“Boob jobs” for teenagers, really?
Around 2 a.m. ET today, Jill Filipovich thought she had a clever tweet in mind.
Maybe you’re unfamiliar with her, but many people lead productive lives without knowing her. She’s recognized for her commitment to a certain ideology around gender, having penned various op-eds for major publications like The New York Times and CNN. With her background in journalism and gender studies from NYU, it’s clear she’s well-educated.
On top of that, she identifies as a “yogi.” I mean, it’s not uncommon for folks who are really into that scene to be a bit… eccentric, right?
One of her more notorious pieces that many on the left adored was a 2013 article in The Guardian. In it, she queried, “Why should women change their names when they marry? Men should adopt new names too.”
I’ve heard that debate before. At a dinner once, I remember a Meta executive saying that she and her husband chose to keep their last names to avoid supporting traditional gender norms.
When I remarked, “So, you’re carrying your father’s name?” it was like I’d dropped a bomb. No one knew how to respond.
If there’s ever been a phrase to capture the contradictions of the leftist viewpoint, it’s definitely Filipovich’s.
I was surprised—despite her lengthy article, one critical word was entirely absent.
Then there’s this curious comment she made about last names. She suggested that if our last names truly belong to fathers, then no one really owns their last names at all.
This logic—well, it’s a real stretch. It’s almost as if she’s lost the plot entirely. If naming conventions trace back to the very beginning of time, then I guess we’d have to consider the divine in a more complicated way.
And, of course, she’s always convinced she’s a brilliant thinker. So, at 2:22 a.m., she tweeted this gem: “If we should ban gender reassignment surgery for minors, we ought to ban all cosmetic surgery for minors.” She goes on to say that a 15-year-old shouldn’t be allowed a nose job, and a 16-year-old should not get breast surgery. Anticipating some exceptions for necessary medical procedures, as if that justifies her point.
Let’s momentarily ignore the implications of her casual comments about minors. Her essence appears to be: If we can’t allow 16-year-olds to undergo surgeries that alter their body completely, why should they be allowed to enhance their bodies in any way?
Oh, come on, Jill! Your argument has turned on itself so much that I’m not even sure you realize it! I doubt you’ll see the cracks in it.
Of course, some sober-minded observers on the political right noticed her tweet and eagerly commented as well.
In response, Charles Cook from National Review offered a pretty humorous take on the situation.
He pointed out that conservatives don’t actually support the idea that banning abortion should compel people to take responsibility as fathers. Unlike, say, certain ideologies that push societal roles more rigidly.
Despite her glaring misunderstandings, I have a hunch that when Filipovich wakes up, sees her name trending, and reads through the backlash, she might have an inkling of what she’s stirred up.
It’s obvious that both rhinoplasty and castration qualify as surgeries, but they’re hardly in the same realm.
Anyway, Jill, I suppose we can find some middle ground here.
As for other issues, there’s a lot to unpack. Reports about doctors allegedly pressuring a patient towards suicide are alarming. Seriously, in this climate, medical professionals might find themselves facing severe consequences.
And on another note, it seems that after her friend’s death, one influencer realized the harsh truth of self-perception and reality.
Plus, it’s intriguing how some in the legal field are now collaborating with fashion brands to draw attention to societal issues. It almost seems like there’s now a trend in profiting off of society’s struggles.
