Leftist writer Jill Filipovic says 'Unborn child' is an 'Orwellian' phrase meant 'to short-circuit our ability to think and speak about human existence and life with necessary complexity'



Writer and author Jill Filipovic posted a tweet on Tuesday in which she described "Unborn child" as an "Orwellian" phrase meant to hinder people's ability to consider "human existence and life with necessary complexity."

"'Unborn child' is another one of these Orwellian terms designed to short-circuit our ability to think and speak about human existence and life with necessary complexity; the point is to use language as a vehicle for replacing reality with right-wing orthodoxy," Filipovic tweeted amid a lengthy thread.

\u201c"Unborn child" is another one of these Orwellian terms designed to short-circuit our ability to think and speak about human existence and life with necessary complexity; the point is to use language as a vehicle for replacing reality with right-wing orthodoxy.\u201d
— Jill Filipovic (@Jill Filipovic) 1657661189

One person responded to Filipovic's post by tweeting a gif of a baby and sarcastically declaring, "Behold! A advanced-age embryo."

Filipovic replied, "That's a baby Jerid."

\u201c@JeridEvan That\u2019s a baby Jerid\u201d
— Jill Filipovic (@Jill Filipovic) 1657661189

"Here's the thing: 'Pro-life' folks say an 'unborn child' exists from the moment of conception. A fertilized egg is a child. An ectopic pregnancy is a child. But literally no one actually believes this -- including pro-lifers," Filipovic tweeted.

"Half of fertilized eggs do not implant, never form a pregnancy, and are flushed out of the body, but the pro-life movement has done nothing to save these lives. If you truly believe that a fertilized egg is a child, you're probably going to care even a little bit about that," she tweeted. "Do people believe that a fertilized egg is a human life? Yes. But that's different than 'a fertilized egg is the legal and moral equivalent of a child.' If anyone believed a fertilized egg was a child, they'd be spending time and money saving the majority of those eggs that die," she added.

Filipovic has previously claimed that men who have stay-at-home wives are more sexist compared to men whose wives work a job.

"More mothers at home makes for worse, more sexist men who see women as mommies and helpmeets. Men with stay-at-home wives are more sexist than men with working wives; they don’t assess women’s workplace contributions [fairly]; and they are less likely to hire and promote women," she tweeted earlier this year.

\u201cMore mothers at home makes for worse, more sexist men who see women as mommies and helpmeets. Men with stay-at-home wives are more sexist than men with working wives; they don\u2019t assess women\u2019s workplace contributions fairy; and they are less likely to hire and promote women.\u201d
— Jill Filipovic (@Jill Filipovic) 1649767099
YOU ASKED FOR IT: Evidence Teachers Are Indoctrinating Kids | Guest: Dave Rubin | Ep 612

YOU ASKED FOR IT: Evidence Teachers Are Indoctrinating Kids | Guest: Dave Rubin | Ep 612

People push back after Jill Filipovic claims that 'Men with stay-at-home wives are more sexist than men with working wives'



Jill Filipovic asserted in a tweet on Tuesday that men who have stay-at-home wives are more sexist compared to husbands whose wives work a job.

"More mothers at home makes for worse, more sexist men who see women as mommies and helpmeets. Men with stay-at-home wives are more sexist than men with working wives; they don’t assess women’s workplace contributions fairy; and they are less likely to hire and promote women," tweeted Filipovic, who says in her Twitter biography that she is a writer, lawyer, and author.

Many women find fulfillment by choosing to be a stay-at-home mom. Unsurprisingly, Filipovic's comments lead to pushback from people on Twitter.

Kimberly Ross tweeted, "…And here I was, excited to leave FT employment outside the home to become a SAHM (by choice!) who also writes on the side. It was and continues to be a great decision for me and my family. I absolutely do not regret it."

\u2026And here I was, excited to leave FT employment outside the home to become a SAHM (by choice!) who also writes on the side. It was and continues to be a great decision for me and my family. I absolutely do not regret it.https://twitter.com/jillfilipovic/status/1513862962297163781\u00a0\u2026
— Kimberly Ross \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6 (@Kimberly Ross \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6) 1649779900

"I see my wife as a mother (among other things.) I think that job is a thousand times more difficult and more important than writing a substack. But apparently that makes me sexist," National Review senior writer David Harsanyi tweeted.

"My husband is a VP at a bank and hires and promotes women all the time. I have been a SAHM for 31 years and none of what you say is true," another person tweeted.

"My husband is far from sexist and I am joyed with this life the Lord has given me. Women are *nothing more* than an easy to replace number in the working world. At home, they are someone's world. They are irreplaceable. More moms at home creates a healthier & stronger society," someone else tweeted.

"She got all wrong. It's a JOY to be a homemaker & serve my husband, but again these people don't know the Lord. God created women to be a helpmate and it says in Titus 2 that women are the keeper of the home. Culture does not rewrite the bible. And my husband is far from sexist," another individual tweeted.

Filipovic also said that moms who have jobs fare better emotionally and psychologically than women who opt to stay at home.

"Stay-at-home mothers are psychologically and emotionally worse off than working mothers by just about every measure, from depression to anxiety to anger; they are much more likely than working mothers to say that they are struggling, and less likely to say that they are thriving," she tweeted.

Stay-at-home mothers are psychologically and emotionally worse off than working mothers by just about every measure, from depression to anxiety to anger; they are much more likely than working mothers to say that they are struggling, and less likely to say that they are thriving.
— Jill Filipovic (@Jill Filipovic) 1649768072

Lack Of Money Isn’t The Reason Our Culture Hates Children

It is an existential crisis for a nation if its women do not want to have children, or if they do not want to raise any children they do have. Child subsidies can't solve selfishness.

Feminist author suggests stay-at-home moms are unambitious and set a bad example for kids



Feminist author Jill Filipovic suggested on Twitter this week that stay-at-home moms set a bad example for their children because their decision "not to work" sends the message that they are not ambitious.

After sparking fury with her comments, she followed up with an apology for her "tone."

What are the details?

The Daily Wire reported that "Filipovic was reacting to a post from Slate concerning a man who was upset that his wife wanted to be a stay-at-home mother," and that "Slate's advice was to be more understanding with his wife."

"This is good advice, but man I feel for this letter-writer, because it's exactly how I would feel if my spouse decided they wanted to be a stay-at-home parent," Filipovic wrote in the launch of her lengthy thread. "Also... is it really ONLY her decision whether to quit working when she's then going to be entirely dependent on him?"

"I realize this is like the third rail of the Mommy Wars, but yeah, lots of super-ambitious people marry other super-ambitious people because they're attracted to ambition," she continued. "I would have a really, really hard time being married to a spouse who chose not to work."

Filipovic did not stop there, adding, "And now I am really going to get myself yelled at, but I also think the issue of example-setting for a kid is a totally fair one. What example are you setting when dad works for pay and mom does the care work at home? Lots of reasons not to want to set that example for a child."

And now I am really going to get myself yelled at, but I also think the issue of example-setting for a kid is a tot… https://t.co/pyBt7FadCW
— Jill Filipovic (@Jill Filipovic)1615393797.0

That comment was met with fierce backlash. A wave of stay-at-home mothers pushed back against Filipovic's assertions, along with people who expressed how grateful they were to be raised by stay-at-home moms. Husbands had choice words for the feminist, too.

Attorney Matthew Kolken told Filipovic, "My late wife was a stay at home mom. She lived for and ultimately died loving our children. It was her full time job. I can write so much more on this subject, but suffice it to say that belittling her decision to prioritize our children over 'work' f***ing pisses me off."

One person called Filipov's comments "unnecessarily condescending and dismissive," and another argued, "I mean, if she genuinely wants to stay at home and raise her kid, I guess she's setting the example that feminism should be about choice and that caregiving takes intelligence, hard work, and yes, ambition?"

On Thursday, Filipov tweeted, "Just want to take a sec to very sincerely apologize for the tone of this thread, which came across as far more flippant and judgmental than I intended. I maintain that it's good and important to defend all the good that comes from mothers working. But my phrasing was beyond bad."

She explained herself further before adding, "I could have approached this with more nuance and generosity, and for failing to do that, I am sorry."