When is a hairy ballsack not a hairy ballsack?
How dare you not know the answer to this, you disgusting transphobe!
The answer, obviously, is when those dangly bollocks belong to a self-declared woman like Jessica Yaniv — formerly Jonathan Yaniv — who is currently suing a number of intimate grooming salons in the Canadian courts because, disgracefully, they refused to wax his lady spheres.
Some commentators, including comedian Ricky Gervais, have suggested that there is something untoward about Yaniv’s behaviour.
But the trans lobby, naturally disagrees.
I personally am on the side of Jessica Yaniv – and not just because she scrubs up so beautifully in her party frock. No, I love Jessica because I think she represents what Rod Liddle memorably coined in one of his Spectator columns as “peak wank.” That is, Jessica and everything he/she/it/ze/zir/wotevs stands for, represent the moment when identity politics reached such a pitch of lunacy that even diehard Social Justice Warriors began facepalming in horror.
In fact, if I were to have my way, in ten years time there will be a statue of Jessica – in her party frock of course – in every square in every city in Canada, plus the odd one in other strategically selected locations: Brighton, Bristol, Stroud and Totnes in the UK; Berkeley, Austin and Manhattan in the US; Melbourne in Australia; etc.
The statue will remind the politically correct denizens of these places that they LOST the culture wars – and that the reason they lost the culture wars was Jessica Yaniv.
The more you read about this case the murkier it gets – to the point where any reasonable observer might well ask: “Is this freak show really the hill you Social Justice Warriors want to die on? Why??”
Here is the basic story:
Trans woman Jessica Yaniv has filed 16 human rights complaints with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal over in Canada, charging various waxing and aesthetic salon workers with transphobic discrimination for refusing to wax her balls/lady spheres/gender dumplings.
Each of these salons or their workers indicated they only provided intimate area services to female clients, and despite the fact that Jessica identifies as and lives her life as a woman, the workers were not comfortable with the fact that they would have to handle/wax a pair of balls.
According to Jessica Yaniv and her supporters on social media, this is discrimination and these women should not be allowed to refuse contact with a penis, whether it belongs to a man or woman.
Yaniv’s critics have pointed out that if this really is about combating discrimination and bigotry then Yaniv is hardly a shining moral example. One screenshot purportedly from Yaniv’s social media accounts, from when ‘she’ still identified as male, show him ranting about immigrants:
“We have a lot of immigrants here who gawk and judge and aren’t exactly the cleanest people. They’re also verbally and physically abusive, that’s one main reason why I joined a girls gym, cause I DON’T want issues with these people, nor do I want them in anyway, shape or form. They lie about shit, they’ll do anything to support their own kind and make things miserable for everyone else.”
Elsewhere, he is allegedly shown somewhat creepily asking for chatroom advice on how to behave in a women’s changing room:
“If I notice a girl that’s nude below and has a tampon string coming out when I’m changing and doing my stuff, is it weird to approach her to ask her for a tampon? or pad? Just to bond with her a bit over period stuff…”
If Yaniv weren’t pursuing an actual discrimination case through the courts, you’d think he was another parody character like Godfrey Elfwick using satire to hold up to a mirror the wilder excesses of intersectional politics.
But in a way, Yaniv is doing us all a huge favour. He is testing woke culture to the bounds of destruction: can it really be possible that a court of law will decide that the rights of a trans woman to get his testicles waxed trump those of poor, often immigrant beauty salon workers, some from religiously sensitive backgrounds, who consider this a task below their pay grade.
My sympathy is with those poor womenfolk. In a free market, I believe that Yaniv is perfectly entitled to have his orbs waxed and polished if he wishes – but that he should pay a proper market rate (a lot, I imagine: well it was the last few times I had it done…) rather than trading under false pretences.
There are bigger issues here as Jamie Whyte suggests here:
This, ultimately, is where the battle lines should be drawn if ever we are to recover our Civilisation.
Should the State, in the name of equality, coerce businesses and individuals to do things they find unacceptable?
Or should businesses and individuals be permitted freedom of choice, just like we used to enjoy in the bad old days before government had quite so much power to tell us what was good for us?
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.