Video: Exposing Jessica Yaniv

[ScaryBunnyPainting]

My friend just sent me this YouTube video about JY. It has already reached over 400,000 people!

I am copying most of what I just said on another thread about Blair’s video and reaction.

I don’t find this video “refreshing”. Why is it talking Blair to call Yaniv a predator for people to notice when numerous women have tried to raise concerns about Yaniv for ages (and have been harassed and deplatformed for it).

Blair also claims Yaniv is not really “trans” because they have “not really transitioned” and they have not “medically transitioned”. Blair specifically states “I don’t believe this is a trans woman, I believe this is a predator posing as a trans woman”

That is the problem. Under self-ID, under provincial law Yaniv has indeed transitioned and is protected for their “gender identity”. Yaniv is considered a trans woman under the law and under trans ideology.

Blair is doing exactly the same as many TRAs so when confronted with a Yaniv, or a Karen White, or a story of a trans woman assaulting a child in a bathroom: “oh, well THAT person isn’t really trans”. We can even call them “he” (Blair argues and does) because now “they aren’t really trans.”

How are we, women and children, supposed to sort this out if even TRAs can’t seem to figure it out until after events have happened (see how many supported Yaniv until recently).

Women have said over and over this is what will happen, and they were verbally abused, deplatformed, and threatened for it. Now suddenly it is, “oh, that person we one defended by brigading your Twitter because you misgendered them and raised concerns they were using being trans to prey on others, oh, they were never really trans! You were never right of course, because we will never admit your concerns are legitimate”.

You were never right of course, because we will never admit your concerns are legitimate”.

Nutshell.

The argument that one person is considerably more trans than the next is nonsense. Because trans is an expression of your personality, your masculinity or your femininity. Which is subjective. And, in these particular cases, almost always comes down to passing, and/or not being an out and out fucker.

The idea that we are supposed to sort out the risk of men based on what they look like is, clearly, risible.

Blair is doing exactly the same as many TRAs so when confronted with a Yaniv, or a Karen White, or a story of a trans woman assaulting a child in a bathroom: “oh, well THAT person isn’t really trans

And yet we are supposed to think that someone like Muscato who puts on a dress and has laydee feels is really trans and we are committing literal violence if we call him "he". Can't have it both ways, if all it takes to be trans is saying you are then they can own Jonathan Yaniv as one of their own.

I’ve not clicked on the link as it sounds very tedious but wondering who that person is and why she appears to be doing a Lady Godiva impression whilst simultaneously making a serious argument in this video. WTF is that about or is it just a very unfortunate still? This case encapsulates so much about what’s wrong with self ID and trying to argue that Yaniv isn’t ‘proper trans’ is spectacularly missing the point.

It's the TRA equivalent of NAMALT, only worse because the claim is JY is not only not representative of the MTF transitioner, they aren't really trans at all.

However, here's the thing, if you support self id then JY is as legitimate a TW as anyone else.

If you believe TWAW then JY is a woman.

If you adopt a position of no debate, it works in reverse and you don't get to "cherry pick" any more than natal women do.

I'm glad attention is being brought to this case but the TRA community need to understand that JY (and others like them) are the fruition of their own activism.

If you don't like it and don't want the trans community to suffer from the backlash created by the likes of JY then take a good look at what you've lobbied for that has indisputably enabled them.

I mean it's infuriating.

All the lobbying and activism to remove every last fucking inch of criteria to be considered female (which is a bloody joke), and now someone is actually doing it, it's all oh noes.

You don't have to have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, you can have a beard, wear a boiler suit, be a rapist, be a paedophile, or identify in and out of it on the hour, every hour, like a cat through a fucking cat flap.

It's a huge, massive, overwhelming, gargantuan and very unpleasant joke.

And it's increasingly more difficult to understand how anyone, anyone at all, can fall for it.

What is 'proper trans?'

Last film I saw, Blaire says they're not having 'bottom' surgery as they feel it's too invasive. Blaire has had extensive facial feminisation surgery etc.

Now I do like some of blaire's stuff as they have moved on and do critique the trans trend and Blaire is very clear that their biological sex is Male. Some of the videos are very good.

But it's not top trumps. Blaire uses female bathrooms, claiming as they've changed 'gender' legally they'd break the law if they used the men's.

"Bad look for the trans community"

There are some issues around the fact that a very feminine person like Blaire could be assaulted in the men's when they realise they're a TW. BUT it's not top trumps. Who gets to draw the line in the sand? Not JY, but no, not Blaire either.

Women do.

I believe Blaire has a huge right not to have bottom surgery. But it shows the phallacy of the trans argument.

(Deliberate misspell!)

The argument that one person is considerably more trans than the next is nonsense. Because trans is an expression of your personality, your masculinity or your femininity. Which is subjective. And, in these particular cases, almost always comes down to passing, and/or not being an out and out fucker.

Yup. I'm just not having it. The same people who tell me I have to accept that Muscato, Drummond et al are 'women just like me' run for cover and do the 'not true trans' shit when it suits them.

It's called No True Scotsman, on wiki

No true Scotsman, or appeal to purity, is an informal fallacyy^ in which one attempts to protect a universal generalizationn^ from counterexampless^ by changing the definition in an ad hocc^ fashion to exclude the counterexample.[

And it's increasingly more difficult to understand how anyone, anyone at all, can fall for it.

Except amazingly someone still is, and they have 36.3k followers.

mobile.twitter.com/bitchute/status/1153773084488261632

The tweet got pilloried and only achieved 62 likes, but it still worried me because what’s the agenda? They didn’t go with not true trans (already widely out there), but have tweeted that the info against JY is false.

I just hope that now this story is so far outside twitter that they’ll never get this genie back in the box.

No way JY can get all this data scrubbed,

Is there?

See also:

transanityca.wordpress.com/2019/07/24/jessica-yaniv-and-the-return-of-the-cooing-doves

Yaniv is just an individual who represents the reductio ad absurdum of the inherent conflict of competing human rights.

As per Laurel Hubbard, the system that allows these anomalies needs to be scrutinised more than the individuals. People clearly predicted the upcoming consequences of these conflicts but there was just a desire to delay the appropriate debate around these matters by denying that these were valid concerns.

twitter.com/HairyLeggdHarpy/status/1049289194370002945