Don't you love kiwis :love: so cute

Then let's call it an aha moment or an hmm moment... why are you aligning this to completely uncomparable issues ts?
As I clearly stated the issue is not with the trans community or anyone's opinions relating to that.
This is specifically regarding the courts and how they are handling the case in Canada.

It's not uncomparable. It's about taking extreme, highly publicized examples and using them as "proof" that people were "right all along" about a wider issue.

Yes absolutely. And why is Yaniv not being investigated is the question?

Exactly

All that was said all along is that some people would use it as an opportunity, that has been proven correct, it doesn't matter who you are or what you do there will always be people willing to exploit, it doesn't really matter if the percentage of those taking advantage is miniscule (though this doesn't appear to be the case in sport where scholarships and cash are the opportunity), closing the gate after the horse has bolted is not the answer, and as we are seeing the authorities are struggling to deal with the opportunists in a competent way

...I don’t think it’s a ‘gotcha moment’, TS...three women have lost their jobs and one women has lost her business because what they did for an income involved female genitalia ...and here was someone who presented male genitalia, saying I’m sorry but you have to...one of the women had a child/children in the house and felt it completely inappropriate...and even though this is a story about a specifically disturbing individual/one person...it doesn’t make it any less terrifying to many females that a man is basically saying..’you have to touch me’....and if you don’t I’ll destroy part of your life...and that’s why it’s so emotive...

It is awful and it is emotive, but it doesn't necessarily mean there should be a restriction on or reversing of trans rights. Or that we shouldn't address the parts that do need to be addressed carefully and sensitively rather than from a place of defensive fear and anger. That's an important part of the equation, here.

...I completely agree with you, I mean totally...but I guess what is being felt atm also is that these women were not protected by any laws or any human rights court, so nothing for them was addressed which would say equality..?....what was demanded from them was then validated ‘in law’...and that’s an important part as well...this is a story of one person, yes...but it’s also a story of the human rights courts validation of that person...

It appears that this case has been addressed far too sensitively and carefully for the wrong party, of course people are going to be angry

people get angry any time there is injustice, and this is no different. There shouldn't be any excuses, there should be a change so it doesnt happen again

I wasn't going to post in this thread... I tend to avoid all the trans threads started on this forum as they are only ever highlighting negatives of trans people in our communities, and hyper focusing on negative issues amongst the minority of trans people.
I had read of this case prior to Niamh starting the thread... and I also sat down with my own trans kid to have an open discussion about what is happening in this situation.
It seems obvious to me that this individual is seeking out, in a very wrong manner, reasons to accuse other people of transphobia to bring to the legal system to create a precedent. Now Kizzy has said in here if I recall that she in particular takes issue with how the legal system in Canada is handling this (or these) cases. I am not aware if any cases have been won yet in this area, but that they are all in legal proceedings from the reputable news source i went to. To that I say, if she didn't have any grounds for a case, the court would not have let it go in front of a judge. I myself have been brought in front of a judge for something that I didn't believe the claimant had grounds to do.... it was thrown out later on. It was a hardship and inconvenience at the time.... but justice worked it's course. That seems to be what is happening here. We live in a litigious society. The people harmed by her false accusations can counter sue back afterwards. That's unfortunately how our justice system works.

But... I strongly agree with everything TS has said in this thread... as a woman who thinks he is allowed an opinion despite his penis... and as someone who knows a fair decent amount of decent trans people. Women's liberties are not being stepped on. There are legalities on how our society should and can go forward to further include trans people as equal citizens... and that will get worked out more and more over time...
But the long standing claim on here that all male to female trans people are treading on the long fought victories in equality for woman is false... and is a masked version of transphobia.

Sorry for the essay

Not even nearly just stick to the topic under discussion ts why the distracting hypotheticals?
There was a concern that the law would be exploited and guess what it has, that is a cold hard fact. Highlighting that is not detrimental to the trans community, I'm sure they'll be equally as outraged that the law has chosen to exonerate a predator.

Let me be clear ... I'm not saying that the trans community are treading on anything... my issue is how this issue specifically has been dealt with in isolation.
I have voiced a concern that in time similar cases may occur in the UK.
That is not in any way transphobic... it has nothing to do with the trans community and everything to do with the legal system.
It is relatively clear from the interview that this person is a predator, I am only at this time commenting on this one case. I haven't expressed any opinion or view on the wider subject of trans rights...Therefore I don't feel it is fair to insinuate any perceived transphobia based on my comments in this thread masked or otherwise.

It's not a hypothetical, it's an example of a comparable situation that would be viewed differently and perfectly relevant to the thread topic. Because no one is arguing that loopholes are being exploited and manipulated for individual gain here; it's the very clear subtext on "what that means when it comes to wider trans issues" that is questionable.

I didn't... I only referred to your post as it related to legal issues... which I thought I made clear by separating my comment on it from my other references.

No it isn't. .. There's no way in heaven that rights of a terrorist would be given priority over the public, and a terrorist is a criminal... where is the criminal in this situation?

There isn't much comfort in being able to sue someone who more than likely hasn't got a pot to piss in once you have lost your business, income, and reputation.

The only reason imo this has got to court is because the guy is identifying as trans and as we can see from how people are immediately labelled on this forum, in the real world people are fearful of losing their jobs or putting a foot wrong in case of an almighty life ruining backlash. The trans community should be up in arms about this guy, he is an opportunist and is exploiting them

When Holly and Jessica were murdered by a school caretaker, the way school staff were vetted was changed so this was less likely to happen ever again

When Vanessa George was convicted of using her mobile phone in a nursery setting, steps were taken and staff can no longer use their mobiles while working into a nursery setting.

school staff or nursery staff were not up in arms at the changes, nor did they feel victimised in any way, they were welcomed as a safeguarding measure.

The point being we shouldn't need to have 'loads of cases' before something is done to stop opportunists

In the same way the trans and wider community need to be safeguarded against opportunists, not sure who is going to put their head above the parapet to do it, but it needs to be done

...for the moment, this story has run its course for me, just because I’m driving myself google crazy in trying to find more in depth information about this person...I mean they are meant to be a ‘notorious Canadian pervert’...and there are some deeply disturbing things reported..and yet no police involvement ...and with the underage topless swimming contest ...where are the outraged parents etc...why is predatory behaviour with children being almost skipped over as a bi-story...I just don’t know what to think about this tbh but i just don’t think we’re getting anywhere near a full story...or something is very off about it for me...

...I mean if this person for instance were a troll then surely that’s an offence and there would have been police involvement because of the serious nature of the trolling ...

Indeed Ammi, I know this individual exists and that they seem to be awful, but beyond that, the story has been latched onto by groups with a very clear and distinct agenda and so the actual facts are clear as mud. People are "OUTRAGED!" about what currently amounts to internet gossip and half truthes and why? I wonder? It seems pretty clear to me that it's simply because they want to. They want to believe that any tidbit of "bad" that can be gleaned from any random forum post on this is true, because it confirms their already-present fears and suspicions about transexuals.

"ReeeEEeeEeee here he goes again Psychic Sally thinking he somehow knows what other people are thinking!!! Misogynist Bob daring to tell women what they think how dare!!"

Just to pre-empt this tired, limp old response: No I'm not psychic, nor do I think I'm psychic, but I'm perfectly entitled to read between the lines when forming my opinions. If you don't like my opinion... well, I don't care so tough luck buddy :shrug:

With respect TS that is nonsense. People are concerned that new rules are allowing exploitation. We know no more than that, and by doing your own association, you are simply furthering your own agenda which is to silence people that don't agree with your philosophy.

Indeed.

...what’s not helping this story ...(...imo...)...is that it seems huge in terms of his perversions ...and yet its main focus of interest...(...from any and all media sources reporting it...)...seems to be very focused on one aspect....with other disturbing things more being skipped over...

Exactly and if Yaniv can get to court with that and put women out of business/extort money from them, these new Self ID laws need looking at.

And in your eyes she is still the victim...
You haven't passed one comment on the beauticians in this case, where is your concern for their mental health?...

they seem targeted aswell, women who were struggling a bit, single mothers and immigrants who may not have the means to fight their case and stand up for themselves properly

Yaniv is a disgusting individual, but the fact that this whole farce has been able to get as far as it has is possibly even worse. Women put out of business for refusing to touch someones balls for ****s sake. I thought this was a joke at first when I first read about it years back. Have referred to balldemort on here before actually in passing. But yeah, of course self ID opens the doors for perverts such as yaniv. Which has always been the feminist argument tbh (though almost always misreprsented as 'you think all trans people are perverts!!!111'). Yes, men will perv anyway, but why make it easier for them..and basically allow situations such as the one thats currently going on.

Have been following this quite closely and tbh, it does seem hes going to lose this, as he should. But that they hav been dragged to court to start with, is ****ing ridiculous and the system really needs to be looked at. Also Yaniv needs treatment for his obvious mental health issues. And locking away from kids forever, too tbh.

Also sorry, **** calling an abusive bloke like this she. Him and his mother are raging racists, ontop of everything else, from the court transcripts. Media might start picking it up now, there was a reporting ban on until very recently, as Yaniv said his privacy would be rbeached, yadayada..but the judge just overturned it as Yaniv has been posting on his twitter about the case.

The women were of course right to refuse. They did not have training in waxing men. Andf its very very different. Hell, if they had done it, they might have damaged him permanently. And honestly, even without that, just the fact they didn't want to touch his dick should be enough to lose the matter entirely. Not go through months of court cases.

...you’re own bias...:laugh:..as in ‘seek and you shall find’, which is what I touched on earlier...that what you were looking for../...expecting or whatever was not really there as such or maybe a little but you may have helped cause it ...is that fair..?...it actually was there with me though and you completely missed it because you were over scrutinising elsewhere..?.../...to a degree obviously because I’m not laying all fault with you, not one bit...I honestly don’t know if this person is transitioning at all, which is my reluctance...or if it’s all just money/income generating..?...they were very precise about how much money was gained from each tribunal...(...I feel..)...as though this person may research who they feel would refuse to wax and then target them with the sole intention of...

I haven't sympathised with them once and have repeatedly referred to them as a dangerous, predatory paedophile. Honestly if you look into it - as awful as the effect on the beautician's livelihoods has been - this is the LEAST of what this person is out there doing and I think there is probably a very real risk posed.

I've also said multiple times that the legal loopholes that are being used to exploit people and destroy their businesses need to be addressed and, in fact, I'm sure I said (or at least I have when discussing this elsewhere) that I think it's ridiculous that a business that involves getting up close and personal with people's genitals doesn't have the right to refuse service without question.

None of this has anything to do with whether or not gender pronouns should be respected? Like I said, an M2F serial killer should still be "she". It doesn't mean I sympathise with their crimes?

The pronoun argument, Yaniv goes by both he and she too. He uses both Jonathon and Jessica as names also. So its not really possible to misgender him, as he uses both depending on the situation..

...why is this story just coming to light if it’s been well known for many years, as Vicky is saying...and what about the predatory behaviour with children...has that not been investigated ...and if it has, things have been posted so why no conviction..?....


....uggghhhh I said before I was done with this story for the moment ...it’s too confusing and conflicting and something is defiantly off about it...just not enough information...

He is very good at getting mention of him wiped from existence. No diea about no conviction. Morgane Oger..a prominent transactivist in Canada has posted about him before too..2 secs. The predatory side of it is absolutely true.

Edit. Ogers take on this..

https://morganeoger.ca/2019/04/19/pr...f-who-you-are/

And no one could possibly call Oger transphobic, by any stretch of the imagination.

...yeah that was the other thing actually which I forgot ...it had stated the person identified by both he and she../..using Jonathan and Jessica...so I made a decision which I would use because I don’t atm believe anything about them...again this is a very unique and individual case with no direct comparisons...

Yes I agree there will be lots of places who said yes to the treatment, from the interview there are multiple businesses being sued. Some have settled, some gone out of business and many still ongoing cases the amount of money involved is $8000- $15,000!
And our sympathy should be with this exploitative preditor?

...it was very precise about the money sums as the interviewer made an error with one amount and it was immediately corrected...that’s one of the things that is really off for me...the winning of the tribunals seemed to be all about the cash over not feeling as though equality was being applied...

It is quite under wraps still tbf. He gets pretty much all mention of his name removed from twitter by legal proceedings, mention of his name pretty much anywhere, half expecting james to get a legal letter over this thread.

When he loses this tribunal (as I cannot even contemplate that he could win..what precident would that set for women?!) I imagine some of the canadian papers might pick up on it a bit more. There WAS a reporting restriction until a couple of days ago..quite surprised its not all out properly now and still seems to be quite hush hush.

The only reason there is a website specifically about him too..is because he was so sucessful at getting peoples posts about him deleted everywhere.

Either way, clear predator, clearly mentally ill, clearly should lose. And a clear problem with self-ID and how the system is going/set up.

Niamh often posts about feminist stuff tbh. And you cannot really get more of a feminist issue, than a bloke trying to sue (multiple) women for refusing to touch his balls. And the system allowing this circus when surely, anyone with half a brain can see whats going on here.

Forgive a lighter mode, but am I the only one who finds the word scrotum funny? :laugh:
A scrotal sack is even funnier


Ok, sorry.

...I still don’t understand, Vicky...(...sorry I’m not being antagonistic...)....but Yaniv is restricting any reporting of and yet I believe it was Yaniv who posted inside the tribunal of what took place...surely that’s odd and conflicting...

I always liked it in EastEnders when they referred to people as a "scrote", like... just calling people a ballbag on prime time telly.