I genuinely think this depends on the person. If you’ve got a lot of your self-image tied up in your hair, and the OP makes it sound like Jen does, then while breaking your leg or your nose is obviously more painful than having your hair cut, I don’t think it’s necessarily worse. It’s violating, having someone decide to change your personal appearance for you; I don’t blame Jen in the slightest for not knowing how to respond to Susan.
For a less extreme example–I think many, many people with long hair would much, much, much prefer to get backhanded across the face than to have their hair cut off–after all, a stinging cheek/bloody nose/cut lip heals up in a day or two, but hair takes years to regrow. But no one would question whether or not a slap like that was battery.
In legal terms, no, it isn’t. A broken leg might carry a higher sentencing recommendation, but the magnitude of the crime (aggravated assault and battery) is the same. You may have a more difficult time making the same tort claim for shorn hair versus a broken limb, but if the action [list=a][li]affected her ability to maintain employment or lifestyle,[/li][li]resulted in significant cost, loss of work, or other fiscal hardship, or [/li][li]caused grave emotional distress,[/list][/li]a personal injury lawyer would have a good shot at an affirmative judgement for both compensatory and punitive damages, especially if the perpetrator did not act in a timely manner to express regret. Her words “I’m making a statement! Bitch about your split ends again!” could even be taken as a further act of intimidation by threat (as in, “This time I cut off your braid; next time I’ll take off the scalp!” or somesuch), and without any mitigating factors such as responding to a previous threat or aggravating action.
A broken nose resulting from a simple brawl between two “bros” without any aggravating factors, on the other hand, would probably be no more than simple assault and battery, and no ambulance chaser is going to even bother pursing a tort with such clowns.
Stranger
I’m kind of thinking that Susan is feeling like she wants to crawl under a rock (at least I hope so), but her text was totally inadequate. And regardless of how sorry she is, or not, I agree that banning her from the bar would be appropriate, at least for a set period of time.
I watch a lot of What Not to Wear, and I’m usually unsympathetic to the women who don’t want their hair cut short. The stylist, after all, is a professional, and knows how to make hair look good. And besides, it grows back if you dislike it.
That being said, I would be furious if I were in Jen’s situation. Yes, it’s just hair, and yes, it grows back, but it’s MY hair, not yours. You do not have permission to cut it unless I am specifically paying you to do so.
I think Jen would do well to distance herself from Susan.
I may be more than a screw loose. She may have deeper issues going: alcoholism, anger management issues, whatever. At any rate, I throw my vote in with the not okay group.
Not comparable–hair can take months or years to grow or in some cases doesn’t always grow back. You can wash off a marker. Though if someone thought that was funny I probably wouldn’t want to be friends with them.
Yup - and there is also something much more violent about attacking someone with a sharp implement, even if that’s cutting their hair off with scissors. It’s malice disguised as a joke. Definitely not court-worthy, but definitely ban-worthy.
Forget “in legal terms”. In real terms, is having someone deliberately break your leg substantially worse than having someone deliberately cut your hair?
If you agree that it is, do you then agree that there is substantially more justification for wanting to prosecute someone for deliberately breaking your leg than there is for wanting to prosecute someone for deliberately cutting your hair, even if the law is written in such a way that they would be treated the same?
Yes, absolutely. Breaking someone’s leg is worse than cutting their hair. Breaking someone’s neck is worse than breaking their leg. And murdering someone is worse than breaking their neck. But just because B is worse doesn’t make A okay.
I wouldn’t press charges, had this happened to me. But I would have one more ex-friend than I did last week.
This is how I feel, too.
It’s not even just about the hair. It’s the fact that this person took it upon themselves to do something this hurtful. If a person purposefully destroyed an outfit or piece of jewelry I liked, even if it was cheap and they offered to replace it, I’d still be pissed. It’s not just about the object–it’s about the fact that the person seems to think that they have the right to do something hurtful to me. With friends like that…you know?
You stated that
In fact, it isn’t “irrelevant”; it may be a matter of scale and context, but if the situation related by the o.p. is taken at face value, the victim certainly has a legitimate case for criminal prosecution, and possibly for civil claims as well. Whether she should do that or not is at her discretion and the amount of bother this is worth to her. You emphasize that “it is just hair”, which glosses over the point that the perpetrator initiated–without prior provocation or rational purpose–an assault using a sharp instrument to involuntarily remove a portion of the victim’s possessions or person, proceeded to taunt her with it, and subsequently failed (as far as has been disclosed) to offer sincere contrition. This isn’t the minor technicality of law that you seem to believe it is; the reason that the laws on assault and battery are written in such a fashion is to allow for interpretation that an act that may not have been harmful in and of itself may be indicative of further atavistic intent or impulse.
I’ll agree that we don’t have full context here, and I’ll be the first to admit that within a certain group of friends we engage in behavior and talk that, removed from context, would sound threatening and offensive, but I can’t imagine any circumstance in which I’d be anywhere north of far wrong that would involve me cutting on any part of someone else’s body or effecting permanent non-incidental damage to their property. And if I knew someone who behaved like this–drunk or sober–I would chalk that up to a severe emotional problem or personality disorder and keep my distance.
Stranger
I’d be pissed. I don’t think I’d press charges, but what about a restraining order (no idea what that involves, maybe not worth the trouble)? Susan is obviously a crazy bitch, and I’d want nothing more to do with her.
I agree with this. Who cares if Susan gets the idea that paying for it makes everything okay? If she does get that impression, it’s easy enough to set her straight.
Susan: Hey, want to go out tonight?
Jen: No. I never want to see you or speak to you again. click
You’re going to have a very difficult time justifying even a temporary restraining order (TRO) without demonstrating cause to believe that the focus of the order represents a future threat, i.e. filing an criminal charge or requesting an injunction. Although she did make what could be considered (out of context) as a threat of future action (“I’m making a statement! Bitch about your split ends again!”) the lack of specificity or credible reason to anticipate further assaults would make that a hard sell unless the perpetrator has a history of violent or destructive behavior. And in many ways, a restraining order is even worse to have on one’s record than an assault charge, as it indicates a reasonable belief that the offender is capable of violent or retributive behavior.
ROs are also not actually much good for anything other than justifying a defensive posture. That is to say, if you have a RO in place, it is easier for the police who respond to a call to assess culpability on the part of the object of the restraining order, and it demonstrates a pattern of history that may be useful in the case that physical force is used in self-defense by the RO holder. A RO by itself, however, is just a piece of paper and won’t stop anyone from doing anything; indeed, it may exacerbate the situation in some conditions, as expanded by security consultant Gavin de Becker in his book, The Gift of Fear. Before you consider applying for a RO on anyone, you should really read the relevant chapters in this book and decide whether a restraining order is really recommended for the situation.
Stranger
Susan is malicious and has serious boundary and envy issues. I had a “friend” like this too. It took a while for me to realize what was really going on with her. When it did, I walked away. In some ways, it was hard to give up the friendship because we had done so much together but I realized the “hurt me once, shame on you; hurt me twice, shame on me” aspect of things.
I would recommend that Jen ignore Susan’s offer of payment. And keep her distance from now on. I also think it would be good to ban Susan from the bar for a period of time. She needs to know that others (beyond Jen) won’t tolerate her behavior either.
No, it’s not. These things have definitions in the penal code. I’ll use New York because it’s what I’m familiar with but let’s assume most states are similar.
And cutting somebody’s hair does not qualify as a physical injury.
Looking over the penal code, you probably could get a conviction on criminal mischief or harassment
That’s assuming you can convince a court that you hair is your property and that it’s worth over $250.
Well I am sooo pleased that the vast majority of Dopers appear to share my outrage over this incident; I forwarded this thread to Jen and she found it very validating.
I must also mention that this is one of those “last straw” incidents as far as Susan goes; she’s been acting hostile and erratic for awhile now…we’ve all been friends for years but I, at least, have been thinking for awhile of distancing myself from her, and this was kind of “it” for me. It wasn’t my hair, but it happened in front of me, to my best friend, and I think it’s time for me to end the friendship. (Such as it is/was.)
It’s one thing to joke about somebody being psycho, but it’s another when they cross a physical line like this, and prove it. I don’t need this kind of drama; this is not the act of a friend. Or a sane person. I hope she gets help with her issues but I don’t deserve to put up with them. Neither does Jen.
Actually, the stylist is looking to make a Dramatic Change, and not necessarily one that’s more flattering to the stylee. If the stylist just trims the split ends, puts in some long loose layers, and gives a deep conditioning treatment, that might be extremely flattering, but it won’t be that dramatic. Giving a stylee a pixie cut when she’s got waist length hair now IS dramatic…but it’s not necessarily the best option, especially if the woman’s SO is really triggered by long hair (and does the woman feel free to say such a thing on national TV?) and is really turned off by short hair. And a woman might not like very short haircuts on ANYONE, herself included.
It’s possible that Susan does feel remorse, especially after she sobers up. But if she violates boundaries when she’s even a little drunk, she needs to stay sober. And she needs to make an actual apology, rather than just an offer to pay.