To think no woman should be forced to wax male genitalia

[Campervan69]

www.thepostmillennial.com/another-b-c-woman-forced-out-of-business-in-transgender-male-genitalia-waxing-case/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

This is where self id has got Canada to.

A male identifying as a woman is suing 16 mainly immigrant women who work from home as beauticians because they only provide brazilian waxing services for females.

Many others have settled out of court for a quiet life.

AIBU to think that no-one working from home in a vulnerable situation as these women are should be forced to wax the genitals of anyone they don't feel comfortable waxing?

I'm done with "post truth", I long for science and reason. It's like the whole world is gaslighting.

Why is this not reported in Canadian newspapers given that reporting restrictions have now been lifted?

That's a very good question.

I do know, from Canadian feminists, that the entire conflict between trans rights and women's rights is rarely reported there.

I don't know if the government have a stranglehold on the media, and are reluctant to let them alert the public to laws that have been implemented which the public might well object to, if they knew more.

But yes, I can't imagine our newspapers keeping away from a story like that.

How do Gentleman's Only and Women's Only clubs get round these issues?

It seems that women's only clubs have to admit men who identify as women but gentleman's only clubs can choose whether to admit men who identify as women or women who identify as men.

Also, primogeniture does not apply to women who identify as men. So big sister cannot transition to become big brother and inherit a Lordship from little brother.

I would say it seems like biological males get a better deal than biological females, but that never happens, right?

It's batshit crazy. I live in BC the self-identification thing here has just gone nuts. Yesterday I took 2 of my kids for their immunizations I was asked how my children self-identify they are 2 & 5! I was also asked if either of them self identify as indigenous peoples? Again they are 5 and 2 years old. We have to get rid of Trudeau at the next election

He can sue till he’s blue in the face, doesn’t mean he’ll win

It seems the goal is to harass and intimidate immigrant women. So JY's already succeeded in that.

Surely it’s all in the wording? If you write in the blurb that unfortunately you are only trained to offer waxing to people with vulvas I assume you can’t get sued? It’s because the beauticians are saying they offer female waxing. If you are offering this service in a country where self ID is enforceable then this is going to happen. Know the laws in your jurisdiction.

And

This could have been resolved if she specified the types of genitals she was and wasn’t trained to wax.

He's targeting immigrant women for whom English is a second language. Many native English speakers wouldn't realise the need for being so clear, and that they can't just say women or female any more. What chance does one have if English is not their mother tongue?

really, really hope that one day JY carries out his nasty little subterfuge on a beautician who, regardless of their training or qualifications, agrees to wax JY's 'lady balls'

JY did indeed find plenty of therapists willing to do it. JY didn't actually want waxing.

I agree with the not being qualified to wax male genitalia point but I don’t think it should matter even if they were qualified. If a woman is not comfortable handling a penis she shouldn’t have to - and women who are uncomfortable with this should not be precluded from being beauticians.

shootingstar I am not undecided because I believe that there is a fundamental difference between a woman being comfortable handling female genitalia and a woman being comfortable handling male genitalia.

Something this horrible individual's behaviour illustrates is the difficulty of abuser-proofing laws. The right, for instance, to self-represent in court is an important human right, which has been misused by abusive people so that they can harass their victims all over again. It should probably be the case that anyone who is self-employed and sees clients at home should be allowed to refuse any client, for any reason, on the grounds that you should not be obliged to admit a person to your home if they make you uncomfortable. Perhaps the law should state that a home-working service provider should only be liable for prosecution under equality laws if the client who was denied service can prove discrimination (eg the service provider used racist language or something like that.) Because, yes, for such a law to work, it would have to allow for the fact that a person working from their home might refuse a client on the grounds of the client's ethnicity. 'I don't feel comfortable with this person' should, however, be the end of the matter when it is a service provider working from home.
(It's worth remembering that all of us who advocate for sex worker rights support the rights of sex workers to refuse any client for any reason.)

I am very pro trans rights but this isn’t a right. Male genitalia is very different to female genitalia. No getting past that!

How can you be all 'pro trans' if you agree that male genitalia is different to female genitalia? Surely if you are 'pro-trans' you should think that these women are wrong for not waxing his lady balls?

How can you be all 'pro trans' if you agree that male genitalia is different to female genitalia?

Perhaps it's the similar kind of "pro trans" to that guy on twitter who saw tw as women in every case except for relationship purposes. Or women who say they don't want males in their spaces.

All of those positions are utterly and unquestionably transphobic though, if you ask the TRAs.

Nothing but unquestioning devotion to their every utterance is good enough, even when the goalposts are moving so fast they are nothing but a blur.

JAKERS what a racist Yaniv is.

mirandayardley.com/en/jonathan-yaniv-is-a-predator/

@MNHQ why was my comment deleted?

I’m beginning to think that I need to screenshot even bloody comment I make these days.

And I see on another thread that he, yes, HE, can now be named as Jonathan Yaniv.

How can you be all 'pro trans' if you agree that male genitalia is different to female genitalia?

What an unsurprisingly disingenuous comment.

We have several female only salons here, not sure if anyone has tried this but they are female only out of choice. If you offer beauty services to both men and women however you can't then refuse certain treatments like waxing. It all depends on whether they stated they were female only

It all depends on whether they stated they were female only

They did.

and for those of you who think it couldn't happen here

It's not about transphobia - it is about safeguarding and protecting women's rights.

What an unsurprisingly disingenuous comment

How so? If you are 'pro-trans' than JY is as female as anyone if he says so.

I'm not sure if you are deliberately misunderstanding. But posters can be pro-trans rights. But not at the expense of women's sex rights. And not at the expense of safeguarding children.
Trans people have rights - rightly.
But the Equality Act also tells me that, as a woman/female I have rights as well.
And a disingenuous man claiming to be a woman cannot trump my rights.
The GRA has got us all into a right old pickle with the creation of legal falsehoods. And self-id will make the that worse.

Are you anti-trans then sack?

You said this: How can you be all 'pro trans' if you agree that male genitalia is different to female genitalia?

Being for trans rights and believing that a penis suddenly becomes a vulva are very different things. But of course you know this.

Where I have my brows & beard done don't do any male waxing. Not even eye brows. It's their choice & I don't see how identifying makes that any different?

I'm not sure if you are deliberately misunderstanding. But posters can be pro-trans rights. But not at the expense of women's sex rights. And not at the expense of safeguarding children

You can't be pro trans rights, which naturally mean that JY is well within them by taking this case to a human rights tribunal for women who refuse to wax his ballsack; at the same time as saying these women do have the right to say no. You have to decide on what grounds JY isn't 'trans' when by being 'pro-trans' you are simultaneously saying he is just as female as anyone.

It's not me 'deliberately misunderstanding' anything, i know he is a bloke.

Are you anti-trans then sack

I don't believe that you can change sex, and i don't believe penises are female sex organs. If that makes me 'anti-trans', then by all means, call me what you want.

I'm stunned by people who say anyone can be male or female, and that they are 'pro-trans' - whatever that means, and then say 'oh but not this guy'. If you believe anyone can be what they want, then this includes this guy, doesn't it?

People well, most people are not idiots sack

They can support a trans persons right to live as their desired sex, to use preferred pronouns, to dress as their preferred sex and to not be discriminated against or attacked because of this.

That does not mean they don’t understand basic biology and believe that a penis is a vulva if it’s on a trans woman.

I personally don’t care if this person is ‘genuine’ trans or just jumping on the bandwagon, makes no difference whatsoever to the fact they had a penis and the woman did not provide services for penis’s and therefore had every right to refuse.

What about female doctors? Should they be allowed to refuse to examine a man's testes.

I honestly can’t believe you think that’s even remotely comparable starzig.