Men-only barber shop controversy

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by rubecube

To be fair, he's not trying to make any empirical claims in this thread like he was in that one.

Agreed, but it is the approach. As soon as he is not agreed with, or is called out he throws his toys.

At least that is my opinion.

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Personally, I'm glad that there are still men out there who have the will to stand up for themselves and their principles. The barbershop is his business which was modeled with a certain focus and as such I think he should have every right to decide whether or not he wants to cut someones hair.

Fixed your post, seeing as you didn't seem to have much in the way of respect for SpaLady or the female centric hair salon you mentioned earlier. Wouldn't want anyone to confuse your point.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Apparently you missed this post from page 2: http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...2&postcount=30

I read it. If this specific barber is absolutely, without a doubt, the only one in Regina who can give her this style she wants, she's got a point. It's just tough to believe that's the case.

[110%]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

mavrickstruth corrected me in this post. I was correct when I stated that private businesses cannot legally deny service to customers on the basis of race/religion/etc., but that protection does not come from the Charter.

I don't know how you can say you were correct when you're entire point was that private business cannot discriminate because of the Charter. Interesting.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Personally, I'm glad that there are still people out there who have the will to stand up for themselves and their principles. The barbershop is his business which was modeled with a certain focus and as such I think he should have every right to decide whether or not he wants to cut someones hair.

Yeah you should totally be able to refuse service because someone is an #######.

What people take issue with is refusing service because someone lacks a penis. That's not so much "standing up for your principals".

[photon]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Personally, I'm glad that there are still people out there who have the will to stand up for themselves and their principles.

But not those of the woman trying to get a haircut?

We don't even know if she did it on purpose or not, it's just assumed by many because it fits a desired narrative to try and characterize and undermine someone.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

I read it. If this specific barber is absolutely, without a doubt, the only one in Regina who can give her this style she wants, she's got a point. It's just tough to believe that's the case.

I don't know, man. Does she have a vehicle? There's no way in hell I'd be taking public transit for 45-60 minutes across a ####hole like Regina to get the haircut I wanted. Proximity definitely has to figure into the equation here.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

I read it. If this specific barber is absolutely, without a doubt, the only one in Regina who can give her this style she wants, she's got a point. It's just tough to believe that's the case.

You said "she should have gone to her regular hairdresser". wittynickname pointed out that there's a very high probability that her regular salon would not be capable of giving her the style she wanted but the barbershop in question could.

It may or may not be the case that there's only one business in all of Regina that can do this particular cut, but why does that even matter? What if this particular barbershop happened to be near her home but her other choices were on the opposite side of town; why should she have to go miles out of her way just to get a haircut when there's an equivalent service much closer to her?

[Edit] Beaten by rubecube

[photon]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

I read it. If this specific barber is absolutely, without a doubt, the only one in Regina who can give her this style she wants, she's got a point. It's just tough to believe that's the case.

It could have just been the closest, or the one she found on the Internet (they are the first result for Regina Barber). Again to assume she targeted it to make a point is just that, an assumption. And an ultimately irrelevant one.

But that's not what makes her have a point. What makes her have a point is that the business can't discriminate based on gender.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by photon

But not those of the woman trying to get a haircut?

We don't even know if she did it on purpose or not, it's just assumed by many because it fits a desired narrative to try and characterize and undermine someone.

As a consumer you don't always get what you want.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by 110%

I don't know how you can say you were correct when you're entire point was that private business cannot discriminate because of the Charter. Interesting.

My entire point was that private businesses cannot discriminate (which is absolutely true). I was incorrect in stating that the Charter is the source of that protection.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't know, man. Does she have a vehicle? There's no way in hell I'd be taking public transit for 45-60 minutes across a ####hole like Regina to get the haircut I wanted. Proximity definitely has to figure into the equation here.

For sure. I'm just basing this on the significance she's placing on the specific barber doing the man cut. I'm not well versed on the haircut scene out there, or in Calgary anymore for that matter. Clippers ftw.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Yeah you should totally be able to refuse service because someone is an #######.

What people take issue with is refusing service because someone lacks a penis. That's not so much "standing up for your principals".

The business is modeled around

"providing exceptional grooming services FOR men in a unique atmosphere geared specifically TO men. When an opportunity arose for one barber to return to his prairie roots, Craig welcomed the challenge to reach a completely new clientele with a twist on a traditional concept.

In January 2012, Ragged Ass Barbers’ revitalized ideal of the barber shop tradition was introduced to the gentlemen of Regina, SK. These barbers are professionally trained to provide you with precision haircuts, beard and moustache trims, and the ever popular hot-towel, straight razor shave."

The barber shop was just standing up for it's modeled principals which is to provide services for men, to men.

[GGG]

Why don't men join womens gyms? or at least try.

I think the answer is that if allowed in they wouldn't want to be judged as the only guy in the womens gym, it would come across a creepy, the trainers don't cater to mens needs. In the general the reason there is no contraversy about Women's gyms is that Men don't want to join them.

So as long as this women actually wanted this type of haircut and it seems that she did and this place is good at doing this haircut then she should have gotten her haircut.

By the same token if there is a man who for whatever actual reason wants to join a womens gym (be it hours, location, not wanting to be judged by bros, etc) he should be allowed to. These Men don't actually exist, its just a red herring. I could actually see a place like curves being able to Cater to overwieght men who want to start being active and it would likely be a legitamate request and if it occured I would support the Man. But that is not what is being suggested in this thread.

So provided people aren't out trolling places trying to be offended and then enforce their rights they should be accomodated. If it is just trolling like pylons quest to join spalady then they should be rejected.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think you're using the wrong example. The female equivalent of that is the chick that does her hair and cakes on a tonne of make-up so she can leisurely use the recumbent bike for half an hour. I think Lulus and tight-fitting top is pretty standard for most women, or at least most women at the gyms I go to.

So is it different if someone stares or leers at the girl on the recumbant bike?

I'm having a tough time with this thread. I think most on here would attest that I am a very open minded person that is all for equality across all genders, sexuality, races, etc. But there are some double standards at play here that are bordering on ridiculous.

Oilstain mentions the "bro" with perfectly fine reasoning but is called "gross" for apparently being able to see into the minds of women, which is really what almost all of us are doing here (trying to figure out what women's reasons are) and what any woman is doing when she assumes that any guy that happens to look at her is at the very least interested in her sexually, and at the very worst, will try to rape her in the parking lot later.

Arguing about the difference between a look and a stare? Come on. If you plug either of those into a thesaurus, the other is right there. When does a glance become a look, a stare, a leer, or a predetermined rape-face? Is it a time thing or an intent thing? And now we're back to seeing into each others minds. What if a guy is daydreaming and a woman happens to be in his line of sight? Guessing at people's intentions is completely futile.

I know someone from any one of: The bro, the fat person, the girl there dressing "attractively" to work out, the girl dolled up on the recumbant, the girl there in shorts and a tshirt, and the guy there in shorts and a tshirt. The only thing we know about all of them is that they are excersising. In a public place people will stare at you for a number of reasons, regardless of who you are or what you're doing. How is it any better or worse that a guy assumes a girl staring at him is interested or a girl assumes a guy staring at her is dangerous? They're all unfair stereotypes.

I know a guy who was pursued into a parking lot by a gay man who became interested after noticing his (very feminine) tattoo in the locker room. Is that man now legally entitled to ask that his gym be a gay-free zone? My guess is most (including myself) would say no.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

The business is modeled around

"providing exceptional grooming services FOR WHITE men in a unique atmosphere geared specifically TO WHITE men. When an opportunity arose for one barber to return to his prairie roots, Craig welcomed the challenge to reach a completely new clientele with a twist on a traditional concept.

In January 2012, Ragged Ass Barbers’ revitalized ideal of the barber shop tradition was introduced to the WHITE gentlemen of Regina, SK. These barbers are professionally trained to provide you with precision haircuts, beard and moustache trims, and the ever popular hot-towel, straight razor shave."

The barber shop was just standing up for it's modeled principals which is to provide services for WHITEmen, to WHITEmen.

How about if it was just for white men. Have a read and tell be what you think.

[AcGold]

Thanks MattyC

Also, yeah I can admit I can be ridiculous but you guys should realize that getting piled on by multiple people at once tends to make someone turn defensive, multiple people poking holes at the same time makes the situation get out of hand. I didn't give examples in the vaccination thread because I didn't want to get piled on when nearly every person held the same point of view and would tear apart any example I gave.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by GGG

How about if it was just for white men. Have a read and tell be what you think.

No you see, it's okay because they're only discriminating on genitalia (as long as you were born with it, the owner already said trans-men aren't allowed), not on melanin content.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Fixed your post, seeing as you didn't seem to have much in the way of respect for SpaLady or the female centric hair salon you mentioned earlier. Wouldn't want anyone to confuse your point.

Those were brought up as discussion points regarding the presence of businesses that are gender specific to females as a comparison to the male specific barber shop being discussed.

You'll note that in a recent post I mention that I'm all for businesses which are specifically targeted at any group of individuals. It is not up to me to decide how a business decides to market itself or what sort of patrons it wants to serve. If a business can thrive by being selective than good for them.

[photon]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

As a consumer you don't always get what you want.

And as a business owner you can't always do what you want.

But I was responding to you admiring someone standing up for themselves and their principles. Which is what the woman was doing, equality is a pretty good principle. So is freedom to do what one wants, but freedom depends on equality.