Such specialized and respectful attention
Rex Murphy wonders where the Canadian reporting is.
From my perspective the core of the story is not Yaniv, who, from what I have read, presents as opportunistic, cruel and delusionally self-entitled, who manipulates the ever-changing fixations of identity and gender politics for (a) notoriety, (b) possible gain, and (c) some delight in pushing and insulting hard-up people, especially Asians and newcomers (see last week’s column) as a very questionable personal amusement.
Where is this yarn — outside the National Post and Toronto Sun — in the large media of this country? CTV, CBC, The Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star? Silence. (The Post Millennial has covered the story, as has Blaire White, herself a transgender woman — she posted her work on YouTube.)
He then says the tv networks are too busy reporting on Trump, which I think is nonsense.
Is it not Canadian news that the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal is giving this apparently aggressive and eagerly litigious person such specialized and respectful attention? At the same time as 16 women are going through what must be to them a frightening, perplexing and tormenting legal grinder? Why are the Canadian media not at least reporting on what they are going through?
Is it simply because even the word “transgender” is kryptonite to the brave media who are always otherwise anxious to write and broadcast “truth to power”? The silent passing over of this story is journalistic cowardice, the fear of offending the passing pieties of militant progressivism.
There are competing pieties here though. Normally militant progressivism is quick to stand with persecuted immigrants, and rightly so, but for some reason one narcissist’s claimed transitude is more piety-worthy than 16 persecuted immigrants women.
Did the tribunal’s members think maybe if 16 — 16! — women unanimously turned Yaniv down, the problem was more likely with the would-be customer, not the provider? Did they consider the upheaval in their lives as solemnly as they presided over this transparently noxious, trivial, illogical and indulgent complaint?
In my column last week, I lamented the Tribunal’s lack of common sense. This week I ask where’s their sense of human sympathy, compassion for the newcomer — and to use one of their most-beloved terms, for the marginalized? The woman from Brazil has lost her income while Yaniv enjoys the publicity.
He’s not wrong. I suspect I disagree with him on most things, but he’s not wrong on this one.
Article in the Guardian conceding that it’s not a hate crime for a woman to to feel uncomfortable waxing male genitalia
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/27/male-genitalia-week-in-patriarchy-women
Very carefully framed.
“16 complaints filed by a Canadian trans woman make a mockery of the hate crimes committed against trans people every day”
So it’s not outrage against women being forced to commit sexual acts, it’s a distraction from the hate crimes against trans people.
“While the Yaniv case has been going on for a while now, you may not have heard much about it, as it has largely been covered by the rightwing press. The sort of outlets that normally joke about consent and women’s rights are now outraged that women are being forced to handle male genitalia against their will.”
Yes, because the left has lost all common sense and common decency on the subject and has been shutting down women who have expressed doubt about the transgender movement.
“The sort of writers that are normally whipping up hate against immigrants are now outraged and concerned that at least one of the beautificians that Yaniv has filed complaints against is a poor migrant. In short there has been a hell of a lot of bad faith and transphobia involved in the reporting around the case.”
There have been a lot of thoughtful feminists outraged about the case as well, some of them like Meghan Murphy silenced. As for the “poor migrant”, even conservative writers will sympathise with an immigrant trying to make a go of it with a small business.
” 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 is a bloke. They may have a problem being alone in their small business – often in their homes with children – with a bloke in a half naked state. How on earth can a woman, even if you shove the word “trans” in front of the word, have testicles?
This is totally mealy-mouthed from the Guardian, and the comments are closed.
“I suspect I disagree with him on most things, but he’s not wrong on this one.”
Yes, and yes, but . . .
Rex knows how to play the CanCon psyche – he’s a die-hard tar-rocker (ie calls bitumen-infested-rock “oil”), and a long standing supporter of Conrad Black. Rest assured he doesn’t give a flying f’ about anyone involved in the story, he just wants another chance to stoke hatred, trash the concept of anyone other than white males having rights, and get another handout from his media owning big-biz bosses.
Here’s another take on how strangely this is viewed in Canada:
https://www.thepostmillennial.com/jessica-yaniv-is-the-hill-that-jesse-brown-wants-to-die-on/
The relevant trope here is Jerkass Has a Point.
Most likely the result of the notion – held almost exclusively by the same people that have lost their brains over transism – that inequities are not only ranked, but should be stacked and tallied. The opression olympics.
#3
TVtropes amirite
Indeed.