You take for granted that, despite the abundance of wild creatures, your children will be safe at the zoo. The secure cages and pens lend that sense of security. But it’s a false sense at the Toronto Zoo, where a certain “species,” some say predatory, roams about unfettered. In fact, it’s there for the expressed purpose of targeting children. Its name?

Vir in veste feminea exaggerata — or, the “drag queen.”

What’s more, when a Rebel News crew went to the zoo to report on the story, they were kicked out. It seems there’s some wildness going on that officials don’t want the civilized world to know about.

Canada sure has been making news recently, in all the wrong ways. On Thursday, I reported on how, in deference to “decolonization,” a British Columbia village just renamed a street “šxʷməθkʷəy̓əmasəm.” (It’s supposedly a “native” word. Native to what planet, they did not say.) Now we have the drag queen story, on which Rebel News reported Thursday:

One of the performers at the Toronto Zoo is someone called “Juice Boxx.” Along with “Carlota Carlisle”, this duo, according to the zoo’s website, read “animal-themed children’s stories that teach lessons of inclusion, diversity, self-love, and respect for others.”

(Not to be a nitpicker here, but what exactly is meant by the term, “self-love”?)

In any event, Sarah [a mother who blew the whistle on the zoo] discovered that Juice Boxx had allegedly posted pornographic pictures on social media. She reached out to this man who presents himself as a grotesque caricature of a woman. Sarah aired her concerns, and before she was blocked, Sarah received the following reply from Juice Boxx: “I hate your kids.”

Rebel then states the obvious: Someone who posts pornography and hates kids should not be entertaining children. The zoo doesn’t see it that way, though. In fact, Rebel reached out to zoo officials, asking them 10 questions, none of which was answered. Instead, they provided a non-answer, with anodyne verbiage about “inclusivity” — even though they’d aggressively excluded Rebel News.

Speaking of which, below is Rebel’s video report on the drag-queen perversion. The news organ’s expulsion from the premises is included.

One question Rebel asked zoo officials was, “What is meant by the term, ‘self-love’?” The outlet wanted to know if this was a descriptor for auto-eroticism. The concern is legitimate because, actually, “self-love” has become a euphemism for that activity. Yet there can be a deeper meaning, too: narcissism — or “egocentrism.”

As a 2019 article at Spiked states, addressing how MUSS (made-up sexual status, aka “trans”) activists zealously silence critics:

Perhaps the most perfect embodiment of the culture of narcissism and attention-seeking is the trans movement, in which all the world collapses upon Me. Everything becomes about celebrating Me and my brilliant, audacious ‘bravery’. No wonder trans people become so angry when people question the authenticity of their new identity.

And research bears this out. Just consider what a National Institutes of Health page relates about those with “gender identity disorder.” (This is the sense that you’re “stuck” in the “wrong” sex’s body.)

“The frequency of personality disorders was 81.4%,” the researchers reported. To the point here, though, they also found that “[t]he most frequent personality disorder was narcissistic personality disorder (57.1%)….”

To be clear, this defect likely epitomizes not just the MUSS crew, but the entire sexual devolutionary movement. It’s all about my sexual preference, my identity, my body, my wants and desires — my feelings. It’s all about focusing inward on the self, not outward on others and, additionally and most importantly, upward on God.

So much of this “self-love” smacks of self-worship, self-deification. Christendom long operated under the supposition that “male and female He made them,” as He willed it. Now there are those who say, “I can remake myself male or female, as I will it.” We long accepted that a man shall “cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Now some demand it be accepted that a man doesn’t have to be a man and that, regardless, he can cleave to whomever he wishes enjoying the pleasures of the flesh, even if it’s only momentary and cleave and leave.

Whichever definition of “self-love” it is (it’s likely both), it’s not surprising that sexual devolutionaries would seek to inculcate it in children. This brings us, too, to “Juice Boxx’s” admission, “I hate your kids.” He might, of course, have just been trying to get Sarah’s goat. But it also can have deeper meaning.

“Self-love” here is not just a euphemism for an activity, but also an attitude: again, self-worship. Yet these worshipers know that this pseudo-deity, the man in the mirror, is most lacking. And what they lack most conspicuously is obvious: innocence.

Now, we all understand that if people are envious of something, they’ll often seek to destroy it or take it away. I’m reminded here of when someone, during the night, tore the hood ornament off my parents’ new car. (We lived in the Bronx.) People also may be jealous of a skill somebody is developing or a relationship he’s in. They may then demean it to discourage its continued embrace, characterizing it as a negative. Why, this is often what has driven career-obsessed feminists to put down stay-at-home moms. It’s not that they’re really upset that these women “aren’t living up to their potential.” It’s that they know these women are — and they’re not.

You see, people instinctively sense what is a good. To the point here, they sense that innocence is a good. Children epitomize it, too, especially youngsters such as Sarah’s, who are protected from corruptive influences — such as Juice Boxx. This explains why Juice Boxx perhaps really does hate children and would, in particular, hate Sarah’s kids.

These sexual devolutionaries gaze upon children and see a beauty, that innocence, they don’t possess. They long ago lost it, maybe before the time they can remember, and maybe it was stolen from them. They don’t believe they can recapture it, either, or they won’t do what’s necessary to resurrect the light within.

So the innocent children are a reminder of what they can never be. Through contrast, the little ones bring the sexual devolutionaries’ ugliness into focus. This is why these broken people want to steal that innocence away. And, of course, “misery loves company” just as holiness enjoys solitude.

But that is their issue. The wider society’s problem is forgetting that what behaviors you tolerate, you get more of. Tolerance of behavior leads to acceptance, which can itself lead to marketing. Now you know why sexual degradation is marketed to your kids — and now you should know the remedy.

To end the malevolent marketing, end the misguided tolerance.