Yep, that sure looks like a plasma formation to me. It can't be a "blowoff" from a star, since that would either be globular, or ring shaped, but not hyperbolic. Mainstream cosmologists have posited the idea of polar radiation from black holes, but there is no similar theory to explain polar ejecta that I know of.
On the other hand, this seems to exactly match the prediction of EU theory that stars are formed by a z-pinch in an interstellar plasma filament. Notice also, there is no sign of the accompanying planetary nebula that standard cosmologists would have expected to be present prior to star formation. Of course, they have recently admitted that the planetary nebula hypothesis is unworkable, but they don't have any replacement theory for it yet. Well, here is the evidence for one staring them in the face!
BTW, this is not the only hourglass nebula we have observed. There is also planetary nebula M2-9 (Minkowski's butterfly), for example:
They have no rational gravitation explanation for Herbig Haro objects either. . . except their lawn watering whirligig sprayer analogy which makes no sense at all over multiple light years.
It is hard, no, impossible, for orthodox cosmologists to look at these nebulae and come up with a gravitational explanation