Victim of entitlement or diversity?

This is an interesting story:

A SYDNEY barber says he’s distraught and unable to sleep after a woman took legal action against him for not cutting her daughter’s hair.

Sam Rahim, who runs a barber shop in Hunters Hill Village in Sydney, said he was devastated when he was taken to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission after refusing the woman’s request on the grounds of being unqualified.

Just before Christmas, a woman came into his shop and asked him to cut her daughter’s hair, according to Nine News.

When he tried to direct her to a salon up the road, she stormed out in anger.

“The reason we rejected it is because it is a barber shop,” he told Today this morning. “I only specialise in cutting men’s hair. I’m not qualified to cut females’ hair. That’s pretty much it. I’m surrounded by hairdressers.”

He said when women come into the shop he just points them to the nearest hairdressing salon. “They are literally a 20-second walk away.”

The woman took her complaint to the Human Rights Commission, claiming he breached anti-discrimination laws and embarrassed her daughter.

So did this woman not realise that a barber is not the same as a hairdresser, and cutting men’s hair is a lot different from cutting women’s? Is this an example of modern entitlement culture? Or is there something else going on?

In a statement to the Nine Network, the complainant claimed Mr Rahim never said he was unqualified to cut women’s hair.

“A claim has been brought against Hunters Hill Barber Shop in the Federal Circuit Court for an alleged breach of the Sex Discrimination Act. The basis of the claim is that the barber shop refused to simply run the clippers through my daughter’s undercut, because she was a girl.

“I indicated to him that I did not need him to style, cut or trim the rest of her hair, which is styled in a ‘bob’.

“Mr Rahim’s explanation was that he wished to keep his barber shop for boys and men only. He never said he was not qualified to cut women’s or girls’ hair, as he has incorrectly reported to the media.

Hmmm. Could this be a diversity issue of the type that now has lowly bollard suppliers thumbing through Sunseeker yacht catalogues?

Over-entitled, permanently aggrieved suburban mother versus member of a protected class. Good luck disentangling that one, Australia!

(What the barber should have done is put the No. 1 head on the clipper and given the little brat a French Foreign Legion cut. Viz had a gag along these lines with One Cut Wally.)


14 thoughts on “Victim of entitlement or diversity?

  1. The gender-bullshit side will win this one — not necessarily legally, but in terms of future pressure — because it looks like that barber isn’t Islamic enough to win on that.

    Once you move away from the umbrella protection offered by Islam, the zombies pounce.

  2. What the barber should have done is put the No. 1 head on the clipper and given the little brat a French Foreign Legion cut.

    Mother: Taylor Swift doesn’t have her hair cut like that!
    Barber: She would do if she came here.

  3. Perhaps said barber is merely qualified to cut the hair of members of the RoP, where ‘qualified’ means ‘only willing to.’

  4. “I indicated to him”

    That’s the wording I use when I don’t want to admit that I didn’t actually say it. She will lose. But under the ‘rules’ of the Aust HRC, they’ll still be hounded out of business. The process is the punishment.

  5. Behind the curve. Several years ago, a wimman (sp?) walked into a barbershop run by Muslims, needing a haircut on a whim (as one does). The owner made the mistake of saying he wasn’t allowed to touch a woman’s hair.

    Bang! Human Rights Commission complaint.

    Not a setup at all, I’m sure

  6. To paraphrase Kate McMillan, when the feminists show up to protest the Islamists you’re supposed to pray for an asteroid, not pick a side.

    This is the inevitable result of identitarian anti-discrimination legislation trumping the basic right to associate and do business with – or not – whomever one chooses.

  7. Another ‘can’t they both lose?’ case. Or even ‘Can’t they both win?’ -either way, it’s popcorn all round!

  8. “which is styled in a ‘bob’.”

    Girl or young woman with a “bob’ = crazy. Or in this case, crazy by proxy. Not every young woman who butches up her hair is crazy, only about 95% of them are. Same with older single women with their “sassy’ short doos. Self mutilation and a sign of despair. 95%. Also a slut tell.

  9. I’ve paid quite some attention to this one.

    The standard of evidence – a woman “said”.
    Then the consequent disruption to the respondent, and the level of personal & financial stress.

    Take good note of this case. Most of us have quite a few people on our list of enemies.
    A sumptuous cash win from said enemy is not required (though would be nice) –
    Just the knowledge that they’re going through what this chap is experiencing, would be sufficient to warm most of our hearts.

Comments are closed.