Fascinating tweets about JY’s waxing case. Read here. (cont. thread 2)

[GirlDownUnder]

Thread 1 here
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3632380-Fascinating-tweets-about-JY-s-waxing-case-Read-here-Thread-title-edited-by-MNHQ

This is a continuation of all that is JY and their waxing cases bought against minority women in Canada.

We are a fair way in, and still are no closer to knowing what the final judgment will be, but we have lots of info. and are finally seeing this case, and all the attending issues with self ID, in the public eye and main stream press.

Try this link:
www.thepostmillennial.com/exclusive-15-year-old-alleged-victim-of-jessica-yaniv-speaks-out/?fbclid=IwAR3JhL_GoWA9hkOb38wzOf9xvNbu8RZyoROLagyL8feUUheyrghLC4pyQ9Y

One wheel on his wagon, and he's still rolling along.

And now I also have an ear worm - worth it!

Here's JY stating that they are a TG woman, but that they also have a uterus and a gynecologist:

t.co/9NxRvKLsHF

And here stating that they can get pregnant:

twitter.com/cosminDZS/status/1153792660752089090?s=09

Surely they should be describing themselves as intersex not trans right?

Surely they should be describing themselves as intersex not trans right?

I've thought this for a while Boom but I guess if self ID is a thing then JY is whatever JY says they are at any given time, and only bigots question.

The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one.

I used to think the farmers were a bit mean with the troon thing, but they seriously have a point.

Thanks for that link, GodDammitAmy 👍

He's a complete loony. Actually not in touch with reality.

It's actually kind of sad, I know he's a predator but it should not be the case that the mental health system is enabling this and making it worse.

I've just watched all of the 27 minutes InfoWars piece linked by Boom

Just wow.

• JY believes transage and if a person wants to join for eg a swim event for 12 year olds, they can join if they believe / ID themselves to be 12.
• Also if a girl is changing, etc. then she should expect to see naked transwomen pre surgery. It's not the 90s you know.
• JY also stated they have an expert witness joining the case on the 26th but I couldn't make out what the expert was going to testify - anyone else pick that up?

As for getting pregnant because JY has a uterus but can't say how they'd get pregnant because complicated.

Is JY going for the insanity plea at this point?

yes JYs grip on reality is clearly long gone. They actually decided to try and change from being trans to being intersex on the fly, while under oath. Bonkers. The thing is though that this level of MH delusion is the actual logical end point of self ID.

I don't think Yaniv has done any research on 'intersex'. It does not involve having both sets of external genitalia. I'm not surprised Yaniv is trying to avoid being specific- because it's all lies.

Quite why the tribunal doesn't insist on verifiable proof on this issue, I am baffled. It's absolutely central to the case.

BoF - Quite why the tribunal doesn't insist on verifiable proof on this issue, I am baffled. It's absolutely central to the case.

From Elsie's thread yesterday the lawyer for the women did push this question but the Member stopped the exam line of questioning.

So, my guess is the Member is either not happy with this line of questioning as it’s intrusive (or something) or she already knows which way she’s going so the confirmation is unnecessary.

And yep, at this point I think JY is just throwing words around as said above in another interview JY started explicitly that they have a uterus and can get pregnant but as to how 'it's complicated'

Did anyone catch the bit,where when discussing being denied a facial, JY response was that they don’t have a penis on their head? Almost word for word what one of the women facing the tribunal said.

So. Much. Appropriation.

If JY lost would costs be owing to the defendants, does anyone know?

If JY lost would costs be owing to the defendants, does anyone know?

No, JY would owe nothing, not even the cost of the lawyer a respondent (the waxers) would have to engage.

Luckily for some of the respondents in the JY cases, the lawyer is acting pro bono hence some crowd funding has been set up to help mitigate (potential or other) losses by the respondents.

The fact that BCHRT are free to bring cases to, don't seem to have an issue with multiple litigations from one complainant - JY - (who incidentally is still filing new claims while these cases are being heard), and only award costs against the respondent if they loose, means it's effectively free for JY.

This is my understanding from all the reading I've done so if anyone has more info or amendments , all good

So. Much. Appropriation. JY all over - no original thought.

They seem to me to be very hungry for (any) attention, to like or seek humiliation, and I'm not really sure they fully engage in human interactions.

I thought there might be a lull between now and the 26th when the next case is due, but they are almost ramping up with click bate tweets, interviews, etc. I wish we had a psychologist who could break this down.

If JY lost would costs be owing to the defendants, does anyone know?

JY was ordered to pay costs in a previous case.

www.bchrt.bc.ca/shareddocs/decisions/2019/may/106_JY_v_Various_Waxing_Salons_2019_BCHRT_106.pdf

Thanks for the link OldCrone

Those costs (never paid I believe) were only awarded because JY filed, withdrew, and re-filed the complaint several times, so in answer to would costs be owing to the defendants, costs weren't due to loosing a case, as the case was never bought.

See page 24, part [84] and [87] copied below:

[84] I have found that JY’s pattern of filing a large number of complaints and then withdrawing those where the respondent mounts a defence is improper. In all of the circumstances, I find that a nominal costs award is appropriate to convey this Tribunal’s disapproval of JY’s conduct. I take into account that the issue that JY is pursuing is an important one, that her motivations are complex, that I have made no findings of fact, and that she is self‐ represented. I order her to pay Laser Cut the sum of $150.

[87] JY’s application for costs against Laser Cut is dismissed.

Anyone else think the likely outcome is JY loses on ‘public’ v ‘private’ service grounds?

That would enable everyone to continue virtue-signalling, twaw, of course JY is literally a woman etc, but would stop short of forcing women to touch strange wangs, by defining their businesses as ‘private’ services and allowing them to choose their clients on whatever grounds they like.

Yesterday I would have agreed with you. But the recent articles might make a difference, the Member might feel less constrained.

You may be right Pumpkin. I thought the same thing.

What worries me about that, is that in "public services" - eg the prison system, would that mean that women can be forced to search male prisoners, if they say they identify as women?

Would it mean that women having smear tests, or women prisoners being searched, would not be allowed to object to a transwoman doing it?

Incidentally, Vancouver pride have banned Vancouver library from participating because it hosted Meghan Murphy

www.citynews1130.com/2019/07/23/vancouver-public-library-cant-participate-pride-parade/

This, from a news director

mobile.twitter.com/char_des/status/1153867989793398795

What worries me about that, is that in "public services" - eg the prison system, would that mean that women can be forced to search male prisoners, if they say they identify as women?

There is all ready a HR complaint filed with the BCHRT about just that. I think I linked to it earlier in this thread. It doesn't have a hearing date set yet but not one I'm watching to see the outcome.

Here's the link about the prisoner who filed a HR complaint because a female prison officer refused to conduct their search.

www.gendertrending.com/2019/04/27/transwoman-in-b-c-womens-prison-files-complaint-over-requirement-that-he-demonstrates-expression-consistent-with-stated-belief-that-he-is-transgender/

Those costs (never paid I believe) were only awarded because JY filed, withdrew, and re-filed the complaint several times, so in answer to would costs be owing to the defendants, costs weren't due to loosing a case, as the case was never bought.

[88] Laser Cut’s application for costs against JY is granted. JY must pay Laser Cut $150 within 60 days of this decision.

That document is dated 30 May, so JY still has a few more days to pay. I don't know if the other respondents will be eligible to apply for costs if JY loses the other cases.