mic wrote:In the abovementioned case against the beauticians, should they be expected to differentiate between pre/ post-HRT testicles… or should they just be expected to do their jobs regardless?
It's hard to say who is right in the Yaniv cases because it seems like she wasn't engaging in good faith. What appears to have happened is that Yaniv stormed out shouting (metaphorically - the exchanges were by email) "This is discrimination! I will sue you!" when the beauticians first expressed being unsure at how to proceed with a scrotum, meaning an honest attempt to sort the issue out didn't occur.
I think in general women's beauty salons should make every reasonable effort to see trans women, but there might be totally understandable caveats, e.g. "please let us know in advance if you have different genitals so we can make sure we have staff available that are trained in that kind of beautology" (Is beautology a real word? It is now!). If a certain salon is literally just a Mum working from home part-time, perhaps it's not necessarily reasonable to expect her to have those skills at all, so maybe it is OK for them to refer someone to a bigger salon.
It's not quite a "gay wedding cake" issue because you need materially different skills to wax a scrotum and around a penis, than you do to wax around a vagina; but it starts to look a lot like discrimination if salons refuse to accommodate trans women at all. A larger salon being run as a proper business with multiple staff etc. should have the capacity to work with a trans customer.
mic wrote:What if, in line with technological advancement, Paralympians start demanding inclusion and winning everything with their prosthetics?!
A new extremely cyberpunk Olympics would be awesome and one of the few developments that could actually make me watch the Olympics, which are currently - let's be honest - very boring.