[photon]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Forgive me for asking some of the more vocal/well written folks on this topic their opinion on a similar matter. Clearly I overstepped by asking about it.

You didn't ask my opinion though, if you'd asked for it I would have answered. What you asked was (a seeming leading question of) why three posters with a certain perspective hadn't commented on something. Not the same at all, so I can't forgive you for something you didn't do.

Originally Posted by pylon

But it is perfectly OK to say because a small minority of men are rapists, it is 100% OK and understandable to exclude them from the same establishment.

We haven't moved past this point, and nothing anyone has said seems to resonate or fit.

I mean obviously it's not because every judge that's ever ruled on the legality of women's only gyms just happened to be a man-hater. And it's not like your rights as a man are being limited at every step in society.

So since this is the sticking point (the justification of discrimination in this case), maybe you need to reach outside our community to someone who's more of an expert that can better explain the justification and the reasoning behind it?

Because it feels like your making this into a society wide equality issue when in reality it's limited to very few specific circumstances.

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

In this situation, the harm is small as well. The female patron can readily move along to another barber or salon within the city. Problem solved.

Yes but the harm being prevented has to be weighed as well. The default position is discrimination is illegal unless justified. The business or the men going to the business would have to make a case to justify the discrimination.

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

Many women are barbers and know how to cut a men's style hair cut since it is pretty much the easiest thing to learn out of school.

And yet there's someone in this thread with direct experience that contradicts you about that specific cut. That makes it difficult to put much merit in what you are saying here.

Originally Posted by FanIn80

The point being, men have the same equal right to feel safe as women do. End of story.

Sure they do, nothing's preventing them. But the law states that a public place can't discriminate based on gender. If they want to exclude women, gather in a private place.

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

I am mostly arguing that the barber is also entitled to cut men's hair only.

The charter disagrees, they aren't.

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

My argument is you can't have it both ways. Have your Women's gym and then complain about a barber shop who only does men's hair.

The differences have been gone over, it's not equivalent. Or if you don't agree about the differences, run your disagreements by a relevant judge or law professor and let us know. Either your points will have merit and spawn a great discussion, or you'll find out why they don't have merit in view of the law.

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

The guy cutting hair is not sexist, he just doesn't know how/or doesn't want to cut a women's hair.

She was asking for a specific cut that they were experts at. The barber never claimed to not know how to cut women's hair. That they don't want to cut women's hair is irrelevant, they are obligated to under the Canadian charter.

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

A women's hair takes much longer or might need prolonged use of scissors which barbers try to minimize the use of.

The charter doesn't say they can discriminate based on wear and tear. You're talking nonsense now. If they go through 3 pairs of scissors because of womens' apparently freakishly hard hair, then charge 5% more for extra scissors.