Ok to have Women only but men only isn't allowed?

Forums › Off topic › Ok to have Women only but men only isn't allowed?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

8030 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3819

#1950026 1-Feb-2018 12:25

MikeB4:

I think the last time I uses a gender specific hairdresser was when I was in Intermediate School.

I don't know whether my hairdresser is unisex or not. I know they aren't female only. I doubt they are male only having female owners.

The thing I most like about barbers is there is less of a chemical smell than in a proper hairdressers, the atmosphere is more relaxed/quiet, I donm't have to book and it's cheaper. I gave up on my hair a long time ago, it's all about staying tidy for minimal bother and outlay.

They do a nice beard groom as well (more tidily than I can do myself).

Mike

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1950049 1-Feb-2018 12:39

I have not used a hairdresser for a few years as its too hard. I get my hair cut at home.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

networkn

Networkn
32865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15456

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1950057 1-Feb-2018 12:47

MikeB4:

But what is their bottom line and ROI like?

So now you want to police how much money each *private* business is making? If they don't meet your standards, you want to step in to ensure they are targeting enough of the type of customers you approve? Give me a break! If he meets his tax obligations, that's all you should be interested in.

Last time I checked the guy in the article wasn't complaining he wasn't making enough money as a result of catering to men only?

It's entirely possible he makes "enough" and doesn't feel compelled to do more. Perhaps he is already at capacity?!

To wish him and his family harm for failing to meet your approved standards is pretty poor.

I'd suggest to you, that the number of women who approach Barbers for haircuts every year would make a miniscule difference to the bottom line.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1950061 1-Feb-2018 12:51

networkn:

So now you want to police how much money each *private* business is making? If they don't meet your standards, you want to step in to ensure they are targeting enough of the type of customers you approve? Give me a break! If he meets his tax obligations, that's all you should be interested in.

Last time I checked the guy in the article wasn't complaining he wasn't making enough money as a result of catering to men only?

It's entirely possible he makes "enough" and doesn't feel compelled to do more. Perhaps he is already at capacity?!

To wish him and his family harm for failing to meet your approved standards is pretty poor.

I'd suggest to you, that the number of women who approach Barbers for haircuts every year would make a miniscule difference to the bottom line.

Don't know where you think I said I want to police them, it was a question about there maybe an increase in mens barbers it does not mean they are profitable businesses. Don't add words to others views.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

networkn

Networkn
32865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15456

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1950069 1-Feb-2018 12:58

MikeB4:

Don't know where you think I said I want to police them, it was a question about there maybe an increase in mens barbers it does not mean they are profitable businesses. Don't add words to others views.

No-one added anything. You are questioning their profitability, which is none of your business and not relevant to the original topic. If they aren't happy with their profitability, and THAT was the reason for the complaint, sure.

You were the one that linked this barbers choice to serve men only, to profits and ROI.

If the guy *chooses* to forgo potential profits by excluding a section of the public, then it's his loss, but he doesn't seem upset by it, probably because it's not a problem for him. Suggesting his business should fail as a result is mean-spirited at best.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1950078 1-Feb-2018 13:10

networkn:

MikeB4:

Don't know where you think I said I want to police them, it was a question about there maybe an increase in mens barbers it does not mean they are profitable businesses. Don't add words to others views.

No-one added anything. You are questioning their profitability, which is none of your business and not relevant to the original topic. If they aren't happy with their profitability, and THAT was the reason for the complaint, sure.

You were the one that linked this barbers choice to serve men only, to profits and ROI.

If the guy *chooses* to forgo potential profits by excluding a section of the public, then it's his loss, but he doesn't seem upset by it, probably because it's not a problem for him. Suggesting his business should fail as a result is mean-spirited at best.

Oh for goodness sake, I was NOT asking about the profit and loss accounts of specific businesses, I was making a GENERAL rhetorical enquiry regarding the general profitability of a business type but I suspect you know that .

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

networkn

Networkn
32865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15456

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1950089 1-Feb-2018 13:16

Why? SMBs in NZ given our small domestic market need to maximise their earning potential by targeting as bigger percentage of that market they can. By excluding a market potential of circa 50 % is plain stupid.

But what is their bottom line and ROI like?

That's not how those two comments read to me, in the context of the other comments, and suggestion his business should fail as a result of excluding a section of the market.

ROI and Profitability shouldn't have been brought into the discussion as they aren't even mildly related to the article.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1950090 1-Feb-2018 13:18

networkn:

Why? SMBs in NZ given our small domestic market need to maximise their earning potential by targeting as bigger percentage of that market they can. By excluding a market potential of circa 50 % is plain stupid.

But what is their bottom line and ROI like?

That's not how those two comments read to me, in the context of the other comments, and suggestion his business should fail as a result of excluding a section of the market.

ROI and Profitability shouldn't have been brought into the discussion as they aren't even mildly related to the article.

I shall leave you to believe what you will.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

matisyahu

1639 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 355

Trusted

#1950091 1-Feb-2018 13:21

Sam91:

This is nothing compared to what's going on overseas.

Full debate:

That is the reason I left Facebook - when someone posted on the Gay Wellington group "Canada is at the cutting edge of gender research" I knew there was a sizeable section of the online community whose head has disappeared up their own nether-regions. Yeah, like *THAT* is something to be proud of right up there with other nebulous ideas. Btw, that second one, "I'm a historian of medicine", that is all very well and good but that doesn't make you even remotely qualified to speak on the topic and to invoke the half baked opinions (his views sound like he has read too much Michel Foucault) really shows that he isn't a serious academic but a name dropper and has enough knowledge to appear to be knowledgeable to the untrained ear but would actually crumble under closer cross examination. The reality is that Nicholas Matte has strayed well beyond what he is qualified to speak about and yet he is given a platform. Sigh.

"When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called 'the People's Stick'"

Dulouz

887 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 384

#1950093 1-Feb-2018 13:22

MikeB4:

I have not used a hairdresser for a few years as its too hard. I get my hair cut at home.

Flowbee?

Amanon

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1950098 1-Feb-2018 13:29

Dulouz:

MikeB4:

I have not used a hairdresser for a few years as its too hard. I get my hair cut at home.

Flowbee?

WTF?

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Coil

6614 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2153
Inactive user

#1950102 1-Feb-2018 13:37

Fred99:

Dulouz:

MikeB4:

I have not used a hairdresser for a few years as its too hard. I get my hair cut at home.

Flowbee?

WTF?

"I pretty much kinda have that trendy haircut"
Gagged at that point there and turned it off..

To conclude, It appears the thread has run its course, We have established that Barbers don't have to cut womens hair and they lose money because they dont and now you can cut your own hair at home with some gizmo.
Just go watch some Ben Shapiro...

Dulouz

887 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 384

#1950103 1-Feb-2018 13:41

Coil:

Fred99:

Dulouz:

MikeB4:

I have not used a hairdresser for a few years as its too hard. I get my hair cut at home.

Flowbee?

WTF?

"I pretty much kinda have that trendy haircut"
Gagged at that point there and turned it off..

To conclude, It appears the thread has run its course, We have established that Barbers don't have to cut womens hair and they lose money because they dont and now you can cut your own hair at home with some gizmo.
Just go watch some Ben Shapiro...