We'll see.  He's not for everyone, that's for sure.

He seems like a massive troll and pot-stirrer.

Quote

Is Milo Yiannopoulos authentic or a concocted media character?

Who cares? Not knowing who this person is or his views, would be a confirmation that a Catholic is living a Catholic life.

There are legion of "political conservatives" personalities like this in the world, why should real Catholics ask the question above about this one in particular? Likely because he being a young aberrosɛҳuąƖ and looking and acting like one, is fighting the liberals. I ask again, why even think of asking the question above? Why watch this person for more than 3 minutes? I watched him debating liberals once because it popped up on YouTube. I knew nothing about him, never heard of him. I immediately saw his effeminacy and concluded he had nothing Catholic to offer. I think I watched him 3 minutes.  Why give this person space on Cathinfo with a question like the OP?

All these people from Billy Graham, Ronald Reagan, and Donald Trump to Milo Y are of the World, they are "conservative" options given by the enemy, like the High Anglican churches and Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod are conservative options to Catholicism. They are all flavors  there to draw people away to hell, teachers according to their owns desires. They are given power by God, allowed to exist, as a punishment upon those that do not listen to the voice of God. These "conservatives" are all on the road to hell by their own choosing.

I'll leave it at that and let all of you think for yourselves on this:

The Future Church: How Ten Trends Are Revolutionizing the Catholic Church By John L. Allen page 390
 
Peruvian journalist Federico Prieto Celi gave me another reading July 12. He theorized that the growth (of Protestantism in South America) is in part linked to conscious American policy. He cited a famous remark of Theodore Roosevelt to the effect that, "I believe it will be long and difficult to absorb these countries into the sphere of the United States as long as they remain Catholic."

“Da mihi castitatem et continentiam, sed noli modo (Give me chastity and continence, but not just yet)!”
? Augustine of Hippo, Confessions

WWII: Gunner fell 22,000 feet WITHOUT a parachute and survived https://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/wwii-gunner-fell-22000-feet-without-a-parachute-and-survived.html

(Thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God.)

He should be considered an enemy because he's a Jew. Plain and simple. It's not notable that a Jew says something that's true, which Milo does quite often. The Jews are like their father and use the truth to promote lies. LaramieHirsch is either very naive or one of them.

You forgot to put yes or no.

He's authentically Jєωιѕн and homo. He's a fake Catholic. The alt-right is a creation of the Jews. Most of the people at Breitbart are Jєωιѕн.

Is that Old Testament Jєωιѕн?
Or is it тαℓмυdic Jєωιѕн?
There is a difference.
Please cite your sources (and please not just "Jєωιѕн names")

at this point there are only 2 things i like about him: He ticks off the Left and he is going through conversion therapy. But i can't see why anyone would call him/herself "gαy".. well, actually, now that i think about it, when i was young i had my rather silly and ignorant moments so yeh... he is young. that explains it

I will be curious to see what comes of his gαy-conversion therapy that he talks about.  

Incidentally, I stumbled across this today:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/barrierbreaker/ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ-wrong-something-somewhere-inside-says-yes-milo-yiannopoulos/

Milo Yiannopoulos Thinks ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Is Wrong
February 4, 2017 by Martin Hughes

I’ve recently argued that Milo is not a provocateur. He is a Catholic guilt evangelist (before you disagree, read this — the actual evidence is pretty damning). Several have disagreed with me on my blogs on the subject, but the more I look into the issue, the more clear it seems to be that he is a Catholic evangelist. Although he flaunts being gαy for laughs, he is on a mission to show that it is a sin, that it’s wrong, and that being heterosɛҳuąƖ is superior — along with a host of other Catholic norms.

You can see this in some of his earlier work, like the time he debated Boy George on gαy marriage for ten minutes. He was arguing that it was wrong.

You see, before Milo bleached his hair, wore designer clothing, and began to present his words as comedy routines, he was a writer for the Catholic Herald who was a vocal opponent of gαy marriage, and quite serious about his stance. In a 2011 post entitled “Why I’ll Never Be A Parent” (which has since been removed, but is accessible via The Wayback Machine), he made clear that he would never have a child because “it’s wrong to expose an innocent child to the possibility of gαy influence.”

He states that gαy people, somehow, deep-down know that what they’re doing is wrong. He states that this feeling that they are doing something that is wrong is the reason for several phenomena:

The feelings of alienation and rejection it engenders are responsible for the sorts of repugnant tribal posturing you see on the streets of Soho on a Friday night, as bitterly unhappy queers engage in degrading and repulsive behaviour, simply because they want to feel a part of something after a lifetime of marginalisation.

They see themselves as faulty, so they exaggerate their imperfections in the company of others they see as similarly defective. Ironically, it’s precisely that profound feeling of being somehow broken that means a gαy man’s sɛҳuąƖity often comes to be the defining characteristic of his personality. Who wouldn’t want to protect a child from a path that leads to such destructive self-loathing?

Some of us in society think that churches and other religious institutions have impeded on the free expression of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity by reinforcing cultural norms through preaching, shaming, and societal backlash. This is extremely common. The church’s attempts in the United States, for example, to successfully ban same-sex marriage in several states before 2015’s Supreme Court decision is one of many examples of the very silencing of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ expression that many of us outside the church have been fighting against.

So you have two sides. One side is trying to expand and validate the free expression of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, and the other is attempting to limit it and invalidate it. And in spite of the fact that he is gαy himself, Milo Yiannopoulos is clearly in the second group. That’s why he was opposed to gαy marriage.

Before you tell me I’m wrong, remember that he said this in the above debate with Boy George (6:03):

I think that gαy marriage is another one of those things that helps to reinforce to people that it is a perfectly acceptable, normal, possibly even desirable lifestyle choice and I don’t believe that. [emphasis added]

That’s why he’s against it. And here, he’s serious. He’s not jovial or joking. Being gαy, in his mind here, is wrong, and he is against gαy marriage because he wants to protect the concept that it is wrong.

There is a distinct choice we can make here regarding the marginalized individuals in our culture. The side of Milo Yiannopoulos is profoundly pessimistic. It surveys our current situation and postulates that we can’t really change it, so we should enforce it. The discomfort with currently marginalized lifestyles that we have in culture, due to a long history of Christian norms, is something that needs to validated, protected, and strengthened in order to protect children.

For all the talk regarding “free speech,” the goal here is not free speech, but censorship through public ostracization of lesbians, of transgender individuals, and the protection of the status-quo of race relations in this country. You can see this, for example, in serious articles he writes about the need for both a mother and a father to raise a child. For example, in a serious article written in 2015 entitled “Kids need a mum and a dad,” he mentions a study that purportedly says children raised by same-sex couples struggle with emotional problems as evidence that same-sex couples should adopt children. There are two noteworthy items here. First, by saying same-sex couples shouldn’t adopt children he is further stigmatizing these couples and thus reinforcing any damage social prejudice may enact in the lives of their children. Second, and even more troubling, is the fact that the link Milo uses in the article is not to the study itself, but to an article entitled “Kids of gαy parents fare worse, study finds, but research draws fire from experts” (emphasis added), and more than half of the article is about the problems with the study — the small sample size, the fact that the study relied mostly on stats from lesbian households with at least one parent who had been divorced from a previous heterosɛҳuąƖ marriage, the fact that the study was funded by conservative groups, and the fact that the person who conducted this infamous study himself — Mark Regnerus — admitted to its flaws and unreliability. This was in the article that Milo read to write his article, and he ignored all of that in order to defame same-sex marriage.

This is a person with an agenda. He is actively opposed to progress that legitimates transgressions of the church like same-sex marriage; he wants to further invalidate these things and protect church morality.

It’s like this: instead of reinforcing Christian norms, as Milo seeks to do, we are choosing to escape from the norms of the church — a church that says how you have to act, who you can marry, what gender you have to be. And for awhile, we have been opening the door.

Today, no one is slamming the door shut in “pop culture” more than Milo Yiannopoulos. And that’s why I care about this fight so much. I want to keep that door open. I don’t want ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ people to be forced back into the closet, as Milo claims is his endgame in a 2015 article. I don’t think people should think, as Milo stated in mid 2016, that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is evidence that people have original sin and thus need Catholic Christianity.  I don’t want transgender people to be even more ostracized and bullied, as one was by Milo late last year, just because the head of Milo’s church calls them an abomination. Unlike Milo, as an atheist I don’t want to hobble people and limit people by using Christian bigotry in culture to shame them. I want them to be free to express themselves without being limited by overmoralizing individuals who intimidate them on the Internet to reinforce Pope-policed morality.

I’m an atheist, and that’s why I believe human beings, and the love we have for each other, should not be restricted or governed by the lies constructed by the Pope’s puppet God. We’re trying to get away from that, not validate it or enforce it — as Milo Yiannopouolos is so strongly attempting to do.