Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…3536384041…62

Comments

  • Options
    #1112
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MrFresh wrote: »
    If that's the case, considering most child molesters are known by the victim, should you not be more concerned about your own family and friends? In the interest of protecting the children of course.

    Whataboutery, really?

    We should be looking to protect children wherever possible. Sadly, abuse in the home is harder to detect but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t tackle areas where abuse could occur elsewhere.


  • Options
    #1113
    Glass fused light
    Registered Users Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭Glass fused light


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    We could be here the a while, after the hearing yesterday they said it'll take up to 3mts to decide whether the biggots have to wax those balls.




    She is now looking for $CAD 500,000

    And put 5 other women out of business.


  • Options
    #1114
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Glass fused light wrote: »
    She is now looking for $CAD 500,000

    And put 5 other women out of business.

    half a mil? thats a lot of tampons


  • Options
    #1115
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    We could be here the a while, after the hearing yesterday they said it'll take up to 3mts to decide whether the biggots have to wax those balls.

    Sorry Drunkmonkey, but what makes them biggots?

    Should I be allowed have my balls waxed (ouch) as a heterosexual? Or is it just transgender people with balls that should be allowed to have it done? What makes one transgender? Can I just say that I am transgender or do I need to have some hormones and therapy first?
    suicide_circus wrote: »
    half a mil? thats a lot of tampons

    That'll be used for sweat... or was that just pads the person was using?


  • Options
    #1116
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    Dante7 wrote: »
    Perhaps I should rephrase. Do you currently identify as a gender that doesn't match the sex on your birth cert?


    Right at this moment?

    skybox2014 wrote: »
    5.—(1) A person shall not discriminate in disposing of goods to the public generally or a section of the public or in providing a service, whether the disposal or provision is for consideration or otherwise and whether the service provided can be availed of only by a section of the public.

    (2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of—
    (c) differences in the treatment of persons on the gender ground in relation to services of an aesthetic, cosmetic or similar nature, where the services require physical contact between the service provider and the recipient,

    So the above seems to say you can treat people differently on tha basis of gender for aesthetic, cosmetic or similar services. The Barber's solicitor argued that point, according to the judgement from WRC. But ultimatly it didn't stand and the case was ruled on the basis of gender
    on the balance of the evidence presented and taking into account the cases referred to I conclude that the complainant was treated differently, because he was transgender when he was refused a haircut by the respondent. This amounts to discrimination on the grounds of gender.
    https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2018/july/adj-00011948.html

    There is no mention the person had a gender recognition cert, they simply asserted they are male and weren't treated as a male.

    Also, the Barber claimed they weren't qualified to cut a woman's hair, but that claim was rejected, because the respondant is considered a transgender man, not a woman under Irish law.

    So that is self ID in action in Ireland at the level of getting a haircut on the head. I don't see how the ruling could be any different for a trans woman seeking a genital waxing service in a woman-only salon. Under the above ruling a trans woman would be eligible for female-only services because they a trans woamn, not a man. No proof (by means of a gender cert or cosmetic surgery or anything else) seems to be required, just simple assertion.

    I would have thought this goes beyond the reach of the Gender Recognition Act - why bother having the act if self declarations like above all that is required?


    It says the barber didn't show up to rebut the evidence given by the plaintiff so you're reading a bit too much into the case in regards to setting it as a precedent.


    Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »
    Now that is a genuine false dilemma.
    No it isn't. It isn't a dilemma. If anything it's closer to reductio ad absurdum. But I'd argue it is neither.

    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Whataboutery, really?

    We should be looking to protect children wherever possible. Sadly, abuse in the home is harder to detect but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t tackle areas where abuse could occur elsewhere.


    But the idea of protecting kids by banning transgender people assumes that transgender people have a high risk, or at least a higher than average risk, of offending against children. I'm not aware of any statistics to support this assumption.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1117
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,141 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    MrFresh wrote: »






    But the idea of protecting kids by banning transgender people assumes that transgender people have a high risk, or at least a higher than average risk, of offending against children. I'm not aware of any statistics to support this assumption.

    No one wants to "ban" transgender people ffs. How would that even work? People have a problem with self id laws being used to abuse women and children. Some of the people who have a problem with it are transgender/transsexual themselves. Are they horrible transphobes too?

    I mean, think about it. This person is legally being allowed to harass women, extort them and put them out of business. Oh and is also using the law to try and force women to handle their genitals. How is that ok in your eyes? Surely, if the law is enabling such abuse then it needs to be changed or have certain exemptions added?


  • Options
    #1118
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,963 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Wibbs wrote: »
    That any marginalised group have higher rates of the above is hardly a surprise. Gay people also have higher rates. There is pretty clear and solid data that trans individuals have much higher rates of self harm, addiction, depression, anxiety all the way up to suicide. These stats remain much higher than background even after medical transition. Higher among male to female than female to male. Slightly better social supports maybe?
    like not purposefully misgendering them or challenging their right to exist?


  • Options
    #1119
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,106 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Overheal wrote: »
    like not purposefully misgendering them or challenging their right to exist?
    as a reason why female to male trans have slightly lower self harm stats?

    As for the rest, personally I've never misgendered anyone. I just use they or them and I certainly wouldn't challenge anyone's right to exist and I 100% acknowledge trans folks exist and struggle with it and they need our support. I would take issue with the extreme(if I'm being kind) types that tend to be loudest in the progressive camp. And the piss takers like the individual that is the subject of this thread. Of the 50 plus self identifying so called genders I'm more bemused than anything tbh.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #1120
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    Overheal wrote: »
    like not purposefully misgendering them or challenging their right to exist?

    There not being misgenderd, this is the whole problem with Jessica, if we take it that he is infact a man he'd be locked up already. No instead were meant to respect her as a she and let her continue to abuse young girls and women in general as to not hurt her and other trans peoples feelings.

    We'll know sometime in the next 3mts if the she is actually a he anything that changes her existing rights puts the pendulum right back in the center where it belongs. Women are protected and men can't just decide to become one as there's more to being a woman after all. Transwomen shold not have absolute equal rights with women but Transmen should.

    This whole things is straight out of a Scooby Doo plot. Were just waiting to find out whos exactlys under the mask.


  • Options
    #1121
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    There not being misgenderd, this is the whole problem with Jessica, if we take it that he is infact a man he'd be locked up already. No instead were meant to respect her as a she and let her continue to abuse young girls and women in general as to not hurt her and other trans peoples feelings.

    We'll know sometime in the next 3mts if the she is actually a he anything that changes her existing rights puts the pendulum right back in the center where it belongs. Women are protected and men can't just decide to become one as there's more to being a woman after all. Transwomen shold not have absolute equal rights with women but Transmen should.

    This whole things is straight out of a Scooby Doo plot. Were just waiting to find out whos exactlys under the mask.


    What crime do you think she has committed that a man would be locked up for and a woman wouldn't?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1122
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,141 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    MrFresh wrote: »
    What crime do you think she has committed that a man would be locked up for and a woman wouldn't?

    Would a man be legally able to extort money from females who refused to handle his dick and balls claiming his human rights were violated? Would a man be able to enter women's restrooms and openly take pictures of teenagers without being reported? Bombard teenage girls with messages about periods? What is the difference here? This person is using self id laws as a cloak of invincibility in order to prey on women and girls. But the real problem is people misgendering Jonathan/Jessica yaniv? Yeah right


  • Options
    #1123
    Jimmy Garlic
    Registered Users Posts: 4,349 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    MrFresh wrote: »
    What crime do you think she has committed that a man would be locked up for and a woman wouldn't?

    A man or a woman would at the very least get arrested for trying to organise a topless pool party for pubescent girls. What kind of sicko thinks that's ok? Jonathan got away with it because wearing a ballgown means basic societal norms don't apply to him.


  • Options
    #1124
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MrFresh wrote: »
    Right at this moment?





    It says the barber didn't show up to rebut the evidence given by the plaintiff so you're reading a bit too much into the case in regards to setting it as a precedent.




    No it isn't. It isn't a dilemma. If anything it's closer to reductio ad absurdum. But I'd argue it is neither.





    But the idea of protecting kids by banning transgender people assumes that transgender people have a high risk, or at least a higher than average risk, of offending against children. I'm not aware of any statistics to support this assumption.

    You just look for anything that sets off alarm bells. Like that swimming event that sought to exclude parents. Alarm bells. As a parent, I wouldn’t be stroking my chin looking for peer-reviewed journals on the topic. I’d just be keeping my children from the event, full stop. Ditto any parade where sexual activity might be on display. Changing rooms where men can wander in next to little girls. No! This is all just common sense.


  • Options
    #1125
    skybox2014
    Registered Users Posts: 32 ✭skybox2014


    It's official, the women weren't being transphobic according to the Guardian

    It's not a hate crime for a woman to feel uncomfortable waxing male genitalia

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/27/male-genitalia-week-in-patriarchy-women
    The long and short of this story is that Yaniv does not seem to be acting in good faith and a lot of women who were running small businesses out of their homes are now being dragged into court and branded as bigots as a result. If those women had refused to wax Yaniv’s legs because they had a problem with her being trans then she would have been absolutely right to take action. However, surely things are more nuanced when it comes to handling genitalia? Surely a woman shouldn’t be forced to wax testicles if that makes them feel uncomfortable? Yaniv argues that if you are a woman who is uncomfortable working with a penis then you are automatically a “transphobic bigot... committing a hate crime.” Not only is that untrue it makes a mockery of the hate crimes that are committed against trans people every day.


  • Options
    #1126
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    Well if they don't accept them as women there being biggots. Hence were here.
    Their either Women or there not, there's no halfway house. If the law doesn't grant JY the rights she already has and pedals back on current legislation, self identifiers (trans) are no longer equal to women. They'll have lost their current rights.
    I've said it before we owe JY a debt for bringing this madness to a head. I'm hoping sanity prevails and the Human rights laws are rewritten to enshrine women's rights under it.


  • Options
    #1127
    Franz Von Peppercorn II
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn II


    Overheal wrote: »
    like not purposefully misgendering them or challenging their right to exist?

    Women you mean, who have now been categorised as ciswomen? A different category of female.


  • Options
    #1128
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    I absolutely hate that phrase the transgenders use to describe women and men.


  • Options
    #1129
    Nulu5
    Registered Users Posts: 29 ✭Nulu5


    Overheal wrote: »
    like not purposefully misgendering them or challenging their right to exist?

    Someone like yaniv who has a penis is biologically male a simple statement of fact isn,t misgendering.


  • Options
    #1130
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    Nulu5 wrote: »
    Someone like yaniv who has a penis is biologically male a simple statement of fact isn,t misgendering.

    Read the mod note in post one. You are misgendering and have broken the terms you agreed to when joining boards. Other posters have been banned for referring to she as a he.
    Your possibly going to get Woke with a ban hammer once a trans or trans ally reports that post. Welcome to 2019.


  • Options
    #1131
    Glass fused light
    Registered Users Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭Glass fused light


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    Read the mod note in post one. You are misgendering and have broken the terms you agreed to when joining boards. Other posters have been banned for referring to she as a he.
    Your possibly going to get Woke with a ban hammer once a trans or trans ally reports that post. Welcome to 2019.

    Male is a noun ? So a free pass should be given

    Plus I note Twitter has started to learn tap dancing, as Lindsay Shepherd account has been reopened.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1132
    Nermal
    Registered Users Posts: 2,622 ✭✭✭Nermal


    Overheal wrote: »
    like not purposefully misgendering them or challenging their right to exist?

    The true 'misgendering' occurs when someone with a penis describes himself as a woman, not when the rest of society describes him accurately as a man.

    No one's challenging his right to exist. If he wants to dress up as a woman, he can. But if he expects society to treat him as something other than a man dressed as a woman...


  • Options
    #1133
    JohnMc1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,987 ✭✭✭JohnMc1


    Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »
    Women you mean, who have now been categorised as ciswomen? A different category of female.

    Can we get rid of those Gender Studies terms? Why legitimize those terms. Let's call "cisgender" people exactly what they are. Normal and sane.


  • Options
    #1134
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    Read the mod note in post one. You are misgendering and have broken the terms you agreed to when joining boards. Other posters have been banned for referring to she as a he.
    Your possibly going to get Woke with a ban hammer once a trans or trans ally reports that post. Welcome to 2019.

    This is exactly what I meant a few pages back when I said that this change has been rammed through society without ever allowing us the opportunity to have a proper debate on it. What's written in that mod note, that we're not allowed to question the very concept that gender is something one 'identifies' as instead of a physical attribute and not a psychological state of mind, is an ideology which should be up for debate, because I strongly suspect that not just a large minority, but the vast, vast, vast majority of people think it's total bullsh!t.

    As far as I'm concerned, this should only be taken seriously when someone physically undergoes transition surgery. The idea that gender is an even more fickle concept than that which is merely something in one's mind and not a physical set of attributes is something I will never, ever, ever agree with - and the fact that adherence to that belief is being enforced on Boards as well as throughout the rest of society, is profoundly disturbing since we haven't had a proper society level political debate around it. And this is exactly why extremists like Trump, Peter Casey, Jordan Peterson etc will continue to grow in popularity - their rise is the equal and opposite reaction to the rest of us having "gender is a social construct and not merely a description of which chromosomes and genitalia someone has" shoved down our throats despite it being obvious that a massive, massive number of people don't actually agree with that statement.


  • Options
    #1135
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Nermal wrote: »
    The true 'misgendering' occurs when someone with a penis describes himself as a woman, not when the rest of society describes him accurately as a man.

    this is a hate fact


  • Options
    #1136
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 3,637 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    My wife is a woman. My mother is a woman. All the real women I know are real women. They all get the female pronoun applied when I speak of them. Naturally.

    I know one person who now identifies as a woman. They’re a nice person, decent and genuine and I extended to them a courtesy through my use of female pronouns for that individuals benefit alone. I do that at my own discretion.

    If that person or anyone else had ever demanded I do that, I’d never have referred to them using anything other than male pronouns, ever. And if someone ever asks me if that person is a man or a woman, I’ll say it the way it is.

    It is likely they’ve received some benefit, from what some have said, but they’re lucky that this current discussion had not taken place before I decided to refer to them using terminology that is simply not accurate.

    Today, the concession I made for one individual will absolutely not be extended to others. And nobody here is an idiot. If I always say ‘they’ instead of ‘he’ or ‘she’, that’s notable for anyone who actually listens.

    “Speaking of Jennifer specifically, ‘they’ is a weird person and ‘they’ seem to have an unhealthy obsession with young girls periods. ‘They’ need to be held to account after this awful episode in which ‘they’ decided ‘they’ would cause such distress to women trying to live their lives. Each of those women has been put through the wringer. ‘They’ is a scumbag creep in a dress”

    Awkward?

    So I think it’s a bit naive to think that language is going to change to the point that a transgender person can hide behind ‘they’ instead of ‘he’ or ‘she’.

    Language evolves. It isn’t going to happen here. As long as I’m being told I should refer to someone born as a male using the same gender pronoun as I would my wife, mother, sister, niece, aunt etc., I’ll keep highlighting the difference by using clearly awkward wording.

    It’s clear. ‘They’ unless referring to a group of people should be considered as a means to identify someone who may not in fact be what others tell you that person is. Otherwise, ‘He’ or ‘She’ should identify someone that we know to be a male or female, those that other people like to call cisgender, a nonsensical term to use in and of itself. It’s like saying ‘wet water’.


  • Options
    #1137
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    Wibbs wrote: »
    The facts are in, it's a demographic with scarily high self harm and suicide rates and part of that is quite clearly marginalisation.

    And I'm hardly a rainbow flag waver. I do most certainly believe there are people that physiologically present as male or female, but have intersex brains and they need help and support and understanding. I don't believe the whole gender is a social construct stuff and it would be my opinion that a proportion of people presenting as trans when young are "going through a phase",

    Speaking of young people i was reading a disturbing account from a doctor who was working in GIDS
    https://medium.com/@kirstyentwistle/an-open-letter-to-dr-polly-carmichael-from-a-former-gids-clinician-53c541276b8d


  • Options
    #1138
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzNGkwGYE4E


  • Options
    #1139
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,106 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    bluewolf wrote: »
    Speaking of young people i was reading a disturbing account from a doctor who was working in GIDS
    https://medium.com/@kirstyentwistle/an-open-letter-to-dr-polly-carmichael-from-a-former-gids-clinician-53c541276b8d
    Jesus B, that's a worrying document to read. "GIDS clinicians tell children and families that puberty blockers/hormone blocks are “fully reversible” but the reality is no one knows what the impacts are on children’s brains so how is it possible to make this claim?". Anyone in the position of providing medical care making the statement as a medical fact that puberty blockers are fully reversible should be struck off for blatant and provable misinformation and quackery.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #1140
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,106 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzNGkwGYE4E
    Actually that brings up another question; are these 50 odd pronouns ze, zir and all that bloody nonsense now present in other languages like French or Spanish, or Chinese, or is it just in the English speaking world influenced by the loons on US campuses and "woke" media?

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1141
    Vlthap
    Registered Users Posts: 47 ✭Vlthap


    I think the logical thing here is to ask is if the Trans person in question is presenting themselves for a Brazilian Wax, a female-only treatment as the treatment requires the presence of labia in order to perform, then there should be no difficulty in performing a colposcopy at the same time. If a colposcopy cannot be performed then it's logical that a Brazilian Wax cannot be performed.

    I'd have no problem with this person wanting a Wax. However, it would have to be a Sack and Crack Wax as that is the anatomy they have. It's nothing to do with gender or being trans. It's about anatomy and training. Performing a Brazilian is completely different from performing a Sack and Crack. Completely different!

    At the risk of sounding facetious it's akin to trans man asking for a prostate exam because all men have to regularly have check-ups after a certain age.

    Bottom line... if the body part physically isn't there then you cannot have the treatment/procedure associated with it.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement