News, views and top stories in your inbox. Don't miss our must-read newsletter Sign up Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

A human rights tribunal has rejected a transgender woman's claim she was discriminated against when beauty therapists refused to wax her scrotum.

Jessica Yaniv, who identifies as female but has male genitalia, had contacted multiple beauty salon businesses in British Columbia, Canada, requesting waxes.

A tribunal heard staff refused to perform the pubic hair removal procedure after she revealed she shad a full set of male genitalia.

Yaniv filed complaints against multiple beauty salons - claiming the aestheticians’ refusal to wax her scrotum was discriminatory, reports the Daily Star .

(Image: Jessica Yaniv / Instagram)

But according the tribunal's Tuesday decision, Yaniv's complaint was not genuine.

The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal ruled she had gone on a campaign both to enrich herself at the expense of South Asians, and to punish them for what she viewed as transphobia.

Now she has been forced to pay the workers over the case- which saw one forced out of business as a result of Yaniv's claim.

The tribunal said Yaniv had had “manufactured the conditions for a human rights complaint” when she demanded bikini waxes from several salons despite still having a full set of male genitalia.

A number of the salon workers voiced religious objections to carrying out the procedures.

Others said they weren’t appropriately trained in waxing a scrotum.

Because some of the salons in question had never offered services to wax anyone’s scrotum, the tribunal said, it could not be said to be discriminating against Ms Yaniv.

(Image: Jessica Yaniv / Instagram)

The verdict from the tribunal read: "Human rights legislation does not require a service provider to wax a type of genitals they are not trained for and have not consented to wax.”

Yaniv, the ruling said, “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".

The evidence Yaniv herself gave was, according to the tribunal, “disingenuous and self-serving”.

(Image: Jessica Yaniv / Instagram)

Welcoming the verdict Jay Cameron, a lawyer for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) which represented five of the respondents in Vancouver targeted by Yaniv, said: “Self-identification does not erase physiological reality."

The organisation said its clients were women from a diverse range of ethnic backgrounds, including two beauty therapists who belonged to the Sikh faith.

Most of the women who were the target of Yaniv’s complaints worked from their own home, are immigrants to Canada, do not have English as a first language, and some have small children with them in the house during the day.

The JCCF said its clients had refused to provide the service for reasons including a lack of personal comfort, safety concerns, a lack of training, and in some cases religious objections.

Cameron said: “Our clients do not offer the service requested. No woman should be compelled to touch male genitals against her will, irrespective of how the owner of the genitals identifies.”

(Image: Jessica Yaniv / Instagram)

The tribunal's decision noted that Yaniv had brought most of her 15 complaints against female workers who were from diverse ethnic backgrounds.

In some cases she had requested waxing of her arms and legs, and in five instances she had requested appointments for pubic hair waxing.

The decision said the businesses she approached did not provide male genitalia waxing services.

The decision also highlighted Yaniv's racial animosity both on social media and in her testimony.

In one tweet, she promised to “expose” the “bigotry” of Indian women who would not serve her.

In other tweets, she railed against immigrants to Canada in general, claiming some: "gawk and judge and aren't exactly the cleanest people."

Yaniv had brought over a dozen complaints in total, seeking damages in the region of $15,000 (£11,600) each from several beauty salons.

She was ordered to pay $2,000 (£1,200) to three of the women she complained about, one of whom was forced out of business as a result of the case.