Oddly, the entire queer movement, the left, and all of mainstream media have been politely ignoring the absolute shit show that has been taking place at the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal
this month. Oddly, journalists covering the queer beathave declined to do their jobs, despite the fact that these hearings are only taking place because of the strides the queer movement has made in its fight to make gender identity ideology law. Oddly, those who are incredibly concerned about “despicable” women who dare discuss the implications of allowing men to self-identify as women have not managed to find time to comment on an individual who filed human rights complaints against 16 women for refusing to wax his genitalia, claiming this constitutes discrimination based on gender identity. Oddly, media outlets with the financial means and staff available to cover this case have left it to independents who are much more vulnerable and much more pressed for resources than they are. Oddly, one high profile woman who had been actively tweeting about the complainant, Jessica (previously Jonathan) Yaniv, was recently permanently banned from Twitter. Oddly, another high profile woman(hi!) who publicly named Yaniv as the one behind these complaints on Twitter was also banned. Oddly, the fact that this is precisely the kind of thing women have been trying to warn policy makers, the media, activists, and the public would be a certain result of gender identity ideology and legislation is being completely ignored by those who were warned.
Oddly, it turns out gender identity ideology hurts women after all.
The Post Millennial reported that more than one of the women Yaniv took to the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal for declining to give him a Brazilian bikini wax have been forced to close their businesses as a result. Many of the women Yaniv filed complaints about were immigrant women for whom English was a second language. Jay Cameron, a lawyer with the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), which represents three of the women against whom JY has filed human rights complaints , including Maria Da Silva, an immigrant from Brazil who worked out of her home (where children are present), told the tribunal judge that Yaniv specifically targeted women from ethnic and religious minorities.
Oddly, reporters covering the “diversity” beat and activists who claim a vested interest in protecting minorities are unconcerned about this.
Yaniv’s complaint is unfounded for a number of reasons. One is, simply, that waxing male genitalia is different than waxing female genitalia. John Carpay, president of the JCCF,
explains that an expert witness (“AB”) with 29 years of experience in waxing, operates a waxing salon for men only, and also teaches at a well-known aesthetic school testified that, “The ideal wax used for male genitals is different because the skin is very thin, and waxing can cause injury if not done properly.”
Beyond that, there are safety issues for the estheticians — particularly for women working alone out of their homes. Carpay writes:
“AB started out providing services from her home, and discussed the risks involved with this. To wax a male client, AB must handle his scrotum and the shaft of the penis. Many men get erections. Some men ask for sex, and when this request is refused, some get angry. AB has been called ‘bitch,’ ‘slut,’ and worse.”
There are very good reasons why women do not wish to be alone with strange, naked men. And most sane people understand that a woman should not be forced to touch a man’s genitals against her will. But when there is such a thing, as the trans activist movement claims, as “a female penis,” things that are very straightforward and obvious are suddenly indefensible. Suddenly, women’s right to say “no,” to have boundaries, to protect themselves and their spaces, to understand that a penis belongs to a male, not a female, cannot be defended.
I was invited to speak at
Scottish Parliament in May, alongside feminist activist and founder of the Vancouver Women’s Library, Bec Wonders, and SNP MSP Joan McAlpine, in order to discuss the situation of gender identity legislation in Canada, and to warn politicians about the repercussions for women. I said:
“None of this is about transphobia. It is about men and it is about women having the right to say no to men. To not be gaslighted and bullied for daring to consider their own safety, rights, and feelings first.
We are at a place where we are not only allowing men to dictate what a woman is, but to destroy hard fought for rights won by feminists, very quickly, without any public debate. We are putting women and girls in danger in order to avoid offending the feelings of a tiny minority of people. Again, without a public debate. We are allowing women to be fired, threatened, harassed, smeared, silenced, intimidated, ostracized, and even beaten in order to accommodate the feelings of men. And I refuse to accept or repeat lies under threat — especially lies that are clearly harmful. We can support people’s rights and dignity and provide them with the services they need without lying and without throwing women under the bus.”
I have been threatened countless times, called countless names, and slandered countless times. This website has been subjected to massive cyber attacks, almost non-stop, since
January (we had experienced similar attacks prior, but none so massive and unrelenting). I received a call from the Langley RCMP, also in January, to inform me “someone” had reported Feminist Current for hate speech. I have received disturbing, sexualized phone calls. My talks are routinely protested (250 protestors showed up to the second #GIDYVR event in Vancouver, discussing gender identity and kids. We had to hire our own security team, as did our venue, and the police had to attend, in order to protect speakers and attendees.) It is unlikely I will ever be employable, in any normal sense of the word, certainly not in Canadian media. I have lost friends. I fear for my safety. I am not the only woman who has experienced these things, simply for understanding that there is no such thing as a “female penis,” and that allowing men to identify as women endangers women and nullifies women’s sex-based rights. I am not the only person who sees that this movement, supported by “progressive” politicians, enabled by the media, and shoved down our throats, under threat, by supposedly left wing activists, is undoing the work feminists have done over decades to protect women.
Oddly, everything we have said is true. And oddly, those responsible are saying nothing.