266683052781569?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Actually no social media is an incredible tool to organize grassroots movements as proved by this summer’s protests
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347262695456665600?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In another reply on Twitter, Ratajkowski asked what would happed if a Capitol raid were justified in the future. “[W]hat if our gov became a fascist one and the only tactic was to storm the capitol? Our tools (the internet/social media) to organize are being taken away from us,” she wrote.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Yeah but what if our gov became a fascist one and the only tactic was to storm the capitol? Our tools (the internet/social media) to organize are being taken away from us
&mdash; Emily Ratajkowski (@emrata) <a href="https://twitter.com/emrata/status/1347249305518673921?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The apparent unpreparedness of Capitol Police on Wednesday has been widely noted by politicos on both sides of the aisle. Reportedly, Democratic D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser discouraged federal agencies from providing assistance at the protest.
&#8220;Democratic D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser discouraged federal agencies from providing assistance to Washington’s Metropolitan Police Department in a letter issued to agencies on Tuesday, effectively asking federal law enforcement to &#8216;stand down&#8217; as the city handled a pro-Trump rally that eventually became a riot,&#8221; The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/report-dc-mayor-discouraged-federal-law-enforcement-from-assisting-dc-police-ahead-of-rally">noted</a> Thursday.
“Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) told Justice Department and Pentagon leaders on Tuesday that the city is not requesting federal law enforcement assistance with protests organized by President Trump&#8217;s supporters this week,” The Hill <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/532739-bowser-to-doj-pentagon-dc-isnt-requesting-federal-law-enforcement-to">reported</a> Tuesday, noting that Bowser specifically requested that federal officials “notify the city and its police department if federal authorities are deployed.”
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dc-capitol-police-defend-riot-response-protesters-armed-with-pipes-and-chemical-irritants-60-officers-injured">D.C., Capitol Police Defend Riot Response: Protesters Armed With Pipes And ‘Chemical Irritants,’ 60 Officers Injured</a>

2020 Vanity Fair Oscar Party Hosted By Radhika Jones – Arrivals

Emily Ratajkowski Slams Big Tech Censorship, Floats Capitol Breach Conspiracy Theory

Big Tech

Menu