Another Human Rights Commission – this time Washington State – told the Christian owners of a women’s Spa that they could not refuse service to transwomen who had not had surgery (discrimination!), even though several services required customers to be naked.
The spa was described by its owners, who are Christian, as being designed based on the belief that “a male and a female should not ordinarily be in each other’s presence while in the nude unless married to each other,” according to a complaint filed by the owners.
Many services provided by the spa require patrons to be fully naked, and the employees who work on-site are all female.
The owners challenged the “anti-discrimmination” law claiming it discriminated against them. The Judge didn’t see it.
The constitutional rights of the owners, employees, and patrons of the Olympus Spa in Washington state were not infringed when officials in the state ordered the facility to provide services to “transgender women” with male genitalia, Washington District Court Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein said in a June 5 ruling. …
[Also]
“The Court does not minimize the privacy concerns at play when employees are performing exfoliating massages on nude patrons. Aside from this nudity, though, there is simply nothing private about the relationship between Olympus Spa, its employees, and the random strangers who walk in the door seeking a massage,” she said. “Nor is there anything selective about the association at issue beyond Olympus Spa’s ‘biological women’ policy. “The Court therefore has little difficulty concluding that the personal attachments implicated here are too attenuated to qualify for constitutional protection.”
And there is some debate as to whether the individual who filed the discrimination complaint was ever at either of their facilities.
Haven Wilvich, a male who identified as a woman yet has not undergone sex change surgery … alleged that the spa “denied me services and stated that transgender women without surgery are not welcome because it could make other customers and staff uncomfortable.”
Spa policy dictates only admitting females older than 13.
An investigation by the spa owners found no evidence that Wilvich had ever been to the spa, which has facilities in Tacoma and Lynnwood and has been operating for more than 20 years. Myoon Woon Lee, one of the spa owners, also expressed concern that exposing female customers, especially minors, to male genitalia could open the spa up to criminal penalties based on state laws governing lewd conduct and public indecency.
At issue then is not if you are trans but if you genuinely are trans and not just a guy who might want to wave their junk around in front of women and girls as young as thirteen.
I’m sure the state would have been happy to oblige by repealing the indecency statute, or maybe not – being charged with that would be a doozy of a thing and probably ruin the Spa. That’s not to say that the publicity and likelihood that women might encounter man parts based on this ruling won’t cut into their customer traffic and ruin them anyway.
Ladies, we have this unique spa experience and look, pensis, at no extra charge. And hey, maybe they do more business as the clientele shifts, but what are the odds this doesn’t hurt their business? And it is a familiar pattern. From Bakers to Photographers to artists to dating services – Christian businesses are targeted, not so that gender warriors can use their services but to put them out of business.
Remember Sweet Cakes by Melissa. Or how about Jack Phillips and Masterpiece Cake Shop? Phillips got his case to the US Supreme Court and won. Still, the state and the Gaystapo came at him again (and again)—lawfare to destroy the man, his business, and his way of life even though there were dozens of places a gay couple could go to get a wedding cake and he had a protected right under the First Amendment.
Cultural assault and battery.
This sounds like that.
