Lawsuits

No Woman Should Be Forced to Give a Troll a Brazilian Bikini Wax

Transgender activist Jessica Yaniv has forced the British Columbia Human Rights council to hear a truly absurd complaint.

|

Canada's human rights authorities are currently considering whether the country's gender equality law requires a Brazilian waxing business that only takes female customers to perform the service on a trans woman who possesses male genitalia.

It's a bizarre case involving a litigant—Jessica Taniv—with a long history of sordid activities and activism. Notably, the story has yet to pierce the bubble of the U.S. mainstream media. I have seen only conservative and contrarian outlets writing about it. But Taniv certainly deserves scrutiny. Her quixotic campaign to compel unwilling female business owners to provide an intimate service to which they are, for various reasons, resolutely opposed, is a reminder that even benign-sounding laws (equality, non-discrimination, human rights, etc.) are often easily abused by trolls.

According to The Toronto Sun, Yaniv appeared at a British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal hearing last week to press her case against Marcia Da Silva, who had advertised Brazilian waxing services for women on Facebook. Da Silva initially agreed to serve Yaniv, but canceled the appointment after she learned that Yaniv possesses male genitalia. Yaniv calls this discrimination against trans women, and has brought similar complaints against more than a dozen female-only Brazilian waxing businesses.

The business owners have offered a variety of compelling reasons not to accommodate Yaniv. One was a Sikh woman with a religious objection to touching men in an intimate manner. Others, including Da Silva, said they were not trained to perform a Brazilian wax on a person with a scrotum.

This is obviously a dispute that's ripe for comedy—Ricky Gervais, in sympathy with Da Silva, tweeted sarcastically, "It's a sad state of affairs when a lady can't have her hairy balls waxed"—though it's no laughing matter for the business owners. Their livelihoods are on the line, and they have to shell out money to defend themselves in court. Da Silva actually shuttered her business after the experience with Yaniv.

"This person is the walking, talking, living, breathing embodiment of what people fear when it comes to trans people," said Blaire White, a trans YouTube star, in a recent video that notes Yaniv has been accused of various predatory actions.

Yaniv got into a nasty Twitter fight with Lindsey Shepherd, a free speech activist known for her informal associations with Jordan Peterson. As a result, Twitter permanently banned Shepherd for mis-gendering Yaniv.

It's possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects. But it seems more likely that she's a troll. I'm reminded of Steve Horner, a Minnesota-based activist who routinely sued bars for selling cheaper drinks to female customers as part of "ladies' night" promotions. Horner charged that this practice violated the state's Human Rights law, and won more than $6,000 in settlements.

Suffice it to say that Yaniv's behavior is uncharacteristic of trans people, or even of social justice activists in general. But it's hard not to draw some parallels to the high-profile dispute surrounding Masterpiece Cake Shop, a bakery in Denver, Colorado, that has faced lawsuits from gay couples who claim the Christian owner's refusal to cater same-sex weddings violates anti-discrimination law.

"It's certainly true that most transgender people aren't trying to force random women to wax their balls, and most of us gay people are content without chasing down Christians and forcing them to bend to our will," writes The Washington Examiner's Brad Polumbo. "So it's important that we view these cases not as warnings of a pending LGBT apocalypse, but rather as isolated incidents that pose troubling philosophical and moral questions."

We should also view these sorts of cases as periodic reminders that there are some unreasonably awful people out there, and even well-meaning laws can be dangerous in their hands.

Advertisement

NEXT: Can the Freedom Caucus Convince Trump to Derail This Awful Budget Deal? If Not, Fiscal Conservatism Is Truly Dead.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. We don’t want to force it on you, we just want to be recognized.

    It’s almost as if they are going out of their way to prove gay hating republicans right.

    1. Keep in mind this exceptional pervert tried to “host” a topless pool party for girls as young as 12.

      This isn’t an “activist,” this is either a severely mentally ill person who should be committed immediately to an institution, or a sexual predator who trooned out to get cover from progressives for his deviancy.

      1. He has also been exposed in saved text messages of asking girls as young as 12 for their tampons. He’s a real winner. Glad Twitter is defending this creep by banning feminists from Twitter who dare counter this creep’s narrative.

            1. It
              Neither women or men want to claim this POS.

          1. He. This guy has lost all right to be treated with courtesy when he tried to force women to wax his balls against their will.

          2. It’s a He. He has balls and a rod. It’s a He. I dont’ play in other people’s fantasies.

    2. Bake the cake, you despicable male bigot. Also wax my sack, you inhuman cis/female trannophobe.

      1. Bake the freaking cake!

      2. Maybe we can split the different and Bake the Balls with a propane torch!

        1. More relevant, simply ask that guy to dip his sac into a bowl of molten wax. And cover your ears!!

    3. > It’s almost as if they are going out of their way to prove gay hating republicans right.

      Except this is happening in Canada.

      But it does tell me that this is a small but extremely loud segment of the Left absolutely determined to wage culture war. And a quite large segment of Canadian government bureaucracy so pathologically bound to legalistic rules that they feel they have no choice but to go along with blatant trolls.

      1. Nobody ever heard of this until right-wing assholes with a bigoted agenda decided to make it their priority.

        Shall we harp on every rightwing asshole who has a shady life? What about Jim Jordan, member of Congress, who covered up child rape?

        1. Why do you consistently make the most retarded take you could possibly have on any given issue? Would you prefer nobody talked about it at all? Fuck off, retard.

        2. This story wasn’t talked about because of a gag order. And it flew in the face of the proggie narrative.

          But yeah, Jim Jordan should be stringed up by his testicles.

          1. “This story wasn’t talked about because of a gag order”

            Ooof Tony felt that in his ovaries.

        3. The only thing you don’t like about Jim Jordan is that he’s a Republican. Had he been a Democrat, you’d welcome him with open arms (and then some).

          1. Democrats expel people from power for pretending to grab some boobies on a comedy tour. If anything, our moral standards are too strict.

            Republicans actually had a speaker of the house who touched little boys.

            1. It’s actually rare for Democrats to do that. How long has Bill Clinton had power and influence in the Democratic Party?

              Of course, the illusion of Republicans being the only ones embroiled in scandal is further exacerbated by the fact that in the press, you could guarantee that there will be an (R) next to the name of the politician caught in the scandal, but if it’s a Democrat, there have been times where, after reading three or four stories about the scandal, I *still* had to search for the person to know what party the person belonged to. (In one example, it was Keith Ellison, who was head of the DNC at the time.)

              Republicans are far more likely to push their own people out of politics when even the hint of scandal raises its ugly head. The ousting of Franken was a fluke, and it only happened because of the anti-due-process #MeToo movement that was happening at the time.

  2. It is all happening as I have foretold.

    The business owner’s best defense was that she was not licensed to perform the ‘grooming’ requested. Only saw that in one place, and no detail on how the tribunal ruled on that one.
    Plan B would be to just go ahead, and market the audio recording of his screams.

    1. Hot wax on scrotum. Sounds like apt punishment to me.

      1. sounds like a Saturday night …

        wait, what??

  3. “No Woman Should Be Forced to Give a Troll a Brazilian Bikini Wax”

    No human should EVER be forced to give ANY troll a Brazilian Bikini Wax!!!

    However, if the Troll is “Tulpa”, then I am WAAAAY on board with programming an unfeeling robot to give a Brazilian Bikini Wax (or ANY kind of wax or waxative or laxative or lava or hot dog shit, for all I care) to give to OUR favorite troll, Tulpa, ALL that he-she-it can take, and THEN some MORE!!!!

    1. You seem more deranged than usual.

      1. 13th amendment be fucked, I clearly own his fucking soul.

  4. If Yaniv has a right to be treated as a woman in all respects, then Yaniv is correct and is not a troll.

    Yaniv can only be a troll if a person does not have a right to be treated as something they manifestly are not regardless of how much they believe it to be so.

    Words mean things, Soave.

    1. The point of a lot of the activism seems to be to redefine “man” and “woman” by legislative fiat.

      1. Yaniv is a troll and is NOT or at least NOT yet Trans or she would NOT have male genitals. It is not to redefine a Man and a Women by legislative fiat… although certainly the argument gets very cloudy because there are some that are using it to eliminate all gender terms, but that takes things to another level. A trans women would NOT have male Genitals, as a surgeon would have cut them off and create female genitals. Yaniv is either pre-trans, and thus still a male who is taking female hormones to give her more feminine features and understand what life will be like post trans. And should not yet be an activist for trans rights as she is not YET trans. Or she is a Male cross dresser. Either way Yaniv is a Troll, and should not be treated as trans or should be framing the argument as pre-trans not trans.

        1. Trans or not, this is about Freedom of Conscience & Freedom of Association, which have been sacrificed on the Holy Altar of the LGBTQXZ Agenda:

          “Fifty years ago, who would have predicted that God would place kindergarten teachers and wedding florists and cake-bakers on the frontline of the cultural war for truth about sexuality and marriage? All believers should be prepared to answer when God calls, and other believers should come alongside them during their trials. We look with admiration at the costs of discipleship for men like Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and then when God puts a trial before us, we rationalize taking the path of least resistance. We should be ashamed.

          Remember when sexual anarchists told us all they wanted was to be left alone to do whatever it is they do in their bedrooms? Remember when they claimed that their private actions would have no affect on the culture?

          Initially their claims seemed believable because all they asked was that society tolerate (i.e., put up with) their private sexual peccadillos. Then they asked for approval of them. Then they demanded celebration and began marching down Main Street in costumes that should have stayed in their closets in their bedrooms.

          Then they transmogrified non-marital unions into unions legally recognized as “marriage.”

          Then couples whose erotic activities are inherently non-reproductive started acquiring children—acquisitions that they view as “rights.” They even demanded that laws be changed so that they could acquire children and that any organization that believes children have a right to a mother and father be shut down.

          They then went for citizens’ right to assemble by going after the Boy Scouts.

          Then they came into our public schools, including our elementary schools, to introduce malleable minds and kind hearts to positive images of a phenomenon that God abhors, teaching children that Leftist moral beliefs are facts and conservative moral beliefs are hatred.

          Then they fought to compel people of faith to violate their commitments to God by using their God-given gifts in the service of celebrations that God abhors.

          And now they seek a linguistic revolution. They’re coming for our pronouns.

          No stone unturned, no aspect of life untouched by the sullied hand of pagan sexuality unrestrained.

          The movement to normalize homoeroticism and gender confusion is the most pressing issue of the day. Leaders in the church, leaders in academia, and leaders in government who don’t understand this or who don’t want to address it need to get out of the way and let those who do lead.”
          -Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute, 2013

          1. Leaders in the church, leaders in academia, and leaders in government who don’t understand this or who don’t want to address it need to get out of the way and let those who do lead.”

            That’s the point, though–they understand it perfectly well. And the fact that they’re enabling it, with the explicit backing of the State and global corporations alike shows where they stand.

            The “leaders of the church” are actually the biggest hypocrites in all of this, since they’re bowing to the fashions of the world in the hopes they won’t be martyred on the altar of political correctness.

          2. So just to be clear:
            I am a fucking pagan.
            I am completely for unrestrained sexuality between consenting adults.
            I have NEVER advocated government be used to force ANYONE to do ANYTHING that they don’t believe in.
            The progressives are the enemy. Not libertine, libertarian pagans.
            The NAP is what I believe in regarding interactions between humans.

            1. “I am a fucking pagan”

              So, what are you when you aren’t having sex? 🙂

        2. “Yaniv is a troll and is NOT or at least NOT yet Trans or she would NOT have male genitals.”

          “trans” is the new word for “cross-dresser”. The more traditional “tranny” is still used to mean someone who is post-op.

        3. You need to get up to date on the definition of “transgender”. Many people insist now that even with male parts, you are a real woman if you feel like on on the inside (whatever that means).

    2. So she could sue a doctor for not performing a pap smear or a hysterectomy?

      1. Doesn’t matter. It takes too long to get an appointment for those procedures in British Columbia.

      2. I think Mickey is calling out Robby on his usual pussy-footedness.

        Rather than calling the tranny crazy and the laws supporting them stupid and unjust, we get a mealy-mouthed squishiest of libertarian stances where the laws would be sensible and correct if it weren’t for trolls, wreckers, and kulaks fucking up Robby’s civil libertarian agenda.

        If Yaniv had merely inconvenienced the store owners by being a mendacious cunt and lying about having a vagina instead of bringing down the full force of the law and trying to put them out of business it would’ve been an acceptable state of affairs.

        1. Soave said Yaniv has an absolute right to be treated like a woman in all respects but should not try to enforce that right. Which means Yaniv is legally in the right and the law can force a woman to wax a person with testicles. What Soave asserted as a principle is contradictory to he thinks Yaniv should have done.

      3. But, HE is going after this poor Christian preacher who has been fighting for Freedom of Religion & Freedom of Speech in Canada which is pretty much dead! Might guess is HE is a slam-dunk to win this $35,000!
        http://www.freenorthamerica.ca/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=10764

    3. Mickey,
      “But Taniv certainly deserves scrutiny. Her quixotic campaign to compel unwilling female business owners to provide an intimate service to which they are, for various reasons, resolutely opposed, is a reminder that even benign-sounding laws (equality, non-discrimination, human rights, etc.) are often easily abused by trolls.”

      Note that Taniv has pulled the exact same thing on over a dozen businesses who expressly say they are a “women only” for many legitimate reasons. It seems she/he/whichever Taniv prefers is targeting specific businesses – most likely with intent to sue. This is almost like a Catholic suing a Jewish temple for not offering “the body and blood” of Jesus. This sure smells and looks like trolling.

      1. The waxer is only trained and experienced in female body. She has no idea what to do with the physical male body and genitalia. She also explains that because of her religious and cultural background she purposely chose to specialize in only women.

        I accept the idea that there can be a difference between gender and biological sex. Be whatever you wish. Yet one does not eradicate the other.

        This very irritable Taniv person gets off on making others miserable. She also does no good to the often difficult cause of transgender people.

        1. I accept the idea that there can be a difference between gender and biological sex.

          Then you are an idiot.

        2. Why do you refuse to use this man’s correct gender pronouns? You recognize that he is a malicious person in several ways, but then submit to their demands regarding pronouns. It’s fake. He’s a liar, a predator, and a MAN.

          1. Fuckin’ transtesticles!

      2. “This is almost like a Catholic suing a Jewish temple for not offering “the body and blood” of Jesus.”

        But no one is asserting that the Catholic has a right to Catholic rites from any religious institution. Soave is asserting that a male who believes strongly that he is a woman has a right to be treated as a woman in all respects by everyone else. If that is true, than Yaniv is in the right. if Yaniv is in the wrong, then there is no such right.

    4. Yaniv is the one who has gotten 2 well regarded feminists kicked off twitter after trolling them. He even harassed one basically laughing at her uterus having a defect that increased miscarriage rates. When the feminist responded by calling yaniv an ugly man she was kicked off Twitter.

      Fuck yaniv, fuck Twitter, and fuck all this woke bullshit.

      1. Twitter is where all of the idiots and a-holes of the world congregate (and I use “congregate” in the original meaning of the word).

    5. This is a good point. Fact it, living in a fantasy world is mental illness.

      If you look down at yourself and see your sexual organs on the the outside of your body. You are male. If your Chromosomes are XY, you are male. These are facts.

      If, in the face of this information you continue to insist you are Female, you are not female, you are a mentally ill male.

    6. The sexuality of the creep is really beside the point. Nobody has a right to compel anyone else to provide a service. If Canada had a functioning justice system, the judge would just say “they said no, so fuck off, and pay their attorney’s fees.”

      -jcr

      1. Well look at you, gettin all paleolibertarian an’ shit.

        This here is woketarian territory, and what a person tells you they are is also the way they dictate the way you must treat them. That’s how new freedom works, anything else is doubleplus unfree.

    7. “We should also view these sorts of cases as periodic reminders that there are some unreasonably awful people out there, and even well-meaning laws can be dangerous in their hands.”

      What the hell Robby! This is a way different message than what you were preaching during the Carolina bathroom drama.

      This was a big reason why Reason’s libertarians lost me. During the Carolina Bathroom kerfuffle, all we heard from Reason’s writers was how letting people who identified as a sex outside their biology into bathrooms was what all good libertarian minded people should do, that it did not impact NAP, that pointing to a slippery slope was wrong think, and how it was bigoted for people to oppose integrating bathrooms.

      Now dear Robby says “even well-meaning laws can be dangerous in” the hands of awful people. Well, no Fricking Duh!
      But when I and others brought this up before, we were mistaken, bigoted, and backward.

      This pedophile’s actions in Canada may have very real implications that impact NAP. If he wins his case, it has the real potential of being state-sponsored abuse, because it would force innocent women to touch hairy balls, or else lose their income. One man, one bad egg, has the potential to do real permanent damage.
      Please don’t tell me, “well this is the USA, not Canada”. Canadian SJW nuttiness has a way of creeping down into the states.

      I am so completely pissed with Reason right now!

      1. Expecting logical consistency from a Reason author is sooo patriarchal.

  5. This is among the most hateful, science-denying things I’ve ever read at Reason. The transphobic language is inexcusable — “trans woman who possesses male genitalia”? Ummmmmm, it’s 2019! A trans woman’s penis and testicles are, by definition, female genitalia.

    Do better, Robby. In fact, on second thought maybe Robby shouldn’t cover these topics at all. Reason needs to have Scott Shackford write a more sensitive defense of Yaniv’s argument.

    #TransWomenAreWomen

    1. Maybe you should uncover those hairy female balls.

    2. Reason needs to have Scott Shackford write a more sensitive defense of Yaniv’s argument.

      D-rate satire at best. A level work would’ve shamed Reason for being dominated by cis white dudes.

      1. That line wasn’t so great, but “[a] trans woman’s penis and testicles are, by definition, female genitalia” is pretty damn good.

    3. Chicks with dicks is now a legal designation it seems.

    4. “[Yaniv] is the walking, talking, living, breathing embodiment of what people fear when it comes to trans people…”

      This. +100

      Somebody send that bitch a razor. FFS, getting your balls waxed is hardly a human right (ditto with cakes) or even a necessity. Frivolous, pointless lawsuits that destroy people’s livelihoods create endless feelings of animosity and hatred and rally otherwise ambivalent people against their cause. If it’s any consolation, the vast majority of trans people would never consider doing anything like this — just your usual extreme activists, with hairy balls, evidently.

    5. ” Ummmmmm, it’s 2019! A trans woman’s penis and testicles are, by definition, female genitalia.”

      A+++

    6. “trans woman who possesses male genitalia”? Ummmmmm, it’s 2019! A trans woman’s penis and testicles are, by definition, female genitalia.
      NO… a trans women who possesses male genitalia is NOT a trans women. At best she is pre-trans, or is merely a male CD, but is NOT yet a trans women, until she posesses female genitals. Unfortunately a lot of the politics on both sides creates a lot of confussion about who is trans.

      1. You’re not woke apparently. The presence of genetalia does not define gender. OBL is right.

    7. Clap. Clap. Clap.

    8. Points for the feminine penis, points deducted for recommending yet another cis male to write the replacement article. 5/10 troll.

      Also, it seems the author of the article would have a better understanding of what exactly constitutes a troll if he were to read some of your work. Have you thought about compiling an anthology? I bet in ten years when we are in the depths of our second civil war after President Harris tries confiscating all semi-auto rifles, that such a book would make for an entertaining read by the light of the burning rubble or the headlamps of the police MRAPs.

      1. Why are you assuming Scott Shackleford’s gender? Shouldn’t we ask what Scott’s gender is before, during, and after he finishes writing that article, before we pass judgement on OBL?

    9. Ummmmmm, it’s 2019! A trans woman’s penis and testicles are, by definition, female genitalia.

      Penis? Female? Can you fuck that penis with another penis? Unless, it can be fucked with a dick, and I don’t mean an asshole, then it’s not female.

      And if the asshole emerges adjacent to a dick, it’s not female. There’s difference between an asshole and a cunt. We usually call men assholes. If a woman is an asshole, she’s more often called a cunt, just as a man who’s an asshole is sometimes called a dick. So whenever a penis is involved, even the asshole is male, not female.

    10. Yes. And there’s a lot of anti-trans sentiment on this thread which is unfortunate.

      But Yaniv isn’t a “real” trans-activist. Yaniv is a racist, sexual predator, who is using the trans identity as a cover.

      Yaniv has support from NO ONE other then twitter algorithms.

      Acting like this person is representative of trans people is a deliberate distortion. There is genuine reason to discuss the legal issues, but this individual is neither representative of trans people nor someone trans people should be defending.

      Watch Yaniv’s interview with Blaire White to see if Yaniv is someone you want to get behind.

  6. It should be a reminder that government’s core mission is violence on behalf of whichever constituents pay the bill.

  7. >>>But it seems more likely that she’s a troll.

    defining ludicrous = troll? used to be MAD magazine.

    1. Worse than a troll I’d say. Most trolls are just trying to upset and annoy people. This guy (and I’ll use masculine words because shitheads like that don’t deserve my tolerance and sympathy) is going after people’s livelihoods.

      1. You and I have very different definitions of trolls. At least one breed of troll has a rather explicit agenda of bringing business owners to heel or otherwise putting them out of business. Maybe it’s selective reporting, but it seems like I can name Gibson’s Bakery, Memories Pizza, Hobby Lobby, Chic-Fil-A, and Masterpiece Cake Shop off the top of my head and that, for at least some of them and a few others, the explicit goal was to shame them out of business on social media.

        1. That wasn’t trolling. It was terrorism by proxy, using the de-jure law as the bomb.

          1. Baby jeffrey assured me this was not economic terrorism. To him it is perfectly allowable to bankrupt non conforming business.

            1. Well they ARE racist Nazis.

    2. This is why MAD stopped publishing. Nothing’s over the top anymore.

    3. I have to agree. “Troll” is an understatement. A person who demands that people get into uncomfortable sexual situations under force of law is not a “troll”, but a “predator”.

      Using threats to coerce someone into touching your genitals is literally a crime. We should not tip-toe around this. This lawsuit in and of itself is sexual harassment.

  8. It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects.

    I don’t think that is a right. You don’t have a right to have other people be nice to you. And it’s not even possible to treat a person with a cock and balls as a woman in all respects even if you wanted to.
    I’m pretty sympathetic to trans people. I’d like people to be tolerant and kind (as appropriate, some people are just assholes and should be treated as such, even if they are trans) and make reasonable accommodations. But trans-women are not real women in every sense of the word and insisting that it is so doesn’t change the fact that they don’t have the right body. Just as the physical body doesn’t define the whole person, one’s mind doesn’t define everything about who and what you are either.
    You can’t just insist on these things and make the whole issue go away. Being transgender (or whatever you want to call it) is a serious problem. You are never going to have the body you feel like you should have. I’m not convinced that the best way to deal with it in all cases is to start presenting yourself as the other sex. I’m definitely sure that the right way to deal with it isn’t by trolling people and being an asshole.

    1. I do not care how one views one self.

      Nobody has a right to force me to play along.

      1. I agree. I encourage people to be kind (to people who aren’t assholes). I don’t want to force anyone to do anything.

      2. Isn’t the demand that you use a person’s preferred pronouns else be denounced as bigoted, transphobic, etc, an attempt to force us to play along? And in Canada it’s the law?

        1. It’s why we have a First Amendment and a need to purge law schools of professors who think “hate speech” is a thing.

      3. That is the heart of the matter. The ladies who do these wax jobs have a human right to refuse their services to anyone for any reason, or no reason at all. Anyone who claims otherwise is a slaver, and should fuck right off.

        -jcr

        1. I’ll second that.

    2. Jesus Zeb, just ‘to be sure’ him and get it over with.

      Seriously, being transgender isn’t a problem, evidence suggest that lots of people experience it when they’re younger and the majority grow out of it. You don’t generally grow out of serious problems. Being transgender is a problem the way puberty is a problem except not nearly as common.

      1. evidence suggest that lots of people experience it when they’re younger and the majority grow out of it

        Yes, but there’s also evidence that some people suffer from a no-shit brain disorder, possibly a dysfunction of the brain’s body-mapping system.

        That is a serious problem, and at the moment is incurable.

        1. Yes, but there’s also evidence that some people suffer from a no-shit brain disorder, possibly a dysfunction of the brain’s body-mapping system.

          That is a serious problem, and at the moment is incurable.

          That’s a poor guess at the problem and again it’s not a serious problem. Or rather, if it is serious, it’s nowhere near as prevalent and dire as various forms of aphasia, paralysis, or other dismorphias such as anorexia. If transgenderism is a serious problem for me, us, or lots of people then everyday problems like obesity more serious and more insurmountable.

          1. I mean it’s a serious psychological problem for some people, not a serious problem for society in general. I’m talking about people who continue to struggle with it in their adult lives, not kids going through phases. Not in every case and not as serious as many other problems would be. But such people actually exist.

          2. “That is a serious problem, and at the moment is incurable.”

            It will always be “incurable” because anyone who tries to do so will be labeled a transphobic hate-enabler and forced out of their profession, at best.

            1. Except for the people who insist that surgery is the cure….but then, you get people who decided that surgery wasn’t a good idea after all, and their experiences are swept under the rug.

              Because questioning transgender surgery is transphobic, even when it’s done by the people who went through with it!

      2. I agree that there is no reason to consider transgender a problem. Still, on the other hand, if Ms Yaniv is truly serious about being transgender, and suing others who don’t accept her as such, I wonder if reassignment surgery has been scheduled.

        1. Did you read the story above? There are serious reasons to consider transgenderism a problem.

      3. Please stop confusing child exploration of concepts with gender dysmorphia. Its dishonest. See all the JHU research. Just because children also pretend to be superheros doesn’t mean we condone adults believing they have super powers. Just a stupid comparison. Why those studies get pushed is to try to normalize dysmorphic behavior. Stop enabling it.

        1. Please stop confusing child exploration of concepts with gender dysmorphia. Its dishonest.

          Acting like you’re the authority on gender dysmorphia in all forms is dishonest.

          1. Hey asshole, I quoted the authority. The most comprehensive study done was done at JHU. Fucking dumbass.

            The papers are paywalled unless you have a JHU account. Here is Wapo discussing the story.

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/long-shadow-cast-by-psychiatrist-on-transgender-issues-finally-recedes-at-johns-hopkins/2017/04/05/e851e56e-0d85-11e7-ab07-07d9f521f6b5_story.html?utm_term=.b483af44061e

            Of course all the activists hate the study because it is consistent with 5 decades of research. SO fuck off dummy.

          2. He is correct, you are full of $hit.

        2. So I should give up my quest to be bitten by a radioactive spider? Darn.

    3. I agree completely.

      I don’t personally have a problem referring to a trans-female as “she.” I’ve known more than one trans person, and sometimes “she” really does feel like the right way to refer to someone who is biologically male.

      But “thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects” is just wrong, and this case demonstrates that.

      The litmus test would be does the woman performing the waxing have a right to say “I wax vaginas, not penises and scrota?” No matter how sincerely Yaniv may believe that he is a woman, he has no right to demand that Da Silva pretend that his penis-and-scrotum are a vagina.

      And mark my words – it’s only a matter of time before someone in Da Silva’s position calls this sexual assault, at which point choices will need to be made . . .

      1. No, it is our responsibility to fight for her right to have babies. Even if she can’t have babies owing to the fact that she hasn’t got a womb for it to gestate in… which is no one’s fault, not even the Romans.

      2. “…at which point choices will need to be made . . .”

        Unfortunately, I fear that “wokeness” will prevail. Just look at the feminists in retreat on the issue.

    4. I’ll take her word for it that she feels that she is trans, that she is a women born in a male body. Largely because how someone feels is impossible to prove or disprove, and they have every god given right to those feelings. HOWEVER, she is not YET trans to the degree that she has transitioned from Male to Female. She may be pre-trans, and it is intentionally very difficult and ought to remain so. Her doctor ought to refuse to perform the surgery based purely on her behavior and say you do not seem to be willing to suffer through the hard ship of living life as a women, so I am stopping your hormone therapy and refusing to go through with the surgery. I doubt her doctor will, and if he did some other doctor is bound to agree to do it. She is doing NO favor to the trans community, as she is furthering misconceptions about something most people likely find very confusing as it is so rare. However once she IS trans and has female Genitals, I say go for it as it completely changes the nature of this case and what Trans are fighting for. In her misguided quest to fight for a cause, she is in fact making things more difficult for those that have transitioned. In a worst case scenario they may say that business’s that deal with intimate female services can refuse to service Trans women based upon activism from someone who is NOT a trans women. Then real Trans women will find life difficult as they try and go about their life having been born a male, but having transitioned to female completely, and having female genitals.

      1. “[S]he is not YET trans to the degree that she has transitioned from Male to Female.”

        One can never transition from male to female. Sex reassignment surgery is cosmetic, not magic.

      2. Subjective aspects should NEVER be made part of any legal consideration. We started down this road with assessing motivation in “hate crime” sentencing. It has proven to be bullshit in that instance and in every instance where we pretend that how someone “feels” should effect the law.

    5. I’m as sympathetic to trans people as I am to anyone with dysmorphic personalities. I prefer to treat them for their issues instead of playing pretend with them. This is true of anorexic and transable people. Encouraging their beliefs is harmful to them. This is why suicide rates dont decrease even after surgery. So let’s agree to stop enabling them.

      1. Would it ever be considered acceptable to tell an anorexic: “No, you’re right, you really are fat?” Something for the transgender enablers to think about.

        1. If they are fat, sure. But only pretty fat. Ugly fat doesn’t matter.

  9. I can see a very aggressive Brazilian waxing if the chick with a dick wins.

    1. Might get the guy closer to his dream of being a real woman.

    2. My puzzlement over why these waxers weren’t falling all over themselves to wax this scrot’s scrot – 5 pounds of paraffin at about 210 degrees, a soup ladle and a rusty pair of pliers sounds like an interesting project.

      1. “Oooh, you think you’re being clever, do you? Come right over and spread those legs, sister!”

  10. “This person is the walking, talking, living, breathing embodiment of what people fear when it comes to trans people,”

    Incorrect. This person is the plodding, dull, predictable embodiment of states legally reinforcing gender theory. Jordan Peterson, a bona fide clinical psychologist, has been telling you for years that fear has nothing to do with this social abomination.

    1. Absolutely right on this one. I do not fear this fat ugly man in a wig. I am repulsed by him. Much the same feeling as when I see a roach in a kitchen.

  11. This article is the reason why I only come to Reason once in a blue moon these days.


    But Taniv certainly deserves scrutiny. Her quixotic campaign to compel unwilling female business owners to provide an intimate service to which they are, for various reasons, resolutely opposed, is a reminder that even benign-sounding laws (equality, non-discrimination, human rights, etc.) are often easily abused by trolls.

    This paragraph is a word salad of double-think. There are a lot of other examples of it in this piece, but the use of female pronouns in a paragraph calling the subject of the piece a troll for claiming to be a woman shows a truly woeful lack of critical thinking.

    When you abandon reality for the whims of the mentally ill, this is where you end up. That isn’t to say that these individuals should be treated like garbage, but legislating around how people feel is a recipe for disaster.

    1. “… but the use of female pronouns in a paragraph calling the subject of the piece a troll for claiming to be a woman shows a truly woeful lack of critical thinking.”

      Or a remarkable aptitude for aping the progressive-approved modes of speech.

  12. Da Silva initially agreed to serve Yaniv, but canceled the appointment after she learned that Yaniv possesses male genitalia. Yaniv calls this discrimination against trans women…

    AND men.

    I do like that the business is being forced to explain their refusal. If this isn’t shining an uncomfortable spotlight on public accommodation policies, then the next absurdist troll will be forced to step up his game.

    1. Yes. Public-accommodation doctrine is the root of the problem (so to speak). Bakeries, florists, photographers, and waxers are not public accommodations. God forbid someone should have to drive to next town to find a service provider willing to put up with their shit.

    2. then the next absurdist troll will be forced to step up his game.

      A couple of years ago, Yaniv WAS the “next absurdist troll” that crazies were dreaming up in their problematic little heads.

  13. Yaniv is pretty clearly sincere in their beliefs. They are the equivalent of the trans woman who did the gender blue on the outside pink on the inside cake. There is literally no difference between the two, except one isn’t likable. Sorry not sorry that people who pushed laws that allow this shit now have to deal with the consequences of having those laws applied.

    1. Um, which one IS likable?

  14. It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus should be under psychiatric care, like any other delusional person. has a right to be treated as one in all respects.

    FTFY

    1. Yeah, Ricky Gervais needs to replace the word ‘lady’ in his tweet with ‘mendacious cunt’ to really solidify the sarcasm.

  15. Waxing through the hot, humid, thick Brazilian jungle, the esthetician treating OBL has so far discovered an abandoned Third Reich compound, a primitive Amazon tribe, and monitor lizards and alligators with prosthetics battling each other in a scene out of a cheesy 50s Lost World movie.
    I gotta admit, OBL looked chic in her silver lycra bikini bottom.

  16. “trans woman who possesses male genitalia”

    Shouldn’t the real question be whose genitalia these are and how she came into possession of them?

    Oh, wait, you mean “she” is a dude with a dick and balls like dudes tend to have.

    1. They go great with a nice chianti. fffft ffft ffft ffft

    2. I am old enough to remember when women with male genitalia meant that the genitalua in question were inside their vaginas!

  17. “Suffice it to say that Yaniv’s behavior is uncharacteristic of trans people, or even of social justice activists in general.”

    How is this legally relevant? Even if 999 out of 1,000 LGBLT people would never use a bad law like this to ruin a business, there’s the 1 who will. And 1 is all it takes. No amount of hand-wringing can protect the business against liability, only getting rid of the law can do that.

    1. And I’m not so sure that this behavior is uncharacteristic of social justice activists. As far as I can tell, they’re all on the lookout for unbelievers who deserve to have an example made of them.

      1. My point is that you don’t have to do a poll before suing someone to make sure that people similar to you support the lawsuit (or whatever a proceeding in a Canadian admin tribunal is called).

        So *even if* most LGBTQs are sane and rational, harboring no grudges against society, and not seeking to ruin anyone’s livelihood, they don’t get a vote on whether someone who *does* have a grudge gets to sue business owner.

    2. It should also be noted that the only reason this is considered abusing the law, is because the victims are from another ‘protected’ class and MeToo has sex being all the outrage.

      1. Multiple protected classes. Intersectionality and all that crap.

  18. Of course, it’s possible the Canadian “tribunal” will find some loophole to avoid applying the law in this one specific case, taking the heat off while leaving the enforcement apparatus alive.

    Yet, I don’t see how this is different in principle than the cake case or the flower case or the tour-company case or the bed-and-breakfast case, etc., etc.

    1. I do.. in that there is a giant loophole in that Yaniv is NOT trans. At best She is pre-Trans, but is not Yet Trans in the full sense, and should not in this case be viewed in the same way. Pre-Trans is difficult, and should be, and is the reason so much of the discussion gets clouded even without the political baggage, from both sides.

      The case would be different than many of the other cases if Yanis was post trans the case. The case may not even exist as she would have female genitals and thus unlikely that the Wax shop would care that she was born Male. Even if it did bring the case I dare say a lot of opinions would be different with someone that is post trans verses someone pre-trans.

      1. “He’s nae a true Scotsman!”

        1. You mean “He’s nae a true Scotsman wearin’ a kilt o’er his greht heery cock-n-balls!”?
          Fuhk off naow.

      2. I do.. in that there is a giant loophole in that Yaniv is NOT trans.

        In Canada, you’re a woman if you say you are; rejecting that idea is what Peterson got into trouble for.

      3. He’s a mentally ill man. He will always be a man, no matter how much he abuses and disfigures his body.

      4. Not how it works now. Now, you are whatever you believe yourself to be; gender is in the mind, not the body.

        I think it’s fine–proper and polite, even–to refer to a trans person as male if they want to be male, and female if they want to be female. But anyone who wants to force other people to do this, whether the trans person themselves or some bureaucrat, is an enemy of freedom. It doesn’t hurt anyone if you are a guy and want to be referred to as a woman, but if you cross the line of trying to force people to treat you as you imagine yourself to be, that’s an aggressive act.

  19. Public accommodation laws are evil. Oh, and “accommodation” is hard to spell, it has too many “m”.

  20. Transgender activist Jessica Yaniv has forced the British Columbia Human Rights council to hear a truly absurd complaint.

    No, the Human Rights Council allowed her (him– now ban me, Reason) to file a complaint by setting rules that people (often labeled problematic or ‘controversial’) predicted would end up with these absurdities.

    But hey, be who you are, love who you want!

    *fingersnap applause*

    1. Use up twinkles, not fingernsaps. This isn’t a Metallica show.

      1. Thanks. I had to hide in the closet with my blanky for a while after reading that comment.

    2. You mean “woke hands” (less aggressive and ‘dancy’ than “jazz hands”.).

    3. None of what’s happening here is the result of “be who you are, love who you want.” It’s about people trying to force other people to accept their version of reality. It’s not unlike the fundamentalist “defenders of traditional marriage,” who somehow thought that straight marriage was endangered by gay marriage. Delusional, but only a problem when you try to impose it on others.

  21. If she has Male genitals she is not Trans. A trans women, would have female genitals. She may be pre-trans in that she is taking hormone therapy in preparation for transition, or she may simply be a Male cross dresser claiming to be a female trans. I think a lot of confusion on this clouds a LOT of debate. However if she really wants to fight for Trans rights, then at the very least she ought to finish transition and then take up the fight. Other wise she potentially does more harm then good by furthering a lot of confusion about someone who is merely a cross dresser, someone that is pre-trans, and someone that IS trans, and has completed the process. If a court were to rule in this case that a women need not perform an intimate act on a Trans women when in fact we are talking about someone that is pre-trans this confusion could be a huge issue to people that genuinely are trans and have no male genitals to worry about. And conversely the same may hold true if they are then told to go to someone that specializes in providing that service to Men who would then argue that they cannot perform this service on a trans women. Certainly for someone who is pre-trans, things are very difficult… but that is entirely the purpose. The surgery cannot be reversed so it is requiring them to live as the other sex in all matters of their life so they fully understand the consequences of he surgery, they are requesting. Other than hormone therapy there is little difference between a cross-dresser and someone that is Pre-trans.

    1. Trans isn’t a destination, it’s a journey, broheim.

    2. A trans women, would have female genitals.

      No they wouldn’t because that it’s not actually possible with today’s technology. They just cut off the male parts and leave a gaping wound. Literally that’s what they do.

      1. Not off, up.

        The penis is inverted so its skin becomes the lining of the pseudo-vagina, and the scrotum is used for making the labia (which, since scrotums are embryologically the same thing as the outer labia, isn’t as big a stretch.).

        1. Stretch. Hahahahahaha

        2. Sorry, I’m just enjoying all of the comments with puns and double entendres in them, intentional or not. This comment section has quite a few.

    3. If the worst consequence of the “phobia” directed at your ‘protected class’ is some inconvenience in finding someone to rip your pubic hair out, I’ve got to question the necessity for the “protected class” status at all.

    4. No, the “current thinking” is that gender is in your head. Whatever you think you are, that’s what you are. It can even change from day to day.

      Which is fine by me, as long as you don’t try to force other people to play along.

  22. Suffice it to say that Yaniv’s behavior is uncharacteristic of trans people, or even of social justice activists in general.

    To be sure.

  23. I identify as St. Jerome. Anyone who doesn’t participate is St. Phobic.

    1. I identify as Kratos, the ghost of Sparta, I am to be feared.

  24. You learn something every day.

    I googled it and found an article in GQ. It is actually a thing for guys. Why anyone would I have no idea.

  25. Not a woman but a mental illness. Get it right.

    And wax your own damn balls. Be a man.

    1. I would wax his balls, but I only have a tube of super glue and sandpaper. It should do the job, and then some!

      1. I will loan you my propane torch so you can just burn it off!

  26. Gary Johnson said, “bake the cake, motherfucker”.

    Or was that Gary L Jackson?

    1. Gary L. Jackson would have baked the cake while reciting Isaiah 25:17.

    2. John Travolta is to sensible and principled to play the part of Bill Weld.

    3. Samuel Jackson. You can tell by the “motherfucker.”

  27. How quickly we’ve gone from “Bake my wedding cake and provide flowers, bigot!” to “Wax my woman-balls, bigot!”

    Now we see why Arthur L. Hicklib is such a strident progressive.

    1. “Wax my woman-balls, bigot!”

      Kinky!

    2. Now that you mention him, I notice that we don’t see Arthur commenting on this article. I’m astonished to think there’s something a shitlib has done that’s so ridiculous that even he can’t defend it?

  28. This is a fat ugly mentally ill man in a wig who wanted nubile young women to touch his privates so he went into a private business and demanded they ignore reality and biology in order to submit to his whims.

    Furthermore, this “troll” routinely goes into women’s restrooms and asks preteen girls to let him show them how to properly use feminine hygiene products. He is not a simple troll, he is a vile pervert shielded from the criminal arrest he deserves by fiat of his taking on the mantle of a group of people we are not allowed to criticize.

    On this issue, with this subhuman sex criminal sans indictment, the conservatives yelling about bathrooms and slippery slopes were over 9000% correct. Not such a fallacy this time, is it?

    1. Yep, I’ve been lit up on that creepy behavior. There’s evidence he’s a fucking pederast and is using the Canadian Human Rights Commission (which shouldn’t exist) to legally allow him to get his jollies off.

    2. This is a fat ugly mentally ill man in a wig who wanted nubile young women to touch his privates so he went into a private business and demanded they ignore reality and biology in order to submit to his whims.

      Its more than that. Its *easy* for fat ugly, mentally ill men in wigs to get nubile young women to touch their privates. Going price is $150 for a half hour.

      Its like rape – rape may sometimes be about sex, but its *always* about power. This dude just wants to exercise his power – and the only way you can let people know how powerful you are is by grinding their faces into the dirt.

    3. Well unless the fact that blacks have committed crimes against whites since they had to be let in is proof that was a bad idea, one trans person being a criminal sicko does not provide a good counterargument to discrimination there either. Is it somehow ok if she was in the men’s room harassing boys instead? Or just better?

  29. Jessica Yaniv has forced the British Columbia Human Rights council to hear a truly absurd complaint

    Well, Yaniv is forced to pay for the absurd existence of this absurd bureaucracy, so why not?

    1. An outstanding point, Juice.

  30. One was a Sikh woman with a religious objection to touching men in an intimate manner.

    Oh, but he’s she’s not a man, baby! So fuck your religion and wax that woman’s balls!

  31. He has his willy, so he’s still a man. Cut Mr. Willy off, then we’ll talk about it.

    1. Why? A woman who’s had a mastectomy (sp?) is still a woman.

      1. What makes a woman a woman is not on her chest.

      2. You realize that breasts are not what differentiates men from women? Men have breasts, as Robert De Niro noted in a movie whose name I can’t remember.

        1. Surgery doesn’t differentiate them either.

        2. You can milk anything if it has nipples.

      3. Yeah, but she’s still got a cunt.

    2. Was John Wayne Bobbitt temporarily not a man?

      1. Was John Wayne Bobbitt temporarily not a man?

        Not being intimately familiar with exactly what got cut where, no. My understanding was that he was producing sperm before, during, and after and never once produced an egg. So, liberally, somewhere between man an eunuch.

  32. “but rather as isolated incidents that pose troubling philosophical and moral questions.”

    There is not enough sarcasm in my brain for how much this statement downplays the negative consequences of the “isolated incidents”.

  33. If a person wants to dress up as the opposite sex and live like that because it makes them happy, more power to them. But when it comes to forcing others to treat them like the sex they pretend to be – especially when genitalia are involved – that’s just fucking ludicrous. Even more ludicrous is the fact that the law can’t seem to make that simple fucking distinction.

    1. It is probably not as complicated as that. The waxer canceled the appointment because she had no experience on male equipment. They also offered a religious reason because she is Sikh.

      So this a-hole set out to make her life miserable because that is what she likes doing.

      1. He’s just this generation’s incarnation of Divine.

  34. I wonder when the day will come that I will be banned permanetly from Reason for referring to Jessica as a man. He simply is one. The fact that he is either an asshole or mentally ill or both, does not change the fact that he is a man.

    1. A fat ugly man in a wig, at that.

  35. But she should be forced to give non-trolls bikini waxes.

    But it’s hard not to draw some parallels to the high-profile dispute surrounding Masterpiece Cake Shop, a bakery in Denver, Colorado, that has faced lawsuits from gay couples who claim the Christian owner’s refusal to cater same-sex weddings violates anti-discrimination law.

    I would be interested in knowing what differences you think there are.

    We should also view these sorts of cases as periodic reminders that there are some unreasonably awful people out there, and even well-meaning laws can be dangerous in their hands.

    Ok, ok. I like this. We’re getting there.

    1. I would be interested in knowing what differences you think there are.

      Soave told you so: “if you sincerely believe that you are an X, you thus has a right to be treated as X in all respects.” It’s the New Libertarianism, don’t you know.

      1. Yeah, people keep using that word “right” in inappropriate places.

        You don’t have a right to be treated any specific way. Maybe you expect to be treated with kindness and decency. Most of us expect to be treated that way. And most of us expect everyone to treat others that way.

        But it is a big leap from there to “we should have armed thugs running around making sure you conform to our definition of ‘kindness and decency’.”

        1. Yeah, people keep using that word “right” in inappropriate places.

          I don’t see what’s “inappropriate” about it. Soave clearly believes in positive rights.

          You don’t have a right to be treated any specific way

          That’s a libertarian view. Progressives and Soave evidently disagree.

          But it is a big leap from there to “we should have armed thugs running around making sure you conform to our definition of ‘kindness and decency’.”

          If you define it as a positive right, then there is no leap: positive rights must necessarily ultimately be enforced by the threat of violence from armed thugs.

          1. “Progressives and Soave evidently disagree.”

            You repeat yourself, sir.

    2. It isn’t the “unreasonably awful” people who make your “well-meaning law” problematic, Robby. It’s the fact that, however “well-meaning” it is, IT IS BAD LAW.

  36. Maybe he’s doing it to expose the absurdity of the law?

    1. While I don’t generally hold Popehat in high regard, The Rule of Goats still applies.

      1. Popehat is dead, baby; Popehat is dead.

  37. “It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects. ”

    No, HE does not.

    1. I very sincerely believe that I am a fire truck, but that doesn’t make cars stop when I cross the road.

  38. I got an ad for Manscaped on this article.

  39. This is the world progressives created. They were warned and all the weasels did was scoff and laugh.

    Oh and don’t compare this to suing over a damn ladies night at a bar. There should be no special discounts for women in an era where they constantly whine about equality. But that isn’t the same as forcing a woman to wax a dudes balls.

    1. Ladies night at the bar is for the benefit of the men, not the “ladies.”

      1. Ladies night at the bar is for the benefit of the bar owner.

  40. I know this is a Canadian thing, but it made me wonder. Robby begs the question with “It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects. ”

    Do U.S. trans-women get dropped from Selective Service requirements when they “become” women? How much effort does it take to “become” a trans-woman? Does simply saying “I identify…” suffice, as it seems to for Title IX stuff–no hormones, no surgery, no questions permitted “I identify therefore I am” seems to be the rule there. Do U.S. trans-men run to register for Selective Service as part of their transition, or do they object on the grounds that they’re really women and should have to?

    1. Robby begs the question with “It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects. ”

      If an adult person “very, very sincerely believes he is a 3rd-grade boy and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects.” can he force youth T-ball league to let him play?

      If an adult person “very, very sincerely believes he is a needs surgery to make himself a disembodied head (think Futurama) and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects.” can he force surgeons to perform the surgery?

      1. If I very, very sincerely believe I’m a tall and athletic high school girl, can I get on the girls’ volleyball team? I promise not to ask for any special accommodations. :innocent face emoji:

    2. “I know this is a Canadian thing…”

      Not if the Dems gain control of both houses of Congress and the presidency.

  41. [Soave] It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects.

    Behold Soave’s libertarianism: “if you sincerely believe something, you have a [positive] right to have your belief accommodated by everybody else.”

    1. Soave is not saying that, he’s saying that Yaniv might believe that. There’s a difference. I know you guys hate Soave but don’t deliberately twist his words around.

      1. Soave is not saying that, he’s saying that Yaniv might believe that.

        His statement is ambiguous. I read it one way, you read it the other way.

        1. His statement is not ambiguous. But, to be sure, it is possible that Soave misspoke.

          The difference is between “…and thus…” and “…and thus believes she….”

          He used the former, not the latter. If he meant the latter he did a shitty job of saying it. But certainly has the opportunity to clarify his intent. That he does not offer clarification says he did not mean anything other than what he plainly stated.

    2. Soave is a progressive.

  42. Suffice it to say that Yaniv’s behavior is uncharacteristic of trans people, or even of social justice activists in general.

    Seems pretty characteristic of “social justice activists” to me.

  43. “It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects.”

    Sorry but one does not follow the other.

  44. The Reason article uses “her” to describe a person with male genitalia. You have bought in……wtf?

    1. Reason staff is woke, yo!

  45. Does no one see the obvious injustice that Canadians can offer Brazilian Waxing Services for women only? Sexist! Why the hell do I need to register as trans? Why do I need to declare as a specific gender? Why can’t I have my hairy balls waxed if I choose to represent myself as the male sex I was born with?!?!?

    Canada is denying my right to carry shiny smooth bollocks!

    1. Don’t fret. There is a tattooed 400-lb. biker named “Tiny” who is eager to wax your balls.

  46. Suffice it to say that Yaniv’s behavior is uncharacteristic of trans people, or even of social justice activists in general.

    Cite?

  47. It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects. But it seems more likely that she’s a troll. I’m reminded of Steve Horner, a Minnesota-based activist who routinely sued bars for selling cheaper drinks to female customers as part of “ladies’ night” promotions. Horner charged that this practice violated the state’s Human Rights law, and won more than $6,000 in settlements.

    So the problem here is not that he has balls and claims to be a woman. The problem is that he is a “troll” and doesn’t believe he is a woman with sufficient conviction for Robby. Since Robby says “t’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects. “, then this woman should be forced to wax the balls of men who “sincerely believe” they are men.

    Jesus Christ what the hell is wrong with you people. It is a fucking man. No one owes him the service of waxing his balls. It is really that simple.

    1. Soave is not saying that. Soave is saying that Yaniv believes she is a woman and thus Yaniv feels she should be treated as one in all respects. Soave doesn’t believe that, he’s just arguing that perhaps Yaniv believes that. But more likely thinks he’s just a fucking troll.

      1. Not true. Read what Soave says again. He is not arguing that Yaniv “believes he has a right to be treated as a woman.” If Soave were arguing that, he wouldn’t then say “But it seems more likely he is a troll”. That statement only makes sense if being a troll is what makes this wrong. And if being a troll is what makes this wrong, that means if he wasn’t a troll, he would have a right to this service.

        You guys will twist yourself into any contortion to give Soave the benefit of the doubt and pretend he is not saying what he is clearly saying. Soave attracts the most dedicated fan boys of any writer on the internet. You really have to give him credit for that if nothing else.

        1. You’re the one doing the linguistic twisting.

          1. I read it the same way John did. And for the same reason.

            From a libertarian point of view, Yaniv’s motivations and beliefs make no difference as to whether a business is justified in refusing him service.

            1. Exactly. If determining the proper outcome requires the use of a pejorative then the process is well and truly fucked.

              It’s nothing more than an arrogation of authority based upon your own opinion.

  48. Testing the boundaries of law and custom is a proud tradition of the Enlightenment-based culture we all live in.

    Eww gross! works too.

    1. What an unsurprisingly dishonest and irrelevant take from Tony.

  49. […] like the story I covered yesterday—the case of the transgender activist trying to persuade the British Columbia Human Rights […]

  50. […] like the story I covered yesterday—the case of the transgender activist trying to persuade the British Columbia Human Rights […]

  51. […] like the story I covered yesterday—the case of the transgender activist trying to persuade the British Columbia Human Rights […]

  52. So this man and his quest for pre-teens’ ised tampons and topless pool paries is the next logical step from those creepy drag queen kiddy fondling parties at public libraries that progressive parents are so keen to send their kids to?

    I remember The Federalist ran an article earlier this year about a movement forming at the vanguard of the LGBTQ+++ movement that was literally advocating for the normalization and acceptance of pedophilia and child abuse, like some kind of “woke” NAMBLA. At the time I thought it was ridiculous and those people wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting anywhere near their goals but now it’s clear that the progressive stupidity has reached a new low. Some progressive parents are now so keen to prove how rightthink they are pushing their kids into all sorts of godawful messed up stuff as soon as they can walk and talk.

    1. Fuck. And I thought virtue signalling was a selfish, cost-free action that benefitted no one and harmed no one.
      “SJWs”: Hold my beer.

    2. I remember The Federalist ran an article earlier this year about a movement forming at the vanguard of the LGBTQ+++ movement that was literally advocating for the normalization and acceptance of pedophilia and child abuse, like some kind of “woke” NAMBLA. At the time I thought it was ridiculous and those people wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting anywhere near their goals . . . .

      You must not remember the 70s. At that time, pedophilia was beginning to look like the next step in the logical progression of the sexual revolution. Remember David Hamilton’s soft porn coffee-table books? Remember how people tut-tutted about how repressive the U.S. was with its ridiculous statutory rape laws, which forced John Derek to move to Europe with his underage girlfriend Mary Cathleen Collins (soon to be renamed Bo Derek)? My theory is that we did a 180-degree turn on pedophilia because it was perceived as a big stick that could be used to beat up on the Catholic Church, and once that institution falls into line (like the Boy Scouts largely have), then the sexual revolution will resume its arc of justice, and the age of consent can be lowered to that of puberty.

      1. I do not remember the ’70s because I am limited to a linear perception of time, and as such my present “begins” to form recollections only in the 1980s. However, you do make a very good point.

  53. […] like the story I covered yesterday—the case of the transgender activist trying to persuade the British Columbia Human Rights […]

  54. As long as the government is involved, this issue is sure to be fixed once and for all.

  55. “It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects.”

    Of all people, a writer for Reason should not be abusing the word “right” in this way.

  56. “It’s possible that Yaniv very, very sincerely believes she is a woman, and thus has a right to be treated as one in all respects.”

    Hell no. You have a right to deny your biological reality and be insane but nobody has to put up with it, nor do we have to subsidize it, enshrine it in our civil rights legislation, or tolerate you thinking its normal to chop off and invert your dick, skin your arms and legs to make a sausage tube, dilate yourself on a regular basis, take unsafe and damaging levels of hormones not made for your biological sex, etc.

    The T+ part of LGBT is why we need insane asylums again.

  57. I’m surprised there aren’t any trans activists on this thread. It was not too long ago that the trans activists would monitor sites like this, then announce on the TG activist websites that their members should go to these sites to argue with us ignorant rubes.

  58. my wife brilliantly suggested that she take this as an entrepreneurial opportunity!! she should start a business to provide Brazilian waxing services to people with penises and scrota (scrotums??), whether men or pre-surgery trans women.

    1. SJW identity grifting is the real entrepreneurial opportunity.

      “They that sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind”

      I love the cries of terror and dismay of those who fed others to the crocodile, hoping it would eat them last, when it finally turns on them.

      Sounds like Justice.

  59. I never would have suspected that Robby was such a transphobe, but The Hair is starting to look a little fashy, ain’t it?

  60. Welcome to car talk with Tom and Ray, hear to discuss your Volvo problems.
    TOM: I know Volvo’s like the back of your hand.
    RAY: how well do you know the back of my hand.
    TOM: well you hit me upside my head enough..
    RAY: our new Volvo dealership is going to be great… I know Volvo’s backward and ford wards.
    TOM: that’s not what your ex wife said
    RAY: huh what
    TOM: yeah , she said instead you knew it forward and backward
    RAY: yeah, so that’s why she’s my ex wife number two then
    TOM/RAY: yuk yuk yuk yuk…..

    TOM: hi caller what seems to be the problem
    CALLER: it’s my rear end,
    RAY: what does it do
    CALLER: it makes a clunking sound when I shift back and forth, like something’s loose back there
    TOM: hmmm, could be a problem with the tranny
    RAY: lets get it on the lift and see..
    TOM: well gosh, look at that, a Mustang
    RAY: and look at the size of that Mustang, anda stick shift model too
    TOM: I’m sorry mam, but we’re a Volvo shop
    RAY: we know Volvos backwards and foreword
    TOM: …forward and backwards…
    TOM/RAY: yuk yuk yuk ….
    RAY: and we got tools for Volvo’s, and experience with Volvo’s
    TOM: yeah, and if we started monkeying around with your Mustang parts, some lug nuts could fall off
    RAY: ohhh that hurts to think about.
    TOM: and what would our insurer say, working on something we have no qualifications
    RAY: we know some good people
    TOM: qualified people
    RAY: well compared to us everyone is qualified
    Yuk yuk yuk…..
    TOM: let us refer you to someone who can deal with you Mustang parts correctly. It’s the right thing to do

  61. ALL women should be forced to wax my scrotum or else I won’t be free and sweet liberty will have perished from these United States, that I cherish above all else.

  62. I am very sympathetic to the plight of trans people. I’m very good friends with two, and gender dysphoria is a real bitch of a mental illness. I think trans people ought to be treated with respect, understanding, and accommodation where possible. However, to hear “libertarian light” Robby Soave demand that trans people have a right to force others to interact with them in a manner they desire is pretty sickening. Fuck-off with that statist garbage.

  63. If the only thing that distinguishes whether or not something is illegal is whether or not the victim is a troll, we have lost the plot and it is a bad law.

  64. Well when Jessica Yaniv gets testicular cancer sure hope s/he can find a gynecologist to help it out.

  65. Well when Jessica Yaniv gets toxic shock syndrome sure hope s/he can find a gynecologist to help it out.

  66. Well when Jessica Yaniv gets bacterial vaginosis sure hope s/he can find a gynecologist to help it out.

  67. Well when Jessica Yaniv gets testicular torsion sure hope s/he can find a gynecologist that knows what he/she is doing.

  68. Yaniv is part of the gay mafia, a part of the LGBQT community that seeks to force their ideology on everyone else via bullying tactics like this. The LGBQT community as a whole represents less then %5 for the human population and yet the radicals within that group live Yaniv are able to bully companies and individual into bending to their will because they have the support of government and most of big tech via its support of progressive and identity politics.

  69. […] the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, and National Review’s Madeleine Kearns, Reason’s Robby Soave, and the Toronto Sun have all documented the hair-raising (sorry) […]

  70. But this IS the logical conclusion from all the leftist insanity, denial of reality, and claims of equality in all possible ways. This is the inevitable conclusion.

  71. am I the only one who’s brain takes that headline and turns it into “If You Give a Mouse a Cookie”?? now we just need a book: If You Give a Troll a Brazilian Bikini Wax.

  72. […] Civil Rights Tribunal, and also National Evaluation‘s Madeleine Kearns, Factor‘s Robby Soave, and also the Toronto Sun have all recorded the hair-raising (sorry) information. The tale has […]

Please to post comments