So you thought that When Harry Met Sally — the classic 80s rom-com which recently celebrated its 30th anniversary with a competition at Katz’s deli in New York to see who could do the best fake orgasm — was a triumph for its writer Nora Ephron, its star Meg Ryan, and the depiction of rounded, female characters generally?
Think again, sexist bigot!
In fact — so we learn from The Atlantic‘s resident kill-joy movie analyst Megan Garber — When Harry Met Sally set back the cause of feminism by years thanks to its crass invention of a term which has haunted womankind ever since: “High maintenance.”
The phrase comes from an observation Harry makes to Sally while they are watching Casablanca. Ingrid Bergman, he says, is ‘low maintenance.’
“There are two kinds of women,” Harry explains, anticipating her question: “high-maintenance and low-maintenance.”
“And Ingrid Bergman is low-maintenance?”
“An L-M, definitely,” Harry replies.
“Which one am I?”
Harry has anticipated this question, too — of course Sally would wonder. “You’re the worst kind,” he says, coolly. “You’re high-maintenance, but you think you’re low-maintenance.”
How dare you not know the answer to this, you disgusting transphobe!
The answer, obviously, is when those dangly bollocks belong to a self-declared woman like Jessica Yaniv — formerly Jonathan Yaniv — who is currently suing a number of intimate grooming salons in the Canadian courts because, disgracefully, they refused to wax his lady spheres.
Some commentators, including comedian Ricky Gervais, have suggested that there is something untoward about Yaniv’s behaviour.
Which is perfectly acceptable. Saying you can't do it because you are not trained etc… totally fine. @rickygervais is using the "it's my right as a woman" not to do something as an argument to refuse a service. Easy step to "its my right as a Christian" etc etc
— MrStrathmore #FBPE #PeoplesVote🏳️🌈 (@MrStrathmore) July 21, 2019
But the trans lobby, naturally disagrees.
Ricky Gervais is a transphobe who (barely) disguises his bigotry as feminism. Real feminism includes all women, including trans women.
I personally am on the side of Jessica Yaniv – and not just because she scrubs up so beautifully in her party frock. No, I love Jessica because I think she represents what Rod Liddle memorably coined in one of his Spectator columns as “peak wank.” That is, Jessica and everything he/she/it/ze/zir/wotevs stands for, represent the moment when identity politics reached such a pitch of lunacy that even diehard Social Justice Warriors began facepalming in horror.
In fact, if I were to have my way, in ten years time there will be a statue of Jessica – in her party frock of course – in every square in every city in Canada, plus the odd one in other strategically selected locations: Brighton, Bristol, Stroud and Totnes in the UK; Berkeley, Austin and Manhattan in the US; Melbourne in Australia; etc.
The statue will remind the politically correct denizens of these places that they LOST the culture wars – and that the reason they lost the culture wars was Jessica Yaniv.
The more you read about this case the murkier it gets – to the point where any reasonable observer might well ask: “Is this freak show really the hill you Social Justice Warriors want to die on? Why??”
Trans woman Jessica Yaniv has filed 16 human rights complaints with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal over in Canada, charging various waxing and aesthetic salon workers with transphobic discrimination for refusing to wax her balls/lady spheres/gender dumplings.
Each of these salons or their workers indicated they only provided intimate area services to female clients, and despite the fact that Jessica identifies as and lives her life as a woman, the workers were not comfortable with the fact that they would have to handle/wax a pair of balls.
According to Jessica Yaniv and her supporters on social media, this is discrimination and these women should not be allowed to refuse contact with a penis, whether it belongs to a man or woman.
Yaniv’s critics have pointed out that if this really is about combating discrimination and bigotry then Yaniv is hardly a shining moral example. One screenshot purportedly from Yaniv’s social media accounts, from when ‘she’ still identified as male, show him ranting about immigrants:
“We have a lot of immigrants here who gawk and judge and aren’t exactly the cleanest people. They’re also verbally and physically abusive, that’s one main reason why I joined a girls gym, cause I DON’T want issues with these people, nor do I want them in anyway, shape or form. They lie about shit, they’ll do anything to support their own kind and make things miserable for everyone else.”
Elsewhere, he is allegedly shown somewhat creepily asking for chatroom advice on how to behave in a women’s changing room:
“If I notice a girl that’s nude below and has a tampon string coming out when I’m changing and doing my stuff, is it weird to approach her to ask her for a tampon? or pad? Just to bond with her a bit over period stuff…”
If Yaniv weren’t pursuing an actual discrimination case through the courts, you’d think he was another parody character like Godfrey Elfwick using satire to hold up to a mirror the wilder excesses of intersectional politics.
But in a way, Yaniv is doing us all a huge favour. He is testing woke culture to the bounds of destruction: can it really be possible that a court of law will decide that the rights of a trans woman to get his testicles waxed trump those of poor, often immigrant beauty salon workers, some from religiously sensitive backgrounds, who consider this a task below their pay grade.
My sympathy is with those poor womenfolk. In a free market, I believe that Yaniv is perfectly entitled to have his orbs waxed and polished if he wishes – but that he should pay a proper market rate (a lot, I imagine: well it was the last few times I had it done…) rather than trading under false pretences.
There are bigger issues here as Jamie Whyte suggests here:
How did we get to the point where women are having to fight for the right to choose whether they wax some big old hairy cock & balls or not? It is not a human right to have your meat & 2 veg polished.
Only a couple of days now before Britain bids a relieved farewell to the worst prime minister in history. But let’s give credit where credit is due: it wasn’t just Theresa May who was so sublimely useless; it was her entire administration.
Under Remainer Chancellor Philip Hammond, Britain’s tax burden has risen to its highest in over 40 years.
Amber Rudd, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, was heard as recently as last week not pleading to be spared exile to the backbenches (as she deserves) but rather strutting around like some prize hen as if she still owned the whole barnyard, clucking that any future Cabinet in Boris Johnson’s government should have a 50/50 gender split.
So now we know what Boris Johnson’s most pressing task when he becomes the United Kingdom’s prime minister next Tuesday: destroy the Electoral Commission.
Not only should he disband the failing, corrupt, anti-democratic quango itself, but he must sack all the people who have anything to do with it, and make damn sure they never worm their way into any position of public influence ever again in their miserable, squalid and oh so very un-British lives.
Extinction Rebellion are dangerous extremists whose criminal activists should be put behind bars.
So says Richard Walton — and he should know: Walton was formerly head of the Metropolitan Police’s Counter-Terrorism Command and now works as an independent consultant on solutions for countering terrorism and extremism. He is also co-author of the first in-depth investigation of Extinction Rebellion, published by the think tank Policy Exchange.
The must-read report is a timely counter to the narrative prevalent across the mainstream media that, while Extinction Rebellion’s protests can be a bit disruptive and inconvenient, the group is essentially on the side of the angels because its people are decent and committed and prepared to sacrifice their careers and liberty in order to save the planet.
Plus: season three of Stranger Things is self-indulgent and twee – more Scooby-Doo than Alien.
Losing my comrade Christopher Booker the other day didn’t help. Nor did turning to the once robustly sceptical Sun newspaper this morning to find a spread on how to cut your carbon footprint and recycle. The final ‘reeeee!’ moment (fans of the movie will get the reference) will no doubt come when I next bump into Matt Ridley and he tells me: ‘We really must heed the wise things the Prince of Wales and Greta Thunberg are telling us about climate change!’
“Islam inherently inhibits the path to progress and freedom”. Not my words: Boris Johnson’s, from an article he wrote in 2007.
But is there a half-educated person with even a fraction of a brain cell who doesn’t know this statement to be accurate, fair and reasonable?
Why, to deny the truth of that statement you’d have to deny the evidence of over a thousand years of history: the Judaeo-Christian West has thrived; the Umma – that’s the world of Islam – has lagged far behind, socially and economically.
Boris Johnson – Britain’s prime minister in waiting – has described President Donald Trump’s robust criticisms of the four Democrat congresswomen known as ‘the Squad’ as “totally unacceptable.”
“Unacceptable” to whom, exactly?
Most people in Britain, it’s true, have never heard of Ilhan Omar. And are probably only dimly aware of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as that cute, slightly goofy looking college kid they once saw dancing on a video on Twitter.
Magaluf — Shagaluf as the kids all call it — is the post-A-levels destination of choice for what seems like every school leaver in the country. If you’ve seen The InbetweenersMovie you’ll know what it’s like: charmless, garish avenues of overpriced bars and clubs with pushy greeters, expensive party cruises, grotesque drunkenness, epic hangovers, sunburn, STDs and gallons of vomit.