Jessica Yaniv

In 2018, Yaniv filed discrimination complaints with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal against multiple waxing salons alleging that they refused to provide Brazilian waxes to her because she is transgender.[9] Yaniv's case was the first major case of transgender discrimination in retail in Canada.[10] Yaniv was seeking as much as $15,000 in damages from each beautician.[11] In response to the complaints, several of the estheticians said that they lacked the required training to wax male genitalia, or that they were not comfortable doing so for religious or personal reasons.[12] Thus, for them, being transgender was not the issue, but having male genitalia was.[13] Yaniv rejected the claim that special training in waxing male genitalia was necessary,[14] and during the hearings equated the denial of the service to neo-Nazism.[15] Most of the respondents were typically working from home, were non-white,[16] and were immigrants[17] who did not speak English. Two of the businesses were forced to shut down due to the complaints.[18]

In May 2019, the Tribunal found that the complainant's pattern of filing a large number of complaints and then withdrawing those where the respondent mounts a defence to be improper. It rejected finding that she was a vexatious litigant, rather characterizing her as a "frequent litigant".[19]

In October 2019, the Tribunal ruled against Yaniv and ordered her to pay $6,000 in restitution split equally among three of the service providers. The ruling was critical of Yaniv, with Devyn Cousineau stating that she "targeted small businesses, manufactured the conditions for a human rights complaint, and then leveraged that complaint to pursue a financial settlement from parties who were unsophisticated and unlikely to mount a proper defence."[2] The tribunal concluded that she had been financially motivated in 10 of the 13 complaints,[20] was untruthful on the central aspect of her complaint, and had made "scurrilous attacks" on one of the respondents.[21] Cousineau added that Yaniv was "motivated to punish racialized and immigrant women based on her perception that certain ethnic groups, namely South Asian and Asian communities are 'taking over' and advancing an agenda hostile to the interests of LGBTQ+ people."[2] For this reason the tribunal ruled not only that, since none of the salons advertised waxing services for male genitals, they did not discriminate against Yaniv on the basis of her gender identity, but also rejected the complaint regarding the refusal to wax Yaniv's arms and legs.[22][23][24] An appeal by Yaniv against the verdict was rejected in November 2019.[25]

Of Yaniv, the ruling also said: "Once her identity and role in these complaints was revealed, she faced a torrent of backlash and hatred, and from that point onward was representing herself in very difficult circumstances."[21]

On January 7, 2020, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), which had represented three of the original respondents, announced it was representing another salon in an additional complaint filed by Yaniv in early October 2019.[26][27] This represented the eighth case filed with the Tribunal by her,[28] and Yaniv told CTV News that this time she believed case law was in her favour.[27] The Tribunal ruled that any complaint by her would be deferred for six months due to her failure to pay fines imposed by Tribunal.[29] In September 2020 it was announced that Yaniv had dropped the complaints against two salons.[30]

In August 2020, Yaniv filed a new civil suit for $11,800 against three of the female beauticians involved in the Tribunal case. In an email to the National Post, she said that she paid the money owed to the beauticians in the tribunal case, but they had failed to remove related liens placed against her; so, she had to sue to protect her assets.[2]

In October 2020, the JCCF claimed that it was representing Canada Galaxy Pageants, a beauty pageant for women and girls, against a human rights complaint lodged by Yaniv with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario on the basis that she had been discriminated against based on gender identity, gender expression and sex by not being accepted as a pageant contestant in the "28 Years and Older" division. The pageant has a stated policy of accepting genetic females and transgender females who have fully transitioned.[31][32][33][34] The Western Standard reported that Yaniv sought damages in the amount of $10,000 for "injury to dignity and feelings".[35]

In January 2021, Yaniv announced that she had filed two complaints against the Langley Royal Canadian Mounted Police for discrimination with the Canadian Human Rights Commission.[36]

Adrienne Smith, a BC human rights lawyer, said the case with Yaniv reversed much of the success the trans community had enjoyed with the tribunal in recent times. Smith said a major problem was that Yaniv had no legal representation, which allowed to Yaniv to make serious errors, such as making negative comments on social media during the proceedings, which a lawyer would have prevented. Smith said it showed a need for better Legal Aid funding, so there would be representation for cases like this.[37]

The Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) noted that "those seeking to undermine the human rights regime, or to suggest that human rights have gone too far (typically in their objections to its inclusion of gender identity and gender expression), widely utilized the news stories around this case to make their point." The CanLII also noted "This case was also notable for the public spectacle it created outside of the Tribunal. It was characterized by incredible levels of hostility".[38]

Writing in July 2019, Arwa Mahdawi of The Guardian criticized the fact that the case had largely been covered by right-wing media, who she suggested normally were not concerned with the marginalized groups they showed concern for in the Yaniv case. Mahdawi also opined that a woman who feels uncomfortable working with a penis should not be called a bigot, as Yaniv suggested, and that such a claim "...makes a mockery of the hate crimes that are committed against trans people every day."[39]

In the Toronto Star, Joanna Chiu reported that numerous transgender people had experienced a significant increase in online hate against them, as a result of coverage of the Yaniv tribunal case. Chiu said transgender advocates "...worry the ruling could embolden transphobia, while the public loses sight of how marginalized the community still is in Vancouver."[40]

Following the filing of the complaint, Yaniv "has become embroiled in Twitter feuds with conservative figures, appeared on the radio show of American conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, and been the subject of dozens of news articles and opinion pieces".[22] Jones and several other media outlets had used Yaniv's case to rile their followers.[10]

The case garnered international attention, including a segment on Tucker Carlson's Fox News channel show.[9] It was also cited as a factor in the centre-right Liberal-National Coalition's decision to oppose a proposed gender self-identification law in Victoria, Australia[41] and was cited by Senator Pauline Hanson in the Parliament of Australia in support of the Australian Education Legislation Amendment (Prohibiting the Indoctrination of Children) Bill 2020.[42]

Yaniv was arrested by the Langley RCMP detachment on August 8, 2019, after she displayed a taser in her possession in a YouTube video, that was live streamed.[43][1] She had been debating with fellow YouTuber Blaire White when she allegedly displayed a prohibited weapon.[1] Commenting on the case, police noted the weapon was not directed at anyone.[44] When police raided her home, they seized two conducted electrical weapons. Yaniv appeared in Surrey Provincial Court on January 13, 2020 to face weapons charges.[45]

Yaniv sued the Township of Langley for $35,000 over her treatment surrounding her arrest. She said that the cells at the jail were unsanitary with bed bugs, and apparent faeces on surfaces. She said a guard failed to provide her with diabetes medication or victim services. She also said that staff refused to use correct pronouns when referring to her.[43]

According to Mathew Claxton in the Aldergrove Star, the Surrey Court registry indicates Yaniv was found guilty of a charge of possession of a prohibited weapon, and sentenced to a conditional discharge.[43] The Langley Advance Times reported that she received probation and a firearms prohibition.[46]

In December 2020, the Western Standard reported that the Langley Royal Canadian Mounted Police had charged Yaniv with mischief and uttering threats in relation to an incident in October 2020 concerning Chris Elston.[35]

According to Joseph Brean of the National Post, Yaniv has been accused by multiple people of harassment. This includes claims she used vulgar and sexualized language in online communications with underage girls. Yaniv has denied these allegations. One of the allegations, was by a girl from Washington State, who said that Yaniv made declarations of sexual interest over social media when the girl was 14 years old, allegations Yaniv has strenuously denied. The girl shared a recording of Yaniv with the National Post, where Yaniv made sexual comments using the voice of Elmo from Sesame Street. Yaniv said the recording was a joke, not sent to the girl, but to a friend.[3]

In 2019, interactions on Twitter by Canadian feminist author Meghan Murphy and Jessica Yaniv resulted in Murphy being banned from the platform.[47][48] Murphy had misgendered Yaniv by calling her "him", in violation of Twitter's hate and harassment policy.[47][22] Murphy unsuccessfully sued Twitter over the ban.[47]

Twitter also banned Lindsay Shepherd, a Canadian columnist, from its platform in 2019 as a result of interactions with Yaniv.[15] Yaniv tweeted a comment regarding Shephard's uterus, to which Shephard replied by insulting Yaniv and referring to Yaniv as a "man". Twitter advised Shephard she had violated its rules against hateful content.[49][22]