Lady can't have her hairy balls waxed [mod notes/warnings in post #1]

ohnonotgmail

drunkmonkey wrote: »

At the moment under the BC Human rights charter she should be able to get her woman balls waxed hence she's able to take these cases.
I don't think anyone here likes the person but it's not about her it's about trans rights. So you either support trans rights which the LGBT movement does or you support womans rights. It's black and white there's no middle ground here.

what about the rights of the people doing the waxing? are their rights not important?

super_furry

drunkmonkey wrote: »

At the moment under the BC Human rights charter she should be able to get her woman balls waxed hence she's able to take these cases.

Well lets wait and see what the court says. It's down for decision on the 26th on this month.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I don't think anyone here likes the person but it's not about her it's about trans rights. So you either support trans rights which the LGBT movement does or you support womans rights. It's black and white there's no middle ground here.

I think the real world is a lot more nuanced that you're trying to present here. Hence the fact that there's no-one supporting Yaniv's actions, her approach or her behaviour.

drunkmonkey

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what about the rights of the people doing the waxing? are their rights not important?

You mean womens rights, no they don't seem to be hence she's already put some out of business and the women defending their stance is costing them around 20k to fight her.

Calhoun

MrFresh wrote: »

It's not the trans community making her prominent though is it?

No it's not but i am sure this person would have their defenders and lets face it the reason they act so brazenly is because of the clout the wider community exerts in order to get more rights than others.

Lets just hope when the time comes people are more rational and can distinguish between the two.

suicide_circus

Deleted User wrote: »

Am I allowed say these days that I don't think that person is a woman.

wellwhynot wrote: »

I don’t think you are. Even though our eyes/brain see a man.

Its transubstanciation. Everyone knows the bread and wine dont actually turn into the body and blood of christ during the mass but all true believers profess to believe it.

Exactly the same mental processes are at play.

super_furry

Calhoun wrote: »

No it's not but i am sure this person would have their defenders .

Can you find any? I think most people are disgusted by her behaviour, not least the trans community who know the blow-back that they're going to get because of her carry-on.

gmisk

drunkmonkey wrote: »

At the moment under the BC Human rights charter she should be able to get her woman balls waxed hence she's able to take these cases.
I don't think anyone here likes the person but it's not about her it's about trans rights. So you either support trans rights which the LGBT movement does or you support womans rights. It's black and white there's no middle ground here.

What a load of rubbish.
I am a gay man and I most certainly support womans rights.



This person has balls (whether they want to refer to themselves as a man or a woman who cares, I dont) and is at least anatomically a man, the women involved do not wax men, they are not trained how to do it, that should be the end of it.
Jessica Yaniv seems like a right bloody eejit from what I can read and a total creep who is clearly just doing this for attention and publicity and it shouldnt even be entertained.

drunkmonkey

super_furry wrote: »

I think the real world is a lot more nuanced that you're trying to present here. Hence the fact that there's no-one supporting Yaniv's actions, her approach or her behaviour.

The Human rights charter supports her. She is correct about her being discriminated against if we're to take it she is a woman.
Even here we have to refer to her as a woman or were misgendering her. Were reinforcing her right to be a woman on boards.
If trans people want which I take it they do to have the full rights of there chosen gender then they all have to support her stance not necessarily the person.

super_furry

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The Human rights charter supports her.

Again, we'll find out at the end of this week. I would hope she's give short shrift.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

If trans people want which I take it they do to have the full rights of there chosen gender then they all have to support her stance not necessarily the person.

Yeah, that's just absolute nonsense.

Calhoun

super_furry wrote: »

Can you find any? I think most people are disgusted by her behaviour, not least the trans community who know the blow-back that they're going to get because of her carry-on.

I haven't gone looking but generally when you bring in laws that give special rights and privileges to a certain group they will be defended. Those laws in turn will be blamed and the whole community tagged along with it, not to mention the whole us v them scenario.

The blowback needs to be there until things are corrected so people cannot be abused in this manner and potential sexual predators cannot hide in plain sight protected by laws that give special privilege.

drunkmonkey

gmisk wrote: »

What a load of rubbish.
I am a gay man and I most certainly support womans rights.



This person has balls (whether they want to refer to themselves as a man or a woman who cares, I dont) and is at least anatomically a man, the women involved do not wax men, they are not trained how to do it, that should be the end of it.
Jessica Yaniv seems like a right bloody eejit from what I can read and a total creep who is clearly just doing this for attention and publicity and it shouldnt even be entertained.

Do you support equal rights for trans people with their chosen gender if you don't I don't think you can class yourself as an ally of the LGBT community. I think you've highlighted the problem with putting everyone under the same banner.
We already know theres trouble in the camp when it comes to L&B rights v's T and the G's by the sounds of it aren't impressed either.
She doesn't identify as Trans btw, she identifies as a Lesbian.

Omackeral

Danzy wrote: »

Jonathan and his hairy penis must be delighted with her self.

Ha FFS the phrasing of this is brilliant.

gmisk

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Do you support equal rights for trans people with their chosen gender if you don't I don't think you can class yourself as an ally of the LGBT community. I think you've highlighted the problem with putting everyone under the same banner.
We already know theres trouble in the camp when it comes to L&B rights v's T and the G's by the sounds of it aren't impressed either.
She doesn't identify as Trans btw, she identifies as a Lesbian.

How dare you tell me I am not an ally to the LGBT community.

Are you? Your tone gives me a good indication you are not.
I am a gay man who has been a victim of a serious homophobic attack so i would like to think I have a good understanding of the need for LGBT rights and the promotion of acceptance of LGBT people.

However, this is not about equal rights, a person does not have a right to have their balls waxed by a place that does not wax balls, and if they do try and bring court cases etc, that is wrong IMO.

I would think the vast majority of Trans people would be pretty bloody pissed of with this persons behavior.
I attended a talk with Lydia Foy this gave a true insight in to what a tough time some trans people get, people like this tit do those a disservice.
I also dont speak for all the "G's" believe it or not.

She can identify as a tree for all I care.

drunkmonkey

gmisk wrote: »

How dare you tell me I am not an ally to the LGBT community.

Are you? Your tone gives me a good indication you are not.
I am a gay man who has been a victim of a serious homophobic attack so i would like to think I have a good understanding of the need for LGBT rights and the promotion of acceptance of LGBT people.

However, this is not about equal rights, a person does not have a right to have their balls waxed by a place that does not wax balls, and if they do that is wrong IMO.

I would think the vast majority of Trans people would be pretty bloody pissed of with this person behavior.
I attended a talk with Lydia Foy this gave a true insight in to what a tough time some trans people get, people like this tit do those a disservice.
I also dont speak for all the "G's" believe it or not.

She can identify as a tree for all I care.

You can't have your cake and eat it, so we're to take it that you agree with the concept that she should have the full rights a woman should have? You can't cherry pick which rights she should and shouldn't have, that's not equality if her rights are different.
This is everything to do with equal rights for trans people.

super_furry

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You can't have your cake and eat it, so we're to take it that you agree with the concept that she should have the full rights a woman should have? You can't cherry pick which rights she should and shouldn't have, that's not equality if her rights are different.
This is everything to do with equal rights for trans people.

Not sure where you get this idea that you're the arbitrator of what people can and can't believe.

Honestly I think you're acting in bad faith here and trying to paint this one loose-screw individual as being entirely representative of not just trans people but but LBGT people as a whole. It's small, it's petty, it's wrong and it's pretty blatant.

ohnonotgmail

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You can't have your cake and eat it, so we're to take it that you agree with the concept that she should have the full rights a woman should have? You can't cherry pick which rights she should and shouldn't have, that's not equality if her rights are different.
This is everything to do with equal rights for trans people.

Those rights do not exist in isolation. the person doing the waxing also has rights. they might not want to wax male genitalia because

a) they are not trained for it
b) they just dont want to do it.

Where there are competing rights the courts have to decide whose rights take precedence.

gmisk

super_furry wrote: »

Not sure where you get this idea that you're the arbitrator of what people can and can't believe.

Honestly I think you're acting in bad faith here and trying to paint this one loose-screw individual as being entirely representative of not just trans people but but LBGT people as a whole. It's small, it's petty, it's wrong and it's pretty blatant.

Thank you!
Much more eloquently put than I could as well.

MrFresh

drunkmonkey wrote: »

At the moment under the BC Human rights charter she should be able to get her woman balls waxed hence she's able to take these cases.
I don't think anyone here likes the person but it's not about her it's about trans rights. So you either support trans rights which the LGBT movement does or you support womans rights. It's black and white there's no middle ground here.

You're attempting to create a false dilemma. Just because someone is in favour of trans people being treated like the gender they identify as, it doesn't mean they have to support this particular case. The real world, and the law, is plenty of grey area.

Calhoun

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You can't have your cake and eat it, so we're to take it that you agree with the concept that she should the full rights a woman should have? You can't cherry pick which rights she should and shouldn't have, that's not equality if her rights are different.
This is everything to do with equal rights for trans people.

Exactly and i think this is the point of contention that is going to underline this conversation as we move into the future.

I fear its probably going to get worse before it gets better because unlike existing religions this is a fairly new form of it. Just like the bad catholic priests in years gone by their are individuals who use the elevated status when its provided for bad deeds.

drunkmonkey

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Those rights do not exist in isolation. the person doing the waxing also has rights. they might not want to wax male genitalia

There you go, we've established she's not a hermaphrodite. She's a male but we all have to refer to her as a female. She does not have equal rights to a female therefore she is not female.
Why do we have to subscribe to her idea of gender but we not allowed subscribe to our own.

Your still skirting around the issue at hand, you either support equal rights for trans people or you don't. Why don't you just come out and say you do or don't think trans women should have equal rights with women.
I don't support the idea there equal. That makes me a bigot.
Your supporting some of her rights but not all of her rights. Pin you medals to your chest and pick a side.

Again this isn't about the person it's about equal rights.

MrFresh

drunkmonkey wrote: »

There you go, we've established she's not a hermaphrodite. She's a male but we all have to refer to her as a female. She does not have equal rights to a female therefore she is not female.
Why do we have to subscribe to her idea of gender but we not allowed subscribe to our own.

Your still skirting around the issue at hand, you either support equal rights for trans people or you don't. Why don't you just come out and say you do or don't think trans women should have equal rights with women.
I don't support the idea there equal. That makes me a bigot.
Your supporting some of her rights but not all of her rights. Pin you medals to your chest and pick a side.

Again this isn't about the person it's about equal rights.

They should have the same rights as biological women. And if you can find a biological woman who the waxer in question gave a scrotum wax to you might have a point. But the person in question is asking for something extra to what would be provided to a biological woman. If she was post op and being refused, it would be a different matter.

conorhal

MrFresh wrote: »

They should have the same rights as biological women. And if you can find a biological woman who the waxer in question gave a scrotum wax to you might have a point. But the person in question is asking for something extra to what would be provided to a biological woman. If she was post op and being refused, it would be a different matter.

MrFresh

conorhal wrote: »

Not sure you are using that correctly.

Sittingpretty

MrFresh wrote: »

They should have the same rights as biological women. And if you can find a biological woman who the waxer in question gave a scrotum wax to you might have a point. But the person in question is asking for something extra to what would be provided to a biological woman. If she was post op and being refused, it would be a different matter.

It wouldn’t be a different matter.

The beautician in question is equally entitled as a biological woman not to be forced or bullied by any agenda that makes her touch what she considers a man.

Trans women/men have every right to live as they please and amend their body accordingly and request that others call them by their new names etc but other people should not have to be forced to be complicit in believing that they are now, because they want to be, their chosen sex. In my opinion, they are not, and never will be.

In short The Lydia Foys of this world should be entitled and consenting adults to do as they please and dress how they please and present themselves to the world as they please without the fear of critique or nastiness from anyone else but do I want her in the shower at the gym beside me? Or competing against me on the track? No. I do not.

suicide_circus

MrFresh wrote: »

Not sure you are using that correctly.

its a response to trans ideology i've used myself.

drunkmonkey

MrFresh wrote: »

They should have the same rights as biological women. And if you can find a biological woman who the waxer in question gave a scrotum wax to you might have a point. But the person in question is asking for something extra to what would be provided to a biological woman. If she was post op and being refused, it would be a different matter.

So she should have the same rights as a biological woman but she shouldn't have the same rights. So you don't support equal rights even though you claim to? Is that correct?
Post op has nothing to do with it, you can't paint a banana green and claim it's a cucumber, it's still a banana. If they don't want to work downstairs on anything but real women they shouldn't have to but the state is forcing them to or closing them down.

Jimmy Garlic

I wonder how many cross dressing perverts claim to be trans in order to act out their fantasies...getting their cock and balls waxed for example. A lot of "women" who claim to be trans look like Paul Gascoigne in a dress bought in a charity shop for a quid. No idea about fashion, hair, make up.. things you would have assume they would at least have a basic knowledge of when they claim to be women.

ohnonotgmail

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

I wonder how many cross dressing perverts claim to be trans in order to act out their fantasies...getting their cock and balls waxed for example. A lot of "women" who claim to be trans look like Paul Gascoigne in a dress bought in a charity shop for a quid. No idea about fashion, hair, make up.. things you would have assume they would at least have a basic knowledge of when they claim to be women.

you know that men can do that already, right?

gmisk

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

I wonder how many cross dressing perverts claim to be trans in order to act out their fantasies...getting their cock and balls waxed for example. A lot of "women" who claim to be trans look like Paul Gascoigne in a dress bought in a charity shop for a quid. No idea about fashion, hair, make up.. things you would have assume they would at least have a basic knowledge of when they claim to be women.

I would be surprised if many lads are getting their sexual kicks from getting their balls waxed....

gmisk

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you know that men can do that already, right?

Yeahhh but these are made up cross dressing pervs claiming to be trans to act out their fantasies....its totally different...:rolleyes:
Its endemic everyone is doing it havent you heard?