And at least 2 porn stars that bullied her openly refused to perform with black men. And one blocked me on twitter when I ask him if it is racist to refuse to perform with black men.
if you rescind the offer to have sex, is that a hate crime?
- Thread starter Dcoat
- Start date
It's year 2019 and if a client couldn't accept the fact that not all women have vaginas, then the onus is 100% on you. Yes there should be descriptions like an SP's race and cis/trans status, but it should be your responsibility to read them. If you go in and EXPECTED her to be cis but she's trans then, well, tough shit.
If being turned down for sex now makes me the victim of a hate crime then where are my reparations?
Biological facts and reality does not care about your feelings. You can thank the late dr john money for inventing this nonsense
Although it's a nice catch phrase, I can't find 'My body, my choice.' as an exception to illegal discrimination in the Ontario Human Rights Code.
Just to be clear here are the grounds that are illegal. The very first is 'race'.
Maybe it's a mistake.
BTW some here who refuse to see black 'gentlemen', you may find comfort in the last illegal ground of discrimination.
Prohibited grounds of discrimination
3 (1) For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.
Yes, but you can’t be legally compelled to have sex with someone, even if your reason for not doing so is explicitly racist/transphobic/whatever. We’re not that far gone yet.
It can't be denial of business based on discrimination when the act of purchasing sex is illegal. So it is not an exception to illegal discrimination.
And again, no judge in the world is going to make a persons right to their own body be trumped by a persons right to non-discriminatory service.
I'm not a lawyer (nor an SJW), may one of you guys with a law degree can jump in.
Looks like you're referring to personal relationships. Thats fine.
SW's aren't looking for nor offering a personal relationship.
They offer services which they hope their clients find sexual. They are not looking for sex for themselves. They explicitly offer 1 on 1 services, like a psychologist, or even entertainment, like a movie house ( I won't push that too far).
Can you imagine a psychologist or theatre advertising times, with an asterisks 'no black gentle, please'?
Thats why they don't get reported. It's not what makes it legal, or even something that's not cringe worthy.
Here’s the problem: as I said earlier in this thread, it was already determined in the Yaniv case that you can’t legally compel someone to touch another person’s genitals. In that case, it was estheticians who were being sued for refusing to wax Yaniv’s scrotum, which is a business transaction. So there is legal precedent that a person’s right not to touch someone else’s genitals, even if it’s in a business context, if they don’t feel comfortable doing so trumps gender identity, at very least.
That aside, it’s neither possible nor moral to mandate that someone cannot refuse to have sex with someone they’re not attracted to. Attraction is not a choice, you don’t choose who and what turns you on, to even attempt to make that argument would undermine the argument (fact) that sexual orientation is not a choice, since if you can choose what you’re attracted to, you could logically choose not to be gay. If a lady says she doesn’t accept clients of a particular race, it may very simply be because she’s not attracted to people of that race, and that’s valid as far as I’m concerned. This is the difference. A psychologist isn’t fucking their clients. A theatre is only fucking their customers at the concession stand.
