I realize that this is basically a dead forum. But I would like to throw something out there for comments I have been trying to find a local hair removal location. IE: waxing location. There are a number of locations in my area that offer waxing services. The ones that offer full waxing services IE: pubic area and or buttocks will clearly tell you that they only do that service for women. For men they limit it to only do the upper back or chest. No other body locations. I visited a " Full Service " salon / shop. And was told that they only offer services to women only. My question is , Is this not gender discrimination ? How do you provide a service to one gender . And refuse service to the other gender ? This seems to be common and wide spread in my area. If you are a man you are being denied services for the same services that they provide others. That is the same as saying "Oh your that race ? We do not do business with that race " It is discrimination .plan and simple Your thoughts on this ?
Well if they don't want to maybe it is because they don't like to do that. Or because they had issues in the past. And no, don't think this can be labelled as discrimination or bring in the argument of race, it is not like being denied access on a bus because one is black. Race has nothing to do with that, you just threw this argument in. They are not telling men aren't allowed in, just they don't want to eradicate hair from certain male spots and to me this is more a problem about the lack of a certain commercial service in a determined area. Discrimination occurs when the difference of treatment or the refusal of service is unreasonable, when the purpose is to segregate a group from another or expel it from social life. It is a serious political topic that has nothing to do with some people deciding they don't want to perform a certain thing that they could find unpalatable, embarrassing or a reliable source of problems and these are all reasonable arguments. Demanding people to go against their will would pose another serious issue, personal freedom. I am sure this is not going to sit well with your expectations but you asked for opinions so here's mine.
You are right I did add race as an example. Only to highlight that fact that if you deny service to one singled out group of people . But not to others then it is discrimination. In this case gender discrimination
There is one more important topic I left out that needs to be taken into account: what each part is losing because of the different treatment. If I discriminate a sex over say, a job, a job that can be done equally well by both a male or a female, I am imposing a heavy burden on people belonging the discriminated sex: the loss of a chance to earn a living and be a part of society. If I am forced to hire a woman, I am basically losing nothing, or my sacrifice is much smaller in comparison with the loss of an important opportunity to be a part of society from the side of the discriminated woman (or man if we want to turn the example upside down, it works anyway). In the case of the denial of hair removal, the sacrifice is to say the least frivolous and laughable. On the other side, forcing a worker into something that causes unease or disgust is a rather serious issue. So the balance between the opposite interests tilts heavily in favour of the business workers. Unless the service asked is related to, say, health or otherwise avoiding a very distressful situation, which does not seem the case here because it is just cosmetics , the freedom of the persons who are involved in this issue takes obvious precedence, it is rather a clear cut situation. One who is refused the service loses the freedom from... hair. That being barred from getting a very particular beauty treatment causes distress is a moot point to say the least. The worker forced to do the job loses personal freedom and this involves personal tastes, repugnance, fear, possibly religious beliefs, and generally speaking their right to not be put into an -at least mentally- distressing situation. Or worse, in case of refusal that can cause the loss of the job. So, case dismissed.
