Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Our favourite Canadian is at it again

137 replies

OnlyTheTitOfTheIceberg · 07/01/2020 10:53

From Twitter:

"Yaniv’s new complaint again targets an esthetics salon run by women of immigrant background. She Point Beauty Studio is operated by East Indian women who are adherents to the Sikh religion. Yaniv approached the studio in August 2019 and first requested a Brazilian bikini wax.

"The studio refused, stating that their services are only for women. Yaniv then requested leg waxing services. Leg waxing takes place in private with the customer in their underwear or nude from the waist down.

"She Point Beauty Studio rejected Yaniv’s request for services due to religious, cultural and safety reasons, and because the salon services are specialized to women. Yaniv filed the complaint against She Point Beauty Studio in early October 2019.

"A hearing date has not yet been set for Yaniv’s new complaint. It is anticipated it will proceed to a hearing sometime in 2020."

Isn't the definition of stupidity doing the same thing and expecting a different result?

OP posts:
WireBrushAndDettolMaam · 07/01/2020 12:04

I’m not sure if this option exists in Canadian law but is there a thing where judges can place a restriction on a person filing any future law suits due to the number and motives of previous cases? JY is a claim happy- they’ve been doing it for years. Doesn’t there come a point where the system has to say “is this about the case or is there something else going on with this person- are they misusing the system?”

On one hand I’m glad JY is doing this. The more exposure this batshittery gets the better. On the other hand innocent women shouldn’t be collateral damage even if it helps expose JY and their ilk.

WireBrushAndDettolMaam · 07/01/2020 12:10

Instead, just say: “we are not taking on new clients at this time”

JY could easily prove this was a lie by asking a female friend to book the same treatment. The salons own appointment book will prove them to be lying.

or “we are fully booked at present”

JY books the appointments ahead. If they were fully booked they wouldn’t make JYs appointment in the first place.

I think the fact JY has been in the press and legally identified as targeting these type of business previously should be enough grounds for them to refuse JY service. They should be able to say “I have legitimate reason to believe my business is at risk from malicious civil action from the individual and on that basis I refuse service”

HumousWhereTheHeartIs · 07/01/2020 12:12

The irony of Yaniv behaving like a dominant and bullish male is astounding

nauticant · 07/01/2020 12:25

I'm with allmywhat. Don't assume that just because Yaniv is acting abusively he won't be supported by the law. Even if a judge doesn't like it he or she will have to comply with Canadian law.

rednsparkley · 07/01/2020 12:35

Notbadconsidering my thoughts exactly. What a revolting trio to have representing your nation 🤮🤮

MidnightBlue28 · 07/01/2020 12:41

Yaniv is due in court on the 13th for the tazer charges so may not be around afterwards to appear at the HRT

WireBrushAndDettolMaam · 07/01/2020 12:53

Yaniv is due in court on the 13th for the tazer charges

More legitimate reason to refuse service to them.

RoyalCorgi · 07/01/2020 13:06

Even if a judge doesn't like it he or she will have to comply with Canadian law.

Yes, exactly. The salon only provides the service to female customers. In Canadian law, Yaniv is female. Legally, that sounds to me as if Yaniv has a strong case - unless they decide this is vexatious litigation.

If Yaniv wins, at least it will have the merit of pointing out to the rest of the world how absurd Canadian law is.

FlaviaAlbia · 07/01/2020 13:14

Calculating isn't he? The last judgment left a massive loophole he's dived straight into.

Still targeting immigrant women, but this time in a salon not their own homes.

ArranUpsideDown · 07/01/2020 13:17

Yaniv is due in court on the 13th for the tazer charges so may not be around afterwards to appear at the HRT

Blaire White's video on this was eye-opening. BW is hoping for a taser-related prison sentence for JY although apprehensive of the choice of prison.

www.nsfwyoutube.com/watch?v=dCCbs_imjAw

BW's reasoning for this is interesting. I've tried to outline the reasons for this and can't so can only refer people to the video if they want to know why.

If the allegations that BW reports are correct, I'm horrified that it's possible that even this is not necessarily relevant to the 'merits' of JY's new case.

Datun · 07/01/2020 13:34

Yes, exactly. The salon only provides the service to female customers. In Canadian law, Yaniv is female. Legally, that sounds to me as if Yaniv has a strong case - unless they decide this is vexatious litigation.

Whilst the Canadian government, and indeed most Governments, wilfully ignore the fetish element to many males transitioning, TRAs will go out of their way to force a legal precedent that allows them to get their rocks off, completely legitimately.

And to be able to publicly vilify any woman who objects.

And it would appear that governments, across-the-board, are utterly petrified to acknowledge even the existence of the fetish, despite how publicly prevalent it is, and how it's under the umbrella of any trans organisation.

Yaniv's proclivities are so extreme and their interest in children so open, one would hope that, at some point at least, the dangers would be acknowledged.

HandsOffMyRights · 07/01/2020 13:41

JY is addicted to the exposure this brings.

Can individuals keep bringing cases against others just for shits and giggles? Can't such characters be reprimanded/fined for wasting the court's time?

How does JY fund this hobby? And it is a pastime, when the poor women are working to keep a roof over their heads/support their families.

Did JY target a male last time (the gynaecologist) or is it only females (from minority backgrounds) that JY targets?

TinselAngel · 07/01/2020 13:42

Given Yaniv's notoriety, I wonder if the service providers are entitled to refuse service on the grounds that they don't want to wax Yaniv, rather than that they don't want to wax men?

HandsOffMyRights · 07/01/2020 13:44

Good point Tinsel and surely if women feel threatened by an individual then they have a right to not provide services to that character.

WireBrushAndDettolMaam · 07/01/2020 13:44

That’s what I would hope tinsel. I think they need to start saying they won’t serve JY due to a reasonably held belief that it would be detrimental to their business.

WireBrushAndDettolMaam · 07/01/2020 13:46

Or that they fear JY will use an illegal weapon on them.

ArranUpsideDown · 07/01/2020 13:54

Given Yaniv's notoriety, I wonder if the service providers are entitled to refuse service on the grounds that they don't want to wax Yaniv

I've no idea if this might be a viable defence in the future. I doubt it would work in this case because it wasn't the reason for service refusal at the time.

However, JY must be at least testing the boundaries of the category of vexatious litigant unless this is self-evidently a case that has merit and would otherwise succeed. (There was some apprehension last time that JY would have succeeded if almost any other representative had brought the case.) If the case fails, it may well be because (iirc) the previous recorder acknowledged that JY has an established pattern of suing women from ethnic minorities.

TinselAngel · 07/01/2020 13:54

I just watched the Blaire White video with the new allegations 😱

HandsOffMyRights · 07/01/2020 13:58

Or that they fear JY will use an illegal weapon on them.

Winner!

Goosefoot · 07/01/2020 13:58

I don't feel sure the court will find against him.

But I am not sure I want to see them dismiss it as vexatious. I think the real question of the women's right to refuse to do intimate services like this for a man, or the faith based right, need to be addressed, rather urgently. Although I am not sure either will be upheld, the zeitgeist seems to be down on both with regard to small businesses.

YourOpinionIsNoted · 07/01/2020 14:01

Jesus fucking Christ I've just watched the Blair White video, I honestly thought I couldn't be shocked by that person anymore. Turns out I was very wrong.

YourOpinionIsNoted · 07/01/2020 14:01
  • that person being JY, not Blair.
WireBrushAndDettolMaam · 07/01/2020 14:03

I’m assuming- hoping- that the police have been informed of the most recent incidents. Masturbating in front of children with video evidence must surely mean a conviction?

ArranUpsideDown · 07/01/2020 14:04

I just watched the Blaire White video with the new allegations

Beyond grim. It's why I gave up on trying to outline the content in a suitably neutral manner.

YourOpinionIsNoted · 07/01/2020 14:12

Fair play, Arran. I'll have a go (though expect I'll get deleted) for anyone not able / willing to watch.

According to the Blair White video, JY is engaging in private video sharing groups with teenagers, and in those groups has shared videos of JYself masturbating while moaning Blair White's name. Blair has been sent one of these videos by a fan.

Now off to throw up and bleach eyeballs, burn phone and chop off fingers.

Swipe left for the next trending thread