Wax the legs or the puppy gets it
Man awarded $35,000 Canadian because a salon refused to wax his legs.
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) has awarded $35,000 in damages to an Indigenous transgender woman who was refused a leg wax at a salon in Windsor six years ago. However, the owner of the salon is challenging the ruling, which his lawyer calls “deeply flawed.”
The decision comes six years after the woman contacted Mad Wax Windsor Inc. by phone to book an appointment. She alleged there was a string of discriminatory and retaliatory behaviour by the salon and owner Jason Carruthers.
…
In their phone call, the woman testified, Carruthers told her there was no one on staff who would be comfortable providing services to “someone like you.” Carruthers denied using that phrase or misgendering A.B., but said he didn’t have a staff member who could provide “male waxing services.”
I have to admit I know nothing about “waxing services”…but I’m guessing the issue was that the staff was female and they were suspicious of his motivation. I can hear it now – “Oh no dear, all the way up.”
The HRTO ordered Carruthers, the salon and another business to pay $35,000 in damages to A.B., plus interest, and that both Carruthers and salon staff undertake online human rights training.
Why? It’s not a “human right” to get someone to pour hot wax on your legs and then pull it off.
In welcoming the tribunal’s decision, A.B. said no one can silence her or the facts laid out by the tribunal. “This decision brings me some peace,” she said in a media release. “It helps tell the story of the discrimination I faced and the steps taken to escalate that discrimination and harassment against me.”
And the CBC reports all this ridiculous nonsense as if it were true and reasonable. Pathetic.
If the online human rights training is like what I had to take to get my teaching certificate, it’s a breeze, and you can ignore it once you’ve taken it. I think it took me thirty minutes to take a 2 hour credit course. I didn’t need to read the material; I just took the test. The answers were obvious.
The whole idea of diversity and human rights training is a lucrative scam.
I wonder if , for the media, A.B.’s indigenaity makes him a slightly more sympathetic victim than Jonathan Yanniv? And the salon owner even has the good grace to be a guy rather than an immigrant woman, as was the case in the Yanniv Affair. The story on the website is even preceeded by a trigger warning:
**
Yay! We’ve established the correct Sympathetic Power Dynamic. (Never mind if the salon staff might have been women; this isn’t specified in the story.) I suppose he’s claiming “Two Spirit”* status? ( I’ve noticed in Canadian usage, many organizations reorder “The Community’s” alphabet soup so that it reads 2SLGBTQ etc., putting “Two Spirit” (2S) in the lead. How could the CBC possibly resist the bait on telling the story of a “genuine” 2S person’s trials and tribulations? During Pride
YearMonth, no less!)Here’s part of the adjudicator’s decision:
Is it not possible for a liar to be “clear and consistent”? How about “Well rehearsed”? Consistency and mendacity are not mutually exclusive. I wonder what the nature of the changes in testimony were? And even if the salon owner had “misgendered” him, so fucking what? A.B. doesn’t get to dictate anyone else’s reality.
Here’s A.B.’s lawyer:
Yeeeaah, no. The “societal change” he’s hoping for is not a good one. It is oppression, and forced compliance with delusional fantasies. A.B.’s beliefs about himself do not change his sex. “Trans” and “cis” have nothing to do with it. Gender identity does not over-ride, over-write, or change anyone’s sex. Whatever his “genital status” with regards to the extent of his physiological “transition”, his legs, and all other bits, remain male. If someone is uncomfortable providing such service to a male, or does not have staff either comfortable or qualified to do so, they should not be punished, whether there was any “misgendering” or not.
It should have been A.B.’s responsibility to ensure that he was seeking out the correct venue for the services he was requesting. If you own a Volkswagon, you shouldn’t demand maintenance for it from a Ferrari dealership. Scrawling “Ferrari” on the side of your Beetle is not going to change the reality of the parts under the hood. If the Ferrari specialist turns you away, that is in your best interest, because he or she might not have the proper tools, parts or training for what you are asking them to do. They might botch the job. If you really have the best interests of the smooth running of your Beetle at heart, you take it to someone who services Volkwagons. If you continue to insist on service at the Ferrari dealership, then one can assume that your visit isn’t actually about getting your car repaired, but is motivated by something else.
*But then again, do Spirits even have legs? If it’s all about an internal, innate, and “spiritual” sense of Being, whatever does “leg” hair have to do with it? Wait. This couldn’t be the same predatory, “validation” power-play bullshit that Mr. Yanniv was pulling, could it? Shock-horror! Maybe scratch the “sympathetic victim” bit after all.
** The CBC story states:
That’s a lot to lay at the feet of the salon owner. Clearly A.B. had or has other problems. Were there no other service providers to whom he could have gone? The place he was going to said they didn’t offer services for male waxing, which is what he would have been asking for, because he was male. That seems straightforward enough. Were there no Volkswagon dealerships in the area?
“Indulge my fantasy or pay the price.” Is this one of the trans “rights” they demand? Under the right to refuse service laws, does discrimination based on sex apply to businesses that discriminate based on sex in the first place? What if a trans “man” wanted to go to a men’s health clinic for a prostate screening and was refused — grounds for a lawsuit? It’s a bad precedent, look at all that easy money to be made. It’s like legalizing theft.
How to monetize your fake victimhood. Creeps.
And besides, trans or not, isn’t not being able to get your hoo hoo waxed kind of a first world problem?
You know, you can buy leg-waxing kits and do it yourself in the privacy of your own home. Also, some salons do perform waxing on men, as in “The 40 Year Old Virgin,” though I admit that was above the waist.
Well sure but the whole point is to make some reluctant bitch do it for you.
I may be in the minority here, but a leg wax is a leg wax whether the person is male or female, same with arms, eyebrows, armpits, etc. Whether the customer is a man or a woman doesn’t matter, and I think a salon that refused to wax Michael Phelps’ legs before a competition would find themselves on the losing side of a discrimination law suit. Waxing a man’s legs because he thinks he’s a woman is no different than waxing a man’s legs because he’s swimming in the Olympics. This is how I frame “gender identiy” discrimination: if a service must be provided to a member of that person’s biological sex under law, and they are declined because they have the “wrong gender identity”, i.e., a man thinks he’s a woman, that is gender identity discrimination. If Lia Thomas had been kicked off the men’s team for not having a male gender identity, that would be gender identity discrimination. But not letting a TIM into a spa where women are nude, and the law permits the exclusion of men, is not “gender identity” discrimination, it is legally permissible sex discrimination.
Well that’s why I said the thing about “Oh no dear, all the way up.” The legs terminate at the crotch. Waxing a man’s legs isn’t quite the same as waxing armpits etc.
Isn’t it funny how eager they are to say “woman” when talking about a man?
Ophelia Benson, leg waxing doesn’t include a bikini wax. There is no need to handle someone’s genitals, male or female, to wax legs.
I know, but men who wanted to could use it as a pretext. Molesters do that kind of thing regularly.