After being denied medical care for a procedure involving a body part she does not possess, a transgender woman alleged she was a victim of discrimination by a gynecologist. The situation escalated quickly, sparking a legal battle that has since divided public opinion and stirred strong emotions across various platforms.
Jessica Yaniv, who now goes by Jessica Simpson, is a transgender activist from Canada who first gained international attention in 2018. At the time, she filed multiple human rights complaints against beauty professionals who refused to perform hair removal services on her male genitalia. The procedure she requested, a Brazilian wax, is typically offered to women and involves removing hair from the pubic region. However, when it is performed on male anatomy, it is referred to as a “brozilian” or “manzilian,” and estheticians usually require separate training for such services due to the anatomical differences.
Although Simpson, now 37, still had male genitalia at the time, she pursued legal action against five independent beauty workers for declining her service. She demanded financial compensation of up to \$15,000 from each of them. In court, she argued that these refusals only occurred after she disclosed that she was transgender. According to her statements, none of the providers expressed any objections until they learned about her gender identity.
The case, which became widely known as Simpson vs. the Beauticians, resulted in a landmark decision in 2019. Simpson ultimately lost. The tribunal found that the estheticians, many of whom were immigrant women working from their homes and not fluent in English, were not trained or prepared to handle male genitalia. The court ordered Simpson to pay \$2,000 in damages to each of the three beauticians who testified. Additionally, the court noted that Simpson had exhibited clear hostility toward certain racial, religious, and cultural groups throughout the proceedings.
When asked by a reporter whether she felt remorse for the financial and emotional toll her complaints had on the women whose businesses closed as a result, Simpson replied with no regret. She stated that she considered herself the true victim and argued that every woman, including transgender women, should receive equal treatment and services.
Simpson’s legal efforts didn’t stop there. Over the years, she continued to file complaints, ranging from beauty pageants to law enforcement and even local media outlets. A British Columbia Supreme Court Justice once referred to her as a “prolific litigant.”
In February 2021, the Langley Fire Department issued her a warning after she reportedly made over 30 non-emergency calls for assistance getting out of the bathtub. The fire department clarified that not one of these calls constituted a true medical emergency and further alleged that Simpson had engaged in inappropriate and sexually suggestive behavior toward staff. Their letter explained that her actions had created an unsafe environment, which would no longer be tolerated.
Simpson responded with a now-deleted social media post, claiming she intended to sue the township for libel and other alleged offenses.
Her latest controversy involves a gynecologist’s office that reportedly refused to provide her care, allegedly stating, “we don’t serve transgender patients.” Simpson took to Instagram, expressing that she was shocked, confused, and hurt by the rejection. She questioned whether such a refusal was even legal and tagged the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia, which oversees medical standards in the province.
In subsequent posts, she insisted that gynecologists play a vital role in transgender healthcare, especially for individuals undergoing or recovering from gender-affirming surgery. She referenced the multidisciplinary care that includes managing gynecological issues in trans women. However, despite her claims that the medical board sided with her, no public updates have been released regarding her complaint, which she filed in 2019.
Public reactions have been sharply divided. Kirralie Smith, a spokesperson for a group called Binary, criticized Simpson’s claims, stating that surgery and hormones do not biologically convert a male into a female and that not all OBGYNs are qualified to care for individuals with male anatomy. Smith emphasized that a transgender person should seek care from a specialist who understands their specific medical needs, not a gynecologist trained exclusively in women’s health.
British comedian Ricky Gervais also weighed in with satirical commentary, expressing mock outrage over a gynecologist allegedly refusing to check a “lady’s cock for ovarian cancer.” He continued in another post, sarcastically announcing he would dress up as “brave female activist Jessica Yaniv” for Halloween, adding that it saved him from having to wax his “big old hairy balls.”
Amid the controversy, medical professionals are increasingly discussing the anatomical and clinical differences between biological female bodies and surgically constructed neo-vaginas, especially concerning routine care. Experts clarify that individuals with a cervix, uterus, ovaries, or fallopian tubes require gynecological care—regardless of their gender identity. However, individuals assigned male at birth, who have not undergone genital reconstruction surgery, do not require the same examinations or treatments as those with biologically female anatomy.
According to professionals, only after a transgender woman has completed gender-affirming surgery would she potentially require gynecological care for her new anatomy. At the time of the incident, Simpson still retained all of her original male genitalia, making the situation more about medical relevance and provider qualifications than about discrimination.
Ultimately, this situation underscores a broader debate: Should identity take precedence over anatomical reality when it comes to medical care? While the public remains sharply divided, one thing is clear—issues like this require thoughtful, respectful discussion grounded in both science and empathy. What do you think? Should healthcare systems adjust to gender identity over biological anatomy? We invite you to share your opinion and join the conversation by spreading this story.
