Unfortunately I have not read the judgement as I like to do, because firstly I don’t know where to get it and secondly it’ll almost certainly be in Danish (but this is not a given given what a cool place Denmark is) so I am reporting this to you through news reports, but a Danish court (or court-like thing - I do not know anything really about Danish law other than jaywalking is illegal but if you do it in Copenhagen constantly all that happens to you is strange looks if you are a tourist, and that Cannabis is illegal but if you go to Christiana not only will you see lots of dogs, you can also buy the most amazing has in the world from a tolerated market - and this is so tolerated that you can look at one of the former hash stands in the museum there. Seriously, go to Copenhagen! (but not for more than a couple of days, there’s not that much there)) has ruled that men and women have to be charged the same amount for a hair cut, by hairdressers.
Is this, in your opinion, taking equality too far? Or is it only fair for customers?
Since I’ve been moaned at in my last debate thread for not providing my opinion, I will do although I don’t see why it matters what I think. My view is that it is going too far, but not because of what you think. I see it as a worse of two evils. While it’s obvious that your average woman’s hair certainly deserves being charged more, both because womens’ hair takes far longer to do in 99% of cases, has to be done “better” in 99% of cases (otherwise complaints will be made about things a man would never notice) , and more general knowledge about styles and so on, general expertise what have you has to be shown by the hairdresser, you can certainly argue that those are not fixed to sex/gender/whatever and you could certainly get a particular man who was more complicated to do than a particular woman. My reason is that the alternative, charging by some alternative scheme (e.g. perhaps by time) will confuse the consumer and lead to far more disputes - and in general far more misery, really - than just allowing this bit of techincal sexism. Going too far down the “logical” route, especially without considering other aspects of things and other general rights leads to potential absurdities and confusion. I believe, incidentally, that this is one of the few things conservatives get right (although they get it right by accident) - don’t change stuff too quickly.
But like I said, who gives a stuff what I think. What’s your take on differential sex pricing for hairdressing? And hell, how about clothing?
I think that is the point. You could have two haircut price charts with pictures of the different ones allowed under each price tier. It doesn’t matter if you are male or female. If you want a clipper cut on the sides and back with the top scissor cut short and blended, it is one price. Long hair, feathering, layers, and bangs get a different price. Problem solved.
Women’s hairdressers already have different prices based, roughly, on how much effort your cut will take. Length and style are the usual distinctions. Do barbers charge the same for a quick once-over with the clippers as for a more complicated cut?
There’s a small chain of unisex hairdressers in London, called Mr Tops, that explicitly (on huge signs in letters nearly as big as the shop name) charges different amounts for men and women, despite also advertising that they only do basic cuts. A quick number two all over or a trim on the ends of long hair takes the same amount of time and skill no matter what genitalia the customer has, but women are charged more. No logic to it at all other than that they can, so they do.
My hair takes 5 minutes to trim. For that I should pay twice as much? It has nothing to do with sex, or even hair length. My hair is pretty no-fuss all around.
I agree with the tiered-service-regardless-of-sex approach – this also solves the problem of having to pay obscene prices at the same level as complicated, half-hour long styles when spending only 5 minutes in the chair. I would, and have, pay more if I want a consultation as well as a trim. But a blunt-cut across the back, long hair or not, is actually less work and time than the short layers of a man’s standard cut.
Heck, charge by the hour. If a stylist is competent at all, they can give you a reasonable estimate of how long it will take to get the style you want.
Assuming you’re talking about Mr Toppers’, I know exactly where you mean and believe me while you may (and btw I totally believe you would cause from your posts you seem to me like you’ve got yer head screwed on right and don’t dither about) accept the haircut given to men there a significant proportion of unused to it women, even if they are going there, just wouldn’t, because they would never have been given such rough treatment before. And lawsuit time beckons especially when you can ruin a woman’s hair for many months, where as a man’s hair even if you completely butcher it will be acceptable enough (if said man ain’t Brian May) after a couple of weeks.
Also I think they wash women’s hair there which they don’t for men.
Well, most barbers will charge extra (at least in the NW) for long hair, and some charge less for buzz cuts. I’ve seen a couple of barbershops in Seattle that charge women the same as men–if they only get a buzzcut.
One of the differences between “modern” and “old style” hairdressers in Spain is this: the modern ones will post prices by haircut type, the old style ones by male/female. Many old style ones will charge a woman with very short hair (pixie cut or shorter) “male” prices and “female” prices to guys with long hair, though, so in the end it ends up being dependent on cut and not on client’s gender.
Car insurance rates aren’t calculated like that; they are completely and utterly gender-based. So, why should hair cuts be any different?
The car insurance companies don’t care if you’re 22 years old with exactly the same driving record. Why should hair cut places care if you’re 22 years old with exactly the same hair cut? Or dry cleaners for that matter?
I don’t see a point to one price for all system. Haircuts are priced on a piecemeal basis, but each cut and each head of hair is different. It’s not a practical business model to have the barber dicker with each customer over the price before beginning work. They have to categorize the different cuts in a way that will allow them to profit overall even though some heads require more time than others. The difference in men’s and women’s styles is sufficient to have a price differential. I suppose if a barber did nothing but buzz cuts and charged women more than men for doing exactly the same thing you could argue that as discriminatory, but that’s not what real life is like.
Haircuts should be charged by style, not by wearer’s gonads. A buzz cut is a buzz cut. If a client wants layering and feathers and deep conditioning treatment, that’s clearly going to take more time and should cost more than a buzz cut, or a simple blunt cut.
Haircuts should absolutely be charged by style. I have a wash and a cut. I am willing to pay a little extra since she must wash it beforehand (thin, curly hair) but when she gets to cutting it it’s about five minutes of trimming on the top and the back. That’s it. No complications.
Why not just have the hairdresser/barber/whatever hit a chess-timer when you sit down in the chair? A dollar a minute, or whatever the going rate is gonna be.