Should Muslim women be forced to give beauty treatments to males?

[HecatesCatsInFancyHats]

"Unisex salon stand by their decision to REJECT a gender-fluid singer from a nail appointment - because they thought they were 'a man' so Muslim beautician objected"

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9601197/Nail-salon-refuse-manicure-gender-fluid-singer-beautician-Muslim.html

More likely it's because the OP is concerned for women, including Muslim women.

@pheebumbalatti

I'm sure you're posting this because you care so much about muslims.

Well, not really.

This is a women's rights forum.

We care so much about women, no matter what their ethnicity, religion etc.

@Oodie @DotCottan @PuttingOnTheKitsch you've all misunderstood my post. I fully support the right of this woman and any woman providing a single sex service not to have to touch men. I think the man involved in this case is reprehensible. I was picking up the poster on what I suspect is a double standard. In that a "progressive" might both argue that this woman should have to provide a service to this man AND believe that the "veil" is uncontroversial. I wanted to know because I wanted to understand where the poster was coming from. I don't have an issue with the veil, but the poster accusing Mumsnet posters of upholding the most conservative tenets of Islam (not true - merely upholding women's rights to boundaries).

I wish these fuckers would STOP trying to make women touch them, who don't want to.

This 100x. Why has the individual chosen to target this service and this woman? When to book an appointment you are informed that this is a service for females.

I’ve got terribly rough hands, dreadful circulation (hands like ice) and never know my own strength (I often snap wine glass stems when washing them).

Lord help anyone who expected me to lay my hands on them.

What do you mean by the veil anyway? Hijab, niqab or what?

FYI and I don't want to derail onto this because it's not the point, but they are both veils.

"The niqāb is a "[face] veil""

"The hijab is a head covering, generally a veil or a scarf"

And I was simply attempting to uncover whether there was hypocrisy at play here. Anyway back to the issue at hand. I'm always struck by how progressives can't see the cognitive dissonance between their support for gender ideology and religious freedom, particularly for Muslim women - for whom unisex facilities of any sort are a huge problem.

It doesn't help that trans activists refuse to even acknowledge that there are competing rights at play.

Oh of course it was a set up.

I emailed the salon today to say how much I support them.

They emailed back to say that the staff have received abuse online and that the beautician is very upset at what has happened.

@AlfonsoTheTerrible

Thanks, *@EyesOpening*. I'll try that! It's a poorly designed web site.

It's an atrociously designed website. There is absolutely nothing on their own website which indicates certain services are female only- quite the opposite.

There is absolutely nothing on their own website which indicates certain services are female only- quite the opposite.

That's as may be, but what sort of person when turned away due to the confusion decides they need to go to the press?

Personally, I might well have a few firm words to them to get their site sorted out to avoid wasting their and others' time, but I don't see what would make the event, the establishment or myself press-worthy...

@NecessaryScene1

There is absolutely nothing on their own website which indicates certain services are female only- quite the opposite.

That's as may be, but what sort of person when turned away due to the confusion decides they need to go to the press?

Personally, I might well have a few firm words to them to get their site sorted out to avoid wasting their and others' time, but I don't see what would make the event, the establishment or myself press-worthy...

The person who complained is publicity seeking prat. The Daily Mail has reported it all factually, without comment, including his/ their (as he /they seems to be confused about his/ their pronouns) quotes and photographs no doubt supplied and approved by him/them and have left it to their readers to make up their own minds. Which, as you will see from the highest rated comment, they have done.

The salon needs a competent web designer.

[quote HecatesCatsInFancyHats]**@Oodie* @DotCottan* @PuttingOnTheKitsch you've all misunderstood my post. I fully support the right of this woman and any woman providing a single sex service not to have to touch men. I think the man involved in this case is reprehensible. I was picking up the poster on what I suspect is a double standard. In that a "progressive" might both argue that this woman should have to provide a service to this man AND believe that the "veil" is uncontroversial. I wanted to know because I wanted to understand where the poster was coming from. I don't have an issue with the veil, but the poster accusing Mumsnet posters of upholding the most conservative tenets of Islam (not true - merely upholding women's rights to boundaries). [/quote]
Oh I see, my apologies.

I really don't think that either male or female service providers in places like salons should have to be unisex or serve both sexes. I am ok with male only barbershops or female only salons.

I don't see what the big deal would be with an aesthetician having only a certain clientele either. A few years ago I was calling a salon about ear piercing for my daughter. The branch closes to me couldn't do it - their piercer only worked on age 16 and up. The piercer at another salon across town did. It was no problem for them to just tell me this.

The person who complained is publicity seeking prat.

The less angelic side of me hopes he hangs out with the sort of crowd who will cancel him for supporting a fascist transphobic rag like the Daily Mail.

I was curious about what had been said on previous "barber refuses to cut woman's/girl's hair" threads. I looked at one from 2018 where opinion was about 50/50 that a male barber was entitled to refuse to do so. It's an etiquette no no to quote from unrelated, old threads but there was some breathtaking hypocrisy in the 2018 thread.

@NecessaryScene1

The person who complained is publicity seeking prat.

The less angelic side of me hopes he hangs out with the sort of crowd who will cancel him for supporting a fascist transphobic rag like the Daily Mail.

Oh absolutely they will.

I'm a Times reader. I used to be a Guardian reader and still am on a Saturday (for Feast and Review) I used to sneer at the Daily Mail and its readers. Who knows, possibly I'm just getting older and more right wing or possibly the Daily Mail readers aren't actually the bunch of ignorant bigots I used to think they were.

( what a pity you quoted a post with a grammatical error!)

Sick of the world we live ! If it was a white person refusing them it would be different.

A job is a job no one really cares about gender that's just people trying to make more of a problem then what it is

Winds me up!!!

@MissBarbary

I was curious about what had been said on previous "barber refuses to cut woman's/girl's hair" threads. I looked at one from 2018 where opinion was about 50/50 that a male barber was entitled to refuse to do so. It's an etiquette no no to quote from unrelated, old threads but there was some breathtaking hypocrisy in the 2018 thread.

Is part of the issue with the barbers that they are much cheaper than the equivalent female services? Interested, not criticizing your point.

Any non-woman who signs up for a service described very clearly as being for ladies without phoning to check whether that’s okay is not a very nice person. Anyone with any decency would respect the fact that there are some women who, for whatever reason, don’t want physical contact with strange non-women.

In the event that the service wasn’t available elsewhere within a reasonable distance at a similar price, then he could take it up politely with the management. Instead it appears he deliberately set out to cause trouble.

And the more these non-women do this in the name of queer, non-binary, or trans rights, the more damage they do to those rights and to the groups they claim they support.

In answer to your question OP absolutely not, reprehensible set up. And we are asked why we think there seems to be a systematic campaign to dismantle all single sex spaces.

@Tibtom

As a unisex salon that provides haircuts for men, I think the sex of the recipient of a manicure is not relevant. It is not a beauty treatment that is done in private and the salon is not sex segregated.

I looked, and on Treatwell, the manicures are all described as "ladies" manicures. They don't offer them to men, or indeed non binary or genderfluid people.

The person who was refused service posts pictures of themselves with a bare chest, and a moustache. It's reasonable for someone who took a job doing "ladies" manicures, not to expect to have to perform such services on such a person.

I've got to say AnyOldPrion, in a long-ish thread with lots of deflections, your post just above really cuts through to what's going on with this man's behaviour.

What a creep. The salon was perfectly clear that they only provide beautician services to females. Plenty of female beauticians only work on female subjects. My frindnis a masseuse whononly massages women, should she be forced to rub any giy who days he’s nonbinary? Fuck that.

So this guy thinks he’s ‘nonbinary’ and therefore had the right to force women who don’t want to touch strange men. What a perv. Why didn’t he just book a salon that does male manicures.

No, no women should be forced to. It's perfectly fine to have single sex beauty salons, hairdressers and barbers, etc.

@TedImgoingmad
There are a hell of a lot more "honour killings" in the UK every year than 12-15, but its very unusual for them to be labelled as such if the victim was white.

It is absolutely not uncommon for white men to be controlling towards their partners to the point of being violent, including murder.

If the woman was happy to do this person's nails but was fearful of the reaction of family members, the problem isnt this person was male. The problem is other males.

If the woman was not happy to do ths person's nails, for whatever reason, including religious belief, then the problem is that person's attempt to circumvent her boundaries.

I was talking generically about "people on mumsnet", given practically the first response was "Oh, but she is muslim, the men in her life wont like her doing that". Not "Oh, she doesnt want to do that man's nails because of her beliefs".

It reminds me of an old neighbour I used to have who would go on and on and ON about how the local shopkeeper sold alcohol and he shouldnt be doing that because Muslim.