Fascinating tweets about JY’s waxing case. Read here. (Thread title edited by MNHQ)

[Whackitupto200]

JY’s parent sounds like an absolute loon. It would explain a lot.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1147905523347365888.html

Just checking back in as this thread has dropped off my active list.

Lang I don't think I'd fully grasped that until now - that you can refuse service for any reason as long as it's not discriminating against a protected characteristic. Is this what the Christian bakers/ gay cake thing was about? (Sorry to say I did not keep up with the ins and outs of that). It must be very hard to prove someone's reasons for doing/not doing something if they insist the reasons are not to do with protected characteristics? How many people post 'is this a red flag' on here; most of those might seem minor on their own but we know the potential danger they could lead to? (Bit of a tangent, sorry...)

Why isnt thus an open and shut case? Religion is a protected characteristic. It's against her religion to touch a penis that isnt her husband's. Done.

If ever there was a case where all the targeted people need to come together to put up a united defence this is it.

Yes. IIRC Cosby only eventually got convicted because of corroborating testimony from more than one of the women he abused. If there are a number of people who have the same experience (including similar details) the weight of evidence changes the equation in 'beyond all reasonable doubt'. When it went to court previously and only one woman was allowed to speak, they didn't convict.

This seems to be a clear case of a vexatious litigant - SURELY in this sort of case there should be a way of the abused women mounting a class action against the state (and JY?) for allowing continued abuse via the courts. JY doesn't even listen to the Member who is constantly telling JY not to do things and JY never listens and just does it again. Surely by now JY should be in contempt of court.

The courts are just allowing this horrible predator to use them to continue to abuse.

Why isnt thus an open and shut case?

Because a legal standard which states a woman has no right to refuse to see or touch a naked male body is very beneficial to a certain large powerful section of society.

It's that simple.

Why isnt thus an open and shut case? Religion is a protected characteristic. It's against her religion to touch a penis that isnt her husband's. Done.

It should be even easier than that. I don't want to touch a penis that isn't my husband's. Or indeed I don't want to touch that particular penis. I don't want to do it full stop!

I can't think of any other way to phrase this then pondering that there seem to me a number of similarities between JY and comparable prominent figures:

assertion of developmental disorders;
assertion of cognitive disorders;
mobility issues;
assorted *philias;
lack of empathy for vulnerable groups and desire to trump others in oppression stakes;
belief that self is a key figure with celebrity rather than notoriety;
ostensible libertarian views;
IT involvement.

However, maybe it's the lack of numbers of people who are more akin to Stephen Whittle - and this would change with ROGD if those transitions are taken to completion in a young cohort - but some of the above list don't seem to be as widespread.+

+I can write English when I can use pronouns or express my thoughts without multiple edits to them.

The member who allowed this to go on should be ashamed. This should have been shut down with the first racist thing out of JY's mouth.

At one point she was going to agree to have SG look at photos and try to decide who is trans

It wasn't until JY brought the member into the scenario that she stopped it, seems like she doesn't like having her intimate business talked about.

Even if Canadian media is scared to report this, it seems like a perfect DM article

Didn’t matter if the person who comes though the door looks like miss world - if they want their undercarriage waxes there are no secrets.

I suspect that this is not an "open & shut case" because JY stands by his assertion that he is a woman. Even though he:

• still has male primary & secondary sexual characteristics
• has a public (and internet) presence under a male name
• doubtful that he has legal gender reassignment status

This is where self-ID gets us. Or more accurately, the assumption that self-ID will become law.

I'm hoping that the Human Rights Tribunal is going to give him enough rope ...

SO SICK OF THIS SHIT.

It's ludicrous this is in the courts. If it was JY being accused, ideal, but, this?

Absolute madness.

I would like to think that the women involved are part of networks in their respective (or common) communities and could get around reporting restrictions by "aunties" having tea and the like. However, I'm betting it's more the case that they're silent because they feel this is shameful and the last thing they want is anybody to know or be talking about it.

Does anybody know the name of the lawyer or legal firm representing? Was it mentioned? I think it would be nice to send postcards (not anything in an envelope because then it's easy to screen for hate mail) of support to be passed on to SG and the two other women appearing at the tribunal.

Just a bit of background to the human rights tribunals, harvested from the farm. Basically it's a case of presumption of guilt and the onus is on the defendant to prove they are innocent (of discrimination).

@FannyCann Bloody hell! I'm dumbfounded

ahumanfemale, it is the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.

www.jccf.ca/

Lawyer is Jay Cameron (male).

twitter.com/juriscameron?lang=en

That's a great idea ahumanfemale I really feel for those women and I'm sure an array of cards on the window sill or wherever would be very cheering for them. I shall send one shortly.

dontdoxmeneither assuming the information is correct it's certainly not justice as we know it or expect it to be delivered.

Surely the law we all want is a legal standard which states a woman has the right to refuse to see or touch a naked body of any gender.

Although that still creates a problem with changing rooms, unless we demand non communal changing rooms...

Has anyone got an address for postcards?

This is appalling.

Popchyk that's brilliant - thanks!! I reckon those women need some love bombing!

sorry - x-posted. Thanks Popchyk

I’m interested in the protected characteristic refusals in the UK. How are single sex swimming nights, or men’s clubs, legal? Isn’t sex a protected characteristic?

Also spas often refuse pregnant women, don’t they?

The third case will be this: "In addition, on July 17, 2019, the Justice Centre will represent Marcia Carnauba, another aesthetician who declined JY’s request to perform waxing services because Carnauba does not have the requisite training, tools or comfort level to perform waxing services on male genitalia."

In this country, we will no doubt see far-right men self-identifying as women in order to stop Muslim women from attending women-only swimming sessions.

A good way to bully women into withdrawing from public life.

The government of course cannot foresee any of this.

Surprised that Tommy Robinson isn't identifying as female right now. Give it time.

Interesting that the press in the UK constantly refer to TR with his real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. Shouldn't they be respecting his self-defined current identity and not deadnaming him?

Don't really get why some identities are sacrosanct and some are not. Particularly when certain individuals use both male and female identities, whichever is the best for the scam that they are currently working.

Which brings us back to JY.

I've been looking at the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms page and Wiki. There is a page you can donate to the centre. However, it's for the JCCF and not this case. I would be happy to support them in this case, especially as there are likely considerable travel and accommodation costs, but looking at their "pro-life" work (inverted commas because that tends to mean pro-unborn-life-and-screw-the-already-born to me at any rate) I can't donate to the entire centre.

The address on the page is in Calgary where they're based and it appears that the address is to a church building, according to Google maps. Is anybody on Twitter who can contact Jay Cameron (JurisCameron on Twitter - See popchyk's link above) to ask if that's where to send them? I reckon if they're sent there they'll forward them on, but maybe there's a British Colombia address they could be sent to.