It’s okay to have a team of doctors carve someone out a pseudo-vagina, having removed their penis and testicles, but not okay to increase the volume or firmness of a woman’s breasts. Why? The former is apparently about “being your true self” and the latter is about “sexism against women and damaging expectations about their appearances.”

It is more than a little strange that surgery keeping a patient mostly the way they are (e.g. a breast enhancement or tummy tuck) is vilified, yet procedures that drastically and irrevocably alter someone’s genitalia, hormones, and other bodily functions is apt to be called bravery.

Most analogously with the issue of surgical “modification” (more like destruction) to “change” someone’s sex, so-called designer vaginas, where mostly straight women change the external appearance of their genitalia, have been attacked for being a patriarchal policing of women’s bodies. Despite challenging women to accept the current state of their vaginas as normal, I would imagine that none of these critics would urge those considering “sex change” surgery to accept their current bodies as normal.

The supreme irony is that the status quo now glorifies giving a man a “vagina” and “breasts” where he did not have them before but balks at a woman making what she sees as improvements to her existing genitalia or breasts. And what about women with children or those above 40, who are only seeking to recapture their past selves when they head to the operating table?

Conventional plastic surgery is based on something we already know

“Victim of the patriarchy” Ivanka Trump. Most women would prefer to have her post-plastic surgery body over her original one and most men would definitely favor the “augmented” Ivanka, too.

There is no doubt that most straight men are hardwired to appreciate large, firm and unwrinkled breasts and round, gravity-defying buttocks. And just as men desire for themselves the good musculature that most women find attractive in them, women would rather have the youthful qualities for their breasts and buttocks that men prefer. These complementary aspects of heterosexual bodily preferences are beyond contestation.

By contrast, on what basis can we justify sex change surgery? Psychologists may point to particular causal factors that explain someone’s continual dissociation from the gender they were born into (conveniently forgetting that almost every “sex change” candidate has no underlying chromosomal abnormalities).

Neuroscientists may take a different path and claim that a certain man or woman’s brain is either feminized or masculinised respectively (similar to how autism might be considered an example of a hyper-masculine mind).


Transgender people without “sex change” surgery should be miserable, but women with small breasts aren’t allowed to be?

So Bruce Jenner had a right to be devastated about his body before his “sex change” surgery but a woman who wants to have a fuller bust or ass just has to accept their present body?

I do not believe plastic surgery should be outlawed, but neither do I encourage it as a fix for everything. Flaws appear on human bodies almost every day and plastic surgery is a slippery slope that can easily spiral out of control. Moreover, Father Time will be ruthless with all of us in the end.

What I find especially condescending, though, is how SJWs believe they can tell a young woman with a non-existent or plain droopy butt that she should not be upset as they simultaneously exhort generally confused and isolated “women in men’s bodies” to take that final step and harvest their male genitalia with the medical equivalent of a hacksaw.

Cultural conditioning such as this has now flowed into the corporate world. Apple has been meticulous in banning the sale of “sexist” children’s apps about plastic surgery, ones it sold until being accosted by the SJW brigades. The emphasis is on politically-designing or regulating games aimed at children because, somehow, plastic surgery is super-sexist.

Yet in our society, before children have even entered puberty properly, they are being taught about people “changing” their sex without any fundamental explanation as to why it is permitted to happen.

You must challenge the SJW narrative and bring up the hypocrisy

Should she have been happy with her former self? Maybe. But this change is far more justifiable than “changing” your sex without your chromosomes being altered.

Details and specificity are anathema to SJW narratives. They focus on feel-good rationales of “being yourself”, “embracing tolerance,” and “ending the stigma.” A ten-year-old boy can’t sign a cell phone contract most of the time but he can, say the do-gooders, make an informed decision to craft himself a new vagina before he even knows his basic sexuality.

Like multiple electrical switches, SJWs seek to cut the flow of some ideas as they allow others, the ones they endorse, to circulate freely. Attacking radical leftist positions is an option you can consider, but better yet is the approach of showing through juxtaposition how very narrow their conception of tolerance and freedom of action is.

If SJWs truly believe in people being themselves, they should start applauding breast enhancement as much as they relish testicles falling off an operating table.

Read More: Progressives Use Ray Rice Scandal To Paint All Male Interests As Inherently Misogynistic