I’m not against these kinds of forums being scrutinized, (and I do think there is some bad behaviour), but it’s rarely ever done well and I think it’s irresponsible to pick and choose certain comments to create a narrative that was clearly already pre-decided. People had long discussions here about Jess being pregnant in the broader context of her ’image’, aka the intimate personality that she sells to all of us. We have, through HER choice, born witness to her life and education and career trajectory. Motherhood was another element of that. But the article makes it seem as though it’s just malevolent and disturbed that anyone would then start discussing her and motherhood. What, are we all supposed to weep and start knitting onesies? I also think the cancer treatments reference was out of line, I can’t remember anyone alluding to something of the sort— but maybe if you put in context that Jess is rich, grown, and still living with her mom so as not to pay rent, that might explain why others were referencing her mother. But literally the only comments I remember around that topic were ones justifying Jess’ pregnancy because her mom was sick.
Jess and others have actively and purposefully sold an image to her viewers and willingly publicized her private life... viewers therefore invest in this kind of brand and continually respond to it. Why would it only ever be positive responses? That makes no sense. If you literally film yourself in bed and running baths and walking around your mom’s house in PJs and you detail your life plans to your audience— then that boundary has already been blurred if not taken away. What’s more, you invite an audience to consume you as media... and audiences always have critical responses.