Lana de Rais: Your Body is Mine

On Fat Lana and Peter Thiel's Gay Agenda

Trigger warning: This text contains graphic(!) references to sexual domination, systemic violence, ritual abuse, and symbolic comparisons involving historical and public figures. Reader discretion strongly(!) advised.

Before moving to Substack, I would freely post on my website, without any real chance of backlash or censorship. However, since fully internalizing surveillance, it was annoying, because I would feel fear of being censored without any of the actual risk. Substack is good for this because there is real risk, so I’m not hallucinating anymore. But this post, and increasingly, in general, I feel more and more of the fear. The more I let myself speak freely, the greater is the fear. The more fear, the more determined I become, so, only time will tell how far I might go.

I did not send this post out via-email. I chose not to for two reasons: 1. I’ve already sent out two emails last week, and 2. this is, in my opinion, a very offensive “piece.” It is morally horrible, so I don’t feel like forcing it into people’s inbox. It’s very hostile, very dark. I keep feeding these entries into Ai, trying to improve my writing, but sometimes, there’s just something in the air that makes you want to scream, by typing.

A great and powerful man supports me from the shadows. He left his dick imprint on my throat and blesses it to speak to thee — that ought to be sufficiently validating. You’ll recognize him through my speech. I hope, through my voluntary self-debasement to established authority, you’ll finally come to truly respect me.

The guillotine is like a cervix. You put your dick in and it disappears, then comes out something else. You lose a little of your head every time you stick it in.

Mommy knows Daddy is a pedophile because he loved her when she was small and helpless. She's doing you a favor by making you flat and keeping you childish, training you to be fearful and obedient. You're repressed, an eternal child, scared of punishment, going just far enough to feel the heat of threatened violence.
You'll go further testing a man, because a man needs you, wants to covet you as something which has motivated every single one of his actions, all he does is driven in service to a supreme being: girl-woman. He wants to be submitted to the pure and defenseless, so make sure to never let yourself become human. You must both push yourselves to the limits of freedom and dignity. He through desecration and destruction, you through restraint and purity.

I Miss Fat Lana

"I miss Fat Lana."
What does this mean? It mean you miss not being represented, you miss not seeing yourself in fame. You're a sick individual for missing fat Lana. You’re killing her. She was miserable. You don’t want her to be happy? Her being fat was a betrayal, to herself and society. Her fatness violated her own image. It disrespected the social order.

I dreamt of her, not last night, but the night before. She was playing a concert, and I was sitting with her in the grass before her performance. I asked her what it was like to be so fat and famous like that? What it was like to be the recipient of so much relentless, grotesque criticism? In the dream, she said it was like being unbearably vulnerable. She looked down at the grass, and solemnly said it was the weakest she had ever felt. Being fat is supposed to make you invisible, but it gave her horrifying, visceral body exposure.

I only started listening to Lana Del Rey in 2021 during my pregnancy. Even though I was on Tumblr when she rose to popularity in the early 2010's, I wasn't a fan of pop music, so she wasn't on my listening radar. I was also suspicious of her, and really, almost everything, because I was much more, almost cripplingly, paranoid back then.

Online, when I came across her music or promotional material, I looked at the visuals and aesthetic and thought it was hyper-modern … too fitting of the zeitgeist. It made me skeptical. It signaled to me "OBVIOUS BRAINWASHING MATERIAL," not so much industry plant. Industry plants are talented individuals, and are selected for a reason, because they’re willing and able… That’s nothing to be scared of, that’s something to admire. It’s not the media itself, but what’s embedded within it: subliminals that hypnotize internal will and mute the inner voice. Not just in music, but the visuals, colors, faces, bodies, movement. All of it. It’s never an individual. It’s the system they embody.

At the time, I was also regularly watching Infowars and nailing signs up around my neighborhood, warning others of “evil forces” and the end of the world. Even my petty criminal loser boyfriend, once, and only once, tried to speak some sense into me, which, I, of course, deeply resented and found incredibly sinister and threatening.

Nevertheless, I didn't give Lana Del Rey much concern over the course of those years. I saw girls tweet about being hit and how it felt like a kiss, but I liked The Crystals, so I thought it was a reference to them, which I also found odd, because they were an old band from the early 1960s.

Around the late 2010's, I noticed most of the people who listened to Lana Del Rey had very bad relationships, so I came to believe her music was part of a subliminal arsenal to engineer a reactionary gender war.

I liked the song "Blue Jeans," though.

In 2020, I joined TikTok. By then, I learned to love brainwashing, in the sense that, by being brainwashed, I could decipher more clues about the nature of reality... In order to understand the architecture of punishment, one must commit a crime, as you know.

In any case, by the end of 2020, I’d heard many snippets of her songs on that platform. I was also shown clips from her infamous SNL performance, and instead of just enjoying the 15 seconds of her songs in the background of a video, that performance convinced me to give her albums a real listen.

I cherish that performance.

I think its one of the most genuine pieces of musical art put to video.
What I love about celebrities is when they're human, and you can see the cracks in their highly curated image. The more rigid and performative, the greater the gap between human and symbol. As even, she herself, has confirmed: CRACK is how the light gets in.

This was perfect timing, and as you know, there are no coincidences, because during my pregnancy, I was living in the south of France (near the Spanish border, not the sea), and we had to drive, a lot. So many empty freeways. We were living in hotels. I was puking in underground parking garages, puking in freeway bathrooms, sitting in a car on empty, endless freeways, nothing but fields and pesticide smog in every direction. My relationship with my husband was bad. I was in a very fragile state. That's how the mind-control got in.

It's my baby who got me into Lana Del Rey, really. They wanted to listen to her music in utero, I'm convinced.

And I loved that Lana was fat.

I actually couldn't fucking believe it. I found it to be the most transgressive norm-violating thing — for her to be fat. It still blows my mind that she was fat. How could it be? How was it allowed? Where were her CIA managers? Unless, it was an orchestrated psy-op… Which, in hindsight, seems more and more likely… What if she was just on follicle-stimulating hormone treatments?

But there's something strange about how her fatness was an "event." Something you could "miss." It wasn't an era of her music, nor a certain performance, just her being not-skinny. Human violating symbolic imagery. That was the spectacle.

Peter Thiel and the Allegory of Domination

Peter Thiel’s Gay Agenda¹ isn’t about turning men gay, it’s about brainwashing men into only being interested in themselves — getting them to stare at themselves all day. Docile bodies under his Sauronian gaze; rendered illiterate to language not exclusively embedded in power and domination. It’s predatory emasculation, psychological ownership, sensual slavery. He doesn't even need to physically touch anyone to violate them.

Peter Thiel’s Gay Agenda is about spreading a fascist homoerotic hyper-masculinity without tolerance for ambiguity. As his friend Alex Karp recently proclaimed, “I don't think in win/lose, I think in domination.” This speaks to the logic of Gay for Pay, Gay for Likes, Gay For Power. Hate weakness. Commit rape. Every weakness must be filled by strength; groom a disembodied sexuality and shape attraction, not towards a relational-other, but towards power, symbols, influence, prestige.

In this mono-directional hierarchical ascent, not unlike a phallic erection, the singular acceptable outcome is domination. Implied, never spoken: domination is predicated on your subjugation, and absolute domination leaves no alternative, it denies choice. Competition, or rather, choice, is for losers. If you can still say no, I haven’t won yet.

Peter Thiel’s Gay Agenda is about buck-breaking through digital necropolitical libido-hijacking. Early exposure to hardcore pornography, gooncave deathcamp videogame enslavement, mind-control through social media-memetic containment. Imagine a billion boys estrogenized, sipping lattes, BAPist-pornographied, hormones all out of whack, their lives spent surveilled by various money making apps. All in near total sensory and social deprivation. This is a digital harem. This becomes the “masculine” ideal. This is “buck-breaking” through sensual intrusion and libidinal capture.

Slaves Will Serve

Peter Thiel’s Gay Agenda is about replicating coercive rapist logic, obviously. It’s about sodomy as coercive, circle-jerking agreement. A thousand yes-man, yes-manning one another. Sometimes when I type the obvious, it feels transgressive. It feels wrong to put things so plainly. Nevertheless, it’s obvious. The gay agenda reproduces a gay agenda, that’s the entire point of the “agenda” — to replicate symbolically. It exploits the sensual world for symbolic power, cultivates a psycho-emotional willingness to dehumanize others into “units” in service to enhancing one’s power: asexually replicating, until as many human beings as possible live and carry out your worldview.

Peter Thiel reminds me of Gilles de Rais — a medieval French knight and war hero turned occult rapist; the medieval archetype of elite transgression hidden beneath nobility. They have such unusual similarities.

Gille de Rais hid his homosexuality, where in secret, he could wield it as a weapon. His homosexuality wasn't necessarily a "sexuality" in the sense of pleasure, love and beauty, but a sexuality predicated on domination, control, and access. Only de Rais’s innermost circle knew, only his victims knew, only those he would inflict homosexual pedophilic rape knew. Thiel didn’t want anyone to know he was gay, either. He wanted to portray himself as a visionary figure, perhaps void of sexuality altogether, fashion himself like a chameleon in any way which might garner him the most status and power. Infamously, Peter went so far as to take down the magazine that outed his sexuality (Peter is the only one allowed to breech the terms of consent). We were never meant to know he is gay. If he had never been outed, it would have made sense, gone unquestioned why he never supports the lgbt, and chooses, instead to endorse its polar opposite (horseshoe theory): nuclear tradism. Peter’s Gay Agenda doesn’t celebrate a humanistic, emancipatory homosexuality, which dignifies and protects individuals with human rights and liberty. On the contrary (obviously), he endorses the repressive, technical-patriarchal, dominating systemic version of heterosexuality. Because his goal is not harmony, nor dignity, nor decency. It’s domination. Singularly.

Coincidentally, Gilles de Rais presented as a nobleman and prestigious war-hero, using this image to build trust in villages and carry out his kidnapping and child sacrifice operations. Peter Thiel presents as a scapegoated CEO-visionary, using this image to help operate and validate his perverse political and technological schemes. He uses his brand as “evil contrarian” to immune himself to critique.

“His rape logic is not abstract. It is not just performed in rooms. It is built into code, into the very economic engines running in Silicon Valley and throughout the world.
Palantir, for example, is not just a surveillance tool. It is an architecture for ritual penetration into secrecy. It’s a digital phallus: constantly probing, constantly extracting, dissolving boundaries under the guise of "national security" or "market intelligence." It teaches and indoctrinates that violation is insight, penetration is security, and intrusion is safety. Most digital software transmits a similar logic.

The entire venture capital apparatus is really an extension of this metaphysics. Funding is not economic; it is initiation, a prostitution auction. VC decks are seduction rituals. You don’t receive funding — you are entered, filled with money. You surrender, and in turn, you teach to surrender time, morality, bodily integrity.

Peter doesn’t build platforms; he builds submission architecture designed to violate the individual and turn them into economic property: surveillance subject, gig worker, raped user.

He doesn’t need to code the surveillance himself. He just needs to fund it. The ideology enters the bloodstream through seed rounds and contracts. A startup founder accepts money, and in doing so, absorbs the sodomy logic. His app is no longer a product. It’s a tool of psychic penetration. That’s why they all end up building the same thing: data pipes, control interfaces, surveillance mirrors. They think they’re innovating. Really, they’re just carrying Peter’s seed.”

Gilles de Rais’s victims were young boys, peasants. He lured and bribed their families by promising money. He was into human trafficking. Peter Thiel targets young, ambitious men. He lures them by promising funding. He collects and travels with them while they perform as his troupe of monk-servants, replicating his ideology in every piece of software they code.

De Rais was obsessed with immortality, eternal-youth, and occult magic. He led French troops with Joan of Arc and became a warrior legend. Thiel is infamous for his funding of military technology and his interest in strange, supernatural science. De Rais was a cannibal. Thiel debates whether drinking blood as a habit is recommendable. Gilles was focused on Satanism and mystery cults, Peter is obsessed with the Antichrist and Apocalypse. Both Peter and Gilles are finance aristocracy.

Peter Thiel's Gay Agenda isn't about physical sexuality. It's about invasive digital penetration as ritual sex magic, violation as initiatory practice. Both de Rais and Thiel keep their sexuality secret. Secrecy is part of the erotic charge. Neither de Rais nor Thiel seduce. Instead, they target, select, and collect. Their libido lurks and stalks from the shadows. Power is gained through degradation. Not just sadistic bondage, but in spiritual and psychological destruction and transformation through penetrative ownership.

Thiel takes bodies and makes them his own. De Rais took bodies and made them his own. They both invert the Christian Eucharist principle that says, "This is my body."
De Rais and Thiel assert, "Your body is mine." Through surveillance, prediction, or, in the case of de Rais, religious sacrifice. They use the body to access and dominate inner experience. Using vulnerabilities of ambition, innocence, and corrupting it through sensual abuse and bribery with symbolic rewards. They execute their dominion by orchestrating the transubstantiation of human beings into psychically violated and personally branded property. Through apps, scientific research, social engineering, political investment — Peter and his technecrophile associates intrude, unconsensually, into the private world of the Other to render them into his personal investments. The neotenizing effects of technology add another layer to this digital predation, making the parallels even more sinister: a system that doesn’t just exploit, but arrests maturity, enforcing infantilization as a condition of control. The internet, under regimes of surveillance and biopsychosocial domination, becomes possessed by the spirit of Gilles de Rais: pedophilic, occult, ritualistic — a system that consumes innocence and curiosity to produce a necrotized underclass designed for perpetual subjugation.

This isn't a gay agenda for individual liberation (good), but an extremist agenda for initiation into an economic system (bad). In de Rais, the system is transcendent, spiritual, and violates all Christian moral code. In Thiel's, the system is equally transcendent, equally anti-biology, and violates Enlightenment norms. Thiel's Gay Agenda is a function of a system, not a personal preference. An echoed reversion to heretical medieval Christianity.

De Rais signaled a moment of Christian rupture, Thiel operates in the same vein. A rupture in the capitalistic-military complex — de Rais a feudal-military one. Isn’t it ironic that de Rais was a scapegoated pedophile, while Catholic priests are respected pedophiles? Likewise, Peter and his ilk scapegoat systems designed to protect the weak: the “degenerate left,” wokism, “democracy,” while building their own institution of rapist technecrotic domination. These two figures personify the conclusions of economic systems in which they appeared, and make no mistake —Gilles de Rais would be perfectly at home under Neo-Feudal Monarchy.

Just as De Rais's image was sanitized, with efforts made, here-and-there, to re-integrate his image into the society upon which he preyed, so too, does Thiel operate under a cloak of civility and innocence, a veneer of "Girardian sacrificial envy," whereby any criticism of him becomes an omission of his opponents impotence and envy, and Peter, poor him, somehow remains a perpetual victim.

In this system, violation dominates, and domination validates. Dominance creates meaning by desecrating boundary. In this perverse world, rape becomes merely another strategy of adaptive intelligence.

I say, if Peter Thiel wants to be a scapegoat, we should give him what he wants, and demonize him like we’re putting a criminal necromancer to the stake. Maybe, he might even find it flattering.²

1. I use the term ‘Gay Agenda’ not as an attack on homosexuality, but to describe how homoerotic fascistic aesthetics and structures of intimacy are hijacked in elite technecrotic circles to reproduce domination, not pleasure. I also use this term because right wingers play on sexual-moral panic while building their own architecture of sexual coercion and repression. I am weaponizing this conspiracy terminology against the political group who has benefitted by employing it against others.

2. This text is a symbolic, literary, and psychoanalytic critique. It engages in metaphor, allegory, and mythic comparison to explore the dynamics of power, technology, domination, and submission in contemporary structures. Named individuals are treated as figures within a symbolic order, not as bearers of literal accusations. No part of this work should be read as a statement of fact or claim of criminal behavior. This is a speculative cultural commentary, not journalism or biography. It does not assert truth claims, but explores archetypes, ritual logics, and societal mythologies through the lens of eros, control, and symbolic initiation.

The use of terms like “Gay Agenda,” “rape logic,” or “ritual domination” is intentionally provocative, employed to draw attention to the aesthetics of coercive power — not to condemn any sexual identity or orientation. This piece is written in defense of liberated, mutual, and humane forms of desire, and in opposition to their exploitation by systemic forces. All interpretations are to be understood within the frame of literary and cultural analysis.