“Non binary trans woman” - now there’s a contradiction. “Non binary” means one’s perceived “gender identity” is neither female nor male. How this man can perceive himself as neither sex and refer to himself as a “woman” defies comprehension. Of course, no one asks him to explain this.
How pleasant to know that I, a woman and a TERF, am considered an “incidental” woman and a lesser “woman” than him. Presumably him possessing a dick allows him the privilege to go unchallenged and for the courts and democratic governments to side in his favour.
We also do not ask is he a gay man?Presumably not because I’ve never known gay men to get off on or boast about being caressed and massaged whilst naked by females.
So I’ll just say it as a lesbian, get the fuck out of women’s space you smug, misogynistic prick. And, yes, I expect a chorus of gay men to rise and support me. Done with the LGBTQ+ alleged community not speaking out against this. Wake up: we’ve already lost gay rights to gather amongst our own kind, we’ve stood as a collective rallying force for this madness to continue while LGB and troubled children are lied to and told sex is a “construct” and that humans can change sex (the damage is immeasurable), and we’ve stomped all over women’s hard won rights along with parental rights.
I would love to hear the mental gymnasts explain why certain services such as the legal services provided by divorce/family law attorneys who represent only men are not included in this state law. Lawyers can discriminate by sex, serving only men while refusing to represent women, but a spa where there's nudity cannot discriminate and serve only women.
Unfortunately , this is indeed what happens if you are in a blue state. We are dependent upon enough red states addressing these issues legally and create a climate where voters in blue states will demand a return to biological reality. This is going to be the death of the Democrat party along with other disconnects from the majority of Americans.
I think most of us live in one party states and as each party becomes held captive by their righteous or looney extremes it filters down to the state level. Hard time for centrists who do not buy either party line.
It’s baffling how a “gender expression or identity,” which is performance, can be conflated with sexual orientation, which requires an object of desire.
And to all the “trans IDing” women out there (“trans men” as they “identify”) ask yourself if you could get away with this? Go for it: demand entry into men’s bathhouses to be “serviced” and their sacred spaces and let’s count how fast you get expelled and told you don’t belong there. Demand entry into men’s prisons and onto their sports teams and let us know how that works out. Right, you’re not doing it. We all know why - because it’s not safe and you will be at grave risk because you’re female. Time to rise to protect your sisters? If you’re really a man, don’t you have a responsibility to protect women?
Yes--I have friends who enthusiastically talk about going to that spa for special occasions. One talked about how it helped her adolescent daughter accept her body, by being among a wide range of women (who were really women, of course!). Other than me telling people, most in our area have no idea of the legal dramas surrounding it.
I went to high school in Bellingham and was a young woman in Seattle.
I loved the women's changing room at our swimming pool over the past eight years living in Victoria, BC. I loved being among women and girls, from little girls to women in their eighties, without the male gaze. It was SO healthy. It helped me heal from sexual assault.
I was devastated when I learned that Victoria allows men in those spaces, and I had to stop going for fear of being horribly traumatized all over again. Eventually, a friend ran into a man in that very same changing room, sitting in an open stall watching little girls undress, and when she told him it was a women's space, he refused to leave.
How despicable that these incidents are reported as happening across BC and Canada and that women, especially the 1/3 who have been sexually assaulted, have to endure being retraumatized by naked men learing at women in their change rooms as they are in a state of undress? That our government passed self ID laws without what appears to be any consideration of how many predatorial men and paedophiles might put their hand up and claim they are women to gain access women and girls is beyond incomprehensible to me.
If I were male, I might self declare as a woman to go into women’s change rooms and sit beside these men to try to protect women and girls. Because if our elected governments will not act to protect females, who does?
Perhaps as an act of rebellion, women need to make way to men’s change rooms and sit and oogle and watch men and boys undress? How long until most men get uncomfortable with this and decide that it is crossing a line?
Canada is the worst country for transgenderism, and BC is the worst of Canada. Almost every time Canada made the news with another shocking incident, it happened either in Vancouver or on Vancouver Island. It's one of the reasons we left Canada and came home.
I agree. No question it’s being reported in all Canadian provinces but BC is renowned for allowing it to happen more frequently. The indoctrination of gender ideology into law and Canadian society by their lead university (UBC) was especially pronounced.
I was also a young woman in Seattle back when Seattle was awesome! (But then left because of traffic.) Regarding nude women’s spaces, I have avoided those in these digital times, assuming creepy men would find a way to be voyeurs one way or another. But now they don’t even have to be sneaky! They have a free pass! WTF?!
Thanks for your clear legal arguments which make complete sense.
On that note...
"It is truly a testament to where we are as a society today that it must be said in the context of federal civil rights litigation that women don’t have penises." Indeed... and no male can become a female, even if he removes his penis and testicles.
All this so he could prove a point. It doesn't sound like he even went there. We don't know for a fact that ANY man has even entered Olympus spa. It sounds like Haven (nee Caleb) read their rule against men, got upset and complained directly to the Commission. The whole brouhaha is theoretical. As someone else said, what a waste of resources to satisfy his one-man crusade against women and common sense. Also, Wilvich's disdain for Korean culture and its bathhouse tradition is racist AF. If I ran into this man at a cafe I'd have to give him a piece of my mind.
One would assume so. But allow self ID laws to pass and for some men to declare they “feel” like a woman and call their penises “lady dicks” and there we have it - they’re in. How can women complain when it’s set in law that any man can self declare as female and society buys in to the mantra that “trans woman are woman”?
The article makes it clear that the amicus brief did indeed point out the inherent contradiction: the law that says he can enter because of gender identity, but the law also makes it a crime to commit voyeurism or indecent exposure. I think this is the most interesting angle to the case. Good luck getting our state legislature to change their woke law anytime soon.
Sorry, but in my opinion they don’t get a pass. If our justices have to struggle to define what a woman is and choose to refute the Oxford dictionary definition and basic accepted biological facts, I don’t believe they’re fit to serve. Come on: even the village idiot knows woman don’t have penises. What a waste of taxpayer money to even have to bring these cases to the high courts.
If a group is protected by anti-discrimination law, there needs to be a comparator. The argument is always that the business (etc) treated the complainant less favourably than it treated, or would have treated, members of the comparator group.
If there is a law protecting transgender people, what is the comparator group? People with the same birth sex (in this case, men) or members of the complainant's target sex (in this case, women)?
I would really l love to see laws like the WLAD interpreted to mean that the spa's treatment of people like Haven is to be compared to its treatment of other natal males, in which there is no discrimination: all are excluded.
The statute seems to define having a gender identity as being “perceived as” having a particular gender. There’s no way that person is ever perceived as being a woman.
Is he alleging discrimination based on a perceived male gender identity? Or a perceived “trans” identity?
“Non binary trans woman” - now there’s a contradiction. “Non binary” means one’s perceived “gender identity” is neither female nor male. How this man can perceive himself as neither sex and refer to himself as a “woman” defies comprehension. Of course, no one asks him to explain this.
How pleasant to know that I, a woman and a TERF, am considered an “incidental” woman and a lesser “woman” than him. Presumably him possessing a dick allows him the privilege to go unchallenged and for the courts and democratic governments to side in his favour.
We also do not ask is he a gay man?Presumably not because I’ve never known gay men to get off on or boast about being caressed and massaged whilst naked by females.
So I’ll just say it as a lesbian, get the fuck out of women’s space you smug, misogynistic prick. And, yes, I expect a chorus of gay men to rise and support me. Done with the LGBTQ+ alleged community not speaking out against this. Wake up: we’ve already lost gay rights to gather amongst our own kind, we’ve stood as a collective rallying force for this madness to continue while LGB and troubled children are lied to and told sex is a “construct” and that humans can change sex (the damage is immeasurable), and we’ve stomped all over women’s hard won rights along with parental rights.
I would love to hear the mental gymnasts explain why certain services such as the legal services provided by divorce/family law attorneys who represent only men are not included in this state law. Lawyers can discriminate by sex, serving only men while refusing to represent women, but a spa where there's nudity cannot discriminate and serve only women.
It would be interesting to know if such firms would represent trans men
Unfortunately , this is indeed what happens if you are in a blue state. We are dependent upon enough red states addressing these issues legally and create a climate where voters in blue states will demand a return to biological reality. This is going to be the death of the Democrat party along with other disconnects from the majority of Americans.
I certainly hope that this will be the death of the Democrat party, at least in its capacity as the Only Party in our authoritarian blue states.
I think most of us live in one party states and as each party becomes held captive by their righteous or looney extremes it filters down to the state level. Hard time for centrists who do not buy either party line.
Your comment certainly gets to the core of the problem!
I'm always really troubled by ther terms 'blue state' and 'red state'. To me they sound fatalistic, defeatist and anti-democratic
It’s baffling how a “gender expression or identity,” which is performance, can be conflated with sexual orientation, which requires an object of desire.
And to all the “trans IDing” women out there (“trans men” as they “identify”) ask yourself if you could get away with this? Go for it: demand entry into men’s bathhouses to be “serviced” and their sacred spaces and let’s count how fast you get expelled and told you don’t belong there. Demand entry into men’s prisons and onto their sports teams and let us know how that works out. Right, you’re not doing it. We all know why - because it’s not safe and you will be at grave risk because you’re female. Time to rise to protect your sisters? If you’re really a man, don’t you have a responsibility to protect women?
I live an hour north of that spa and I am quietly seething after reading this, yet not surprised at the outcome
You live near Bellingham? I'm from that neck of the woods.
Yes--I have friends who enthusiastically talk about going to that spa for special occasions. One talked about how it helped her adolescent daughter accept her body, by being among a wide range of women (who were really women, of course!). Other than me telling people, most in our area have no idea of the legal dramas surrounding it.
I went to high school in Bellingham and was a young woman in Seattle.
I loved the women's changing room at our swimming pool over the past eight years living in Victoria, BC. I loved being among women and girls, from little girls to women in their eighties, without the male gaze. It was SO healthy. It helped me heal from sexual assault.
I was devastated when I learned that Victoria allows men in those spaces, and I had to stop going for fear of being horribly traumatized all over again. Eventually, a friend ran into a man in that very same changing room, sitting in an open stall watching little girls undress, and when she told him it was a women's space, he refused to leave.
That would have destroyed me.
How despicable that these incidents are reported as happening across BC and Canada and that women, especially the 1/3 who have been sexually assaulted, have to endure being retraumatized by naked men learing at women in their change rooms as they are in a state of undress? That our government passed self ID laws without what appears to be any consideration of how many predatorial men and paedophiles might put their hand up and claim they are women to gain access women and girls is beyond incomprehensible to me.
If I were male, I might self declare as a woman to go into women’s change rooms and sit beside these men to try to protect women and girls. Because if our elected governments will not act to protect females, who does?
Perhaps as an act of rebellion, women need to make way to men’s change rooms and sit and oogle and watch men and boys undress? How long until most men get uncomfortable with this and decide that it is crossing a line?
Canada is the worst country for transgenderism, and BC is the worst of Canada. Almost every time Canada made the news with another shocking incident, it happened either in Vancouver or on Vancouver Island. It's one of the reasons we left Canada and came home.
I agree. No question it’s being reported in all Canadian provinces but BC is renowned for allowing it to happen more frequently. The indoctrination of gender ideology into law and Canadian society by their lead university (UBC) was especially pronounced.
I was also a young woman in Seattle back when Seattle was awesome! (But then left because of traffic.) Regarding nude women’s spaces, I have avoided those in these digital times, assuming creepy men would find a way to be voyeurs one way or another. But now they don’t even have to be sneaky! They have a free pass! WTF?!
Yeah, back in the 1980s my best friend lived on the Ave upstairs from Doctor Feelgood's Smokeshop. We were all over that city. What fun times we had!
I'd never thought of that point - the benefits for body image. A really important one
"I did it! I got the main naked lady spa in the area to submit to me in my male supremacy!"
What a thing to brag about.
Thanks for your clear legal arguments which make complete sense.
On that note...
"It is truly a testament to where we are as a society today that it must be said in the context of federal civil rights litigation that women don’t have penises." Indeed... and no male can become a female, even if he removes his penis and testicles.
All this so he could prove a point. It doesn't sound like he even went there. We don't know for a fact that ANY man has even entered Olympus spa. It sounds like Haven (nee Caleb) read their rule against men, got upset and complained directly to the Commission. The whole brouhaha is theoretical. As someone else said, what a waste of resources to satisfy his one-man crusade against women and common sense. Also, Wilvich's disdain for Korean culture and its bathhouse tradition is racist AF. If I ran into this man at a cafe I'd have to give him a piece of my mind.
Isn't indecent exposure against the law in Washington state? https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.88.010
One would assume so. But allow self ID laws to pass and for some men to declare they “feel” like a woman and call their penises “lady dicks” and there we have it - they’re in. How can women complain when it’s set in law that any man can self declare as female and society buys in to the mantra that “trans woman are woman”?
I don't think the ruling grappled with the contradiction. Were they asked to? If not, why not?
The article makes it clear that the amicus brief did indeed point out the inherent contradiction: the law that says he can enter because of gender identity, but the law also makes it a crime to commit voyeurism or indecent exposure. I think this is the most interesting angle to the case. Good luck getting our state legislature to change their woke law anytime soon.
Thanks for the clarification and sorry for not reading that far!
Sorry, but in my opinion they don’t get a pass. If our justices have to struggle to define what a woman is and choose to refute the Oxford dictionary definition and basic accepted biological facts, I don’t believe they’re fit to serve. Come on: even the village idiot knows woman don’t have penises. What a waste of taxpayer money to even have to bring these cases to the high courts.
And voyeurism, too, I bet, yet, here we are.
If a group is protected by anti-discrimination law, there needs to be a comparator. The argument is always that the business (etc) treated the complainant less favourably than it treated, or would have treated, members of the comparator group.
If there is a law protecting transgender people, what is the comparator group? People with the same birth sex (in this case, men) or members of the complainant's target sex (in this case, women)?
I would really l love to see laws like the WLAD interpreted to mean that the spa's treatment of people like Haven is to be compared to its treatment of other natal males, in which there is no discrimination: all are excluded.
The statute seems to define having a gender identity as being “perceived as” having a particular gender. There’s no way that person is ever perceived as being a woman.
Is he alleging discrimination based on a perceived male gender identity? Or a perceived “trans” identity?
Again, his perceived gender, to me, is male.