Why is the source rejected? I think it's a great article. It would make sense that it's all an act, honestly. It is rather ridiculous.
Also, why do you defend him so much? Is it because you have the hots for him? (Honey, he ain't that good looking.) His views are thoroughly disgusting. He's a racist, sexist pig as well as a self-hating gay homophobe and transphobe.
Milo Yiannopoulos - RationalWiki
Why did the University of Minnesota Host a Neo-Nazi Rally?
I've rejected that article due to it being largely speculative. Though extremely well written, it's very foundation is more than a bit shaky.
I am neither going to defend Milo to you or anyone else.
I don't care what he says. He has a right to say what the thinks and a right to be heard... just like you... just like me. (It's a really very basic concept.)
I don't think I even made it to the end of the first paragraph of the so-called "rational' wiki page. It struck me as ever so slightly biased - just a teeny bit.
Your 2nd source is seriously unhinged. A Tumblr blogger? Serously? Rejected. My guess is anyone the special snowflake doesn't like is a likely Neo-Nazi. The things that pass as evidence these days.
Look, I've listened to several of his talks. He is really quite hilarious. I have never heard him utter a single racist comment though he does seem to have issues with the BlackLiveMatter folks. I have never heard him say anything that was particularly sexist though he has been pretty frank about some third wave feminist leaders. I've never seen him even slightly resemble a cute little pig. A self-hating gay homophobe? Seriously? He seems rather loud and proud to me. And no, I have not heard him even mention trans issues.
My basic working idea is, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" -
Evelyn Beatrice Hall
It would appear the idea has fallen out of favor in recent years.... and what a great pity that is.