Transgender Woman Sues After Muslim Refuses Body Waxing Service (Canada)

[Sanguine]

An unnamed male-to-female transgender is suing a spa in Canada after a female Muslim employee refused to wax him, citing religious grounds.

According to the filed complaint, the trans woman tried to get a body waxing at Mad Wax beauty spa in March but was turned away when no one was available to perform the waxing. The employee who typically waxes male customers was out on sick leave, and the other employee working, a Muslim woman, refused, as she will not make physical contact with any male she is not related to.

...

The complainant is seeking $50,000 for "immense harm to my dignity."

...."However, we also welcome staff members and respect their religious beliefs and feelings of safety and dignity in regards to the right not to perform waxing services on males or male genitals."

https://www.dailywire.com/news/30807/transgender-woman-sues-muslim-amanda-prestigiacomo?utm_medium=email&utm_content=051918-news&utm_campaign=position3

It will be interesting to see how this goes.

[WingNot]

It will be interesting to see how this goes.

Yes.  It will be very interesting. 

[RoosGirl]

 

[SZonian]

 

[Free Vulcan]

This will be fun. Let's see who wins the battle for the upper slot in the Canadian Leftist Caste System.

[Emjay]

It will be interesting to see how this goes.

@Sanguine   Yep, interesting case.  Two of Canada's favorite pets;  transgenders and Muslims.

But I gotta say, Yuck on body waxing the guy.  Don't blame her.

[edpc]

The complainant is seeking $50,000 for "immense harm to my dignity."

If you think your dignity is in bad shape, wait until they carve and rearrange your junk to make a mangina.

[austingirl]

When "cultures" collide. Bound to happen.

[Gefn]

I'm so glad I'm a natural blonde. Nothing to wax unless I want a Brazilian

[Gefn]

@Sanguine   Yep, interesting case.  Two of Canada's favorite pets;  transgenders and Muslims.

But I gotta say, Yuck on body waxing the guy.  Don't blame her.

Wouldn't a guy cringe with the thought of getting hot wax on his um ? Anyone?

[sneakypete]

The complainant is seeking $50,000 for "immense harm to my dignity."

Now,THAT'S funny,I don't care who you are!

[RoosGirl]

Wouldn't a guy cringe with the thought of getting hot wax on his um ? Anyone?

Apparently he got rid of his um.

[andy58-in-nh]

I'm so glad I'm a natural blonde. Nothing to wax unless I want a Brazilian

I know a place we can meet, hmmm?

[Gefn]

Apparently he got rid of his um.

There are so many things going through my brain now. Like Rocky Mountain oysters. Eww

[Maj. Bill Martin]

 

[GrouchoTex]

I figured that this will happen in the US eventually.
A Muslim will refuse to make a cake, provide flowers, not allow unisex bathrooms in their stores, etc.

Interesting to see who wins this round.....

[driftdiver]

Wouldn't a guy cringe with the thought of getting hot wax on his um ? Anyone?

@Freya
Yes a guy would cringe.

Which has no bearing on this situation.

[roamer_1]

Wouldn't a guy cringe with the thought of getting hot wax on his um ? Anyone?

@Freya

! No longer available

[Gefn]

@Freya
Yes a guy would cringe.

Which has no bearing on this situation.

When all else fails, I'll quote Mike Judge

[sneakypete]

I figured that this will happen in the US eventually.
A Muslim will refuse to make a cake, provide flowers, not allow unisex bathrooms in their stores, etc.

Interesting to see who wins this round.....

@GrouchoTex

It should have never happened,period! With the exceptions of public services,which are operated using tax dollars and emergency services,most of which are at least partially finances with tax dollars,NO business that deals with the public should EVER be obligated to provide any service to anyone they wish to deny service to,regardless of race,creed,color,sexual orientation,or religious affiliations.

We are either free to live our lives in peace without government interference in our daily lives,or we are not free.

But,to address your question,I have no doubt whatsoever that anybody white man or woman that tries to sue a Muslim,black,or homosexual business for discrimination from denial of service is going to lose,and will probably have to pay the winners legal bills.

White people who demand their freedoms as well as their rights are just too damn troublesome for the government to deal with,so they need to be slapped back into place.

[Emjay]

@GrouchoTex

It should have never happened,period! With the exceptions of public services,which are operated using tax dollars and emergency services,most of which are at least partially finances with tax dollars,NO business that deals with the public should EVER be obligated to provide any service to anyone they wish to deny service to,regardless of race,creed,color,sexual orientation,or religious affiliations.

We are either free to live our lives in peace without government interference in our daily lives,or we are not free.

But,to address your question,I have no doubt whatsoever that anybody white man or woman that tries to sue a Muslim,black,or homosexual business for discrimination from denial of service is going to lose,and will probably have to pay the winners legal bills.

White people who demand their freedoms as well as their rights are just too damn troublesome for the government to deal with,so they need to be slapped back into place.

I agree.  I remember when Rick Perry tried to get a law passed in Texas regarding lawsuits.  It would have made it much more difficult and dangerous to institute a frivolous lawsuit.

It's way too easy to do that now and too many under-employed lawyers willing to take it on contingency.

We should not be forced to provide a service for any reason at all, including 'I don't like you."

[GrouchoTex]

I agree.  I remember when Rick Perry tried to get a law passed in Texas regarding lawsuits.  It would have made it much more difficult and dangerous to institute a frivolous lawsuit.

It's way too easy to do that now and too many under-employed lawyers willing to take it on contingency.

We should not be forced to provide a service for any reason at all, including 'I don't like you."

Tort reform, yep.

[Jazzhead]

But,to address your question,I have no doubt whatsoever that anybody white man or woman that tries to sue a Muslim,black,or homosexual business for discrimination from denial of service is going to lose,and will probably have to pay the winners legal bills.

White people who demand their freedoms as well as their rights are just too damn troublesome for the government to deal with,so they need to be slapped back into place.

Oh please.    What does any of this have to do with white paranoia and the denial of "white rights"?   

A white person is protected by anti-discrimination laws the same as anybody else.   Funny thing though - white folks just don't seem to be the victims of discrimination all that much.  And I guess that's @sneakypete 's point - a lawsuit alleging discrimination on the basis of whiteness may well just be dismissed as frivolous, and the plaintiff obliged to compensate the dependent for his/her legal bills  in defending against such foolishness.     

[catfish1957]

One of my favorite pleasures late in life, is to enjoy the laws of unintended consequences unfurl. 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Oh please.    What does any of this have to do with white paranoia and the denial of "white rights"?   

A white person is protected by anti-discrimination laws the same as anybody else.   Funny thing though - white folks just don't seem to be the victims of discrimination all that much.  And I guess that's @sneakypete 's point - a lawsuit alleging discrimination on the basis of whiteness may well just be dismissed as frivolous, and the plaintiff obliged to compensate the dependent for his/her legal bills  in defending against such foolishness.   

@Jazzhead

My firm did labor and employment work for one of the largest private employers in the country.  That employer had a mandate that a certain percentage (at a minimum) of its legal work be done by females and minorities.  What this meant was that work -- and it was good work that billed well -- had to be assigned disproportionately to females and minorities.  The result was that if you were a male/white associate, you couldn't sniff that work.  That affected compensation, partnership track, etc..  That exact issue -- discrimination -- was brought up at the annual meeting of our Labor and Employment Partners, and the head of our Group openly admitted it was discrimination.  He said "let's just hope none of them decide to sue."

That is hardly uncommon.  So-called "diversity" mandates too often amount to a form of institutionalized discrimination, and the only thing that saves many companies from getting hauled into court is, frankly, lying about the programs.  I know because I defended such firms, and finally quit because I simply couldn't continue  to tell managers what they could and couldn't say about what they'd been told by higher-ups about hiring.

I'll tell you another truism -- if you are a minority with a good degree/record from a better school, you can write your own ticket.  Firms are begging for them and will pay a premium, which should not be possible under anti-discrimination laws.