I certainly think this could be useful to include with hairdresser tagging (though possibly separate from identifying barbers?). Doesn’t only have to be ethnicity related, could be any specialism. Just like cuisine for a restaurant. Any ideas about how?
My basic presumption is that this is about language, but my Polish is limited to about 5-6 phrases, so not something I can ascertain. Many may have closed since Brexit, as I haven’t resurveyed the area systematically.
However, I have straight hair and getting a haircut in Hong Kong was great because that’s what they were used to.
I’ve certainly seen this in the UK. One entrance, two named businesses with different parts of the premises. I’d go with two nodes in these cases.
Tagging what languages the staff speak is an excersise in futility.
Let me quickly add that tag to all hairdressers in sub-Sahara Africa…
But basically you want hairdresser:speciality similar to healthcare:speciality ?
Sorry, I find your attitude here rather sarcastic and unhelpful.
I’m just stating a well-documented fact that there is a large, and under-served, market for this particular form of hair styling in Europe and North America. You seem to be arguing that we should not have tags to serve certain ethnic minorities.
I’m honestly completely unaware of this, but my hair is cut mainly with hair clippers and relatively simple techniques, so I should probably listen more and speak less.
In countries where discrimination is illegal or at least discouraged, most hairdressers serve all demographics (possibly excluding the demographic of bald people). It’s unclear to me what exactly you’re trying to tag here.
I doubt that it is a good idea to put hairdressers and barbers under the same main tag and distinguish the business then by using a subtag “barber” and “salon” or “styling” or the like.
I think it is very difficult to make a difference by which service these shops are offering. In Germany for instance many hairdressers offer womens and mens styling including shaving and beard grooming. In fact all these services are part of the official education of a hairdresser (which is seen as a craft like carpenter or painter or the like).
On the other hand barber shop may well be happy to do some womens hair styling as well, whereas others probably wont.
I think we should differentiate these businesses by what they call themselves and give each of them its own main tag. If a shop presents itself as “barber” we should tag it shop=barber. If it is presented as hairdresser we should tag it shop=hairdresser.
If a shop has 2 sections we should give it 2 nodes with 2 different tags, as @SK53 already proposed.
Besides that, I support
Without doubt, black people may have difficulties to find a hairdresser in most European countries to professionally style their hair, specially when it comes to braid “corn rows” including their extensions. I don’t know about other special styles but that one would well be worth a separate tag.
Please educate me (I’m aware I’m ignorant but the topic has piqued my mild curiosity): why would supply not be able to keep up with demand in this market? The entry barrier seems low enough.
I am sure most hairdresses can learn how to braid cornrows but as per today the majority would not be able to offer this service.
Besides that cornrow braiding is not only an art of itself, it is a very time consuming process of several hours, often done parallel by 2 hairdressers, and an important part of doing it is the personal exchange of the participants, so it is not just a job to be done.
If you want to know more just have a look at the link I provided above.
why? I just do not see good reason to try get support for new tag among all tools and data consumers. That just seems to make thing more complex for no benefit.
3 Likes
hairdresser=barber/salon/stylist seem like sensible tags, but I doubt hairdresser=these_people_can_braid_cornrows will get anywhere, so if you have a better idea, please share it.
(14) All individuals enjoy the freedom to contract, including the freedom to choose a contractual partner for a transaction. An individual who provides goods or services may have a number of subjective reasons for his or her choice of contractual partner. As long as the choice of partner is not based on that person’s sex, this Directive should not prejudice the individual’s freedom to choose a contractual partner.
I believe this is similar in the US. Generally businesses have a right to refuse service, except for reasons of a protected characteristic, including a customer’s sex (e.g., The Civil Rights Act of 1964).
ok, so in theory this would not be possible (in practice I don’t think you have to say why you don’t want someone to enter your shop, you just deny entry to them).
There are also places that openly exclude people because of their sex (e.g. lady’s day in the sauna), parking spaces for women (I think unlike the sauna (which is eventually illegal) these are only recommendations legally because it wouldn’t be possible). There are many similar examples.
Jewish synagogues also strictly separate men and women, maybe mosques as well, and women may not become catholic priests. What happens if religious rules clash with gender rights, who has more significance?
Off topic to this conversation. But yes, there are certain legitimate exemptions. Barbers are not one.
Why do we use so many different tags for “building” or “craft” and so on? Because they stand for different objects. If a barber would understand himself as a hairdresser, he would call his shop hairdresser and not barber. So we should tag his business as barber shop.
Again there is no self explanatory subtag for the business of a hairdresser who is just a hairdresser and this affects at least 95% of all business related to hairdressing. “salon” or “styling” means nothing. A barber also operates a salon and does styling. The only reasonable tag for a hairdresser is hairdresser.
That means by using the real world wording we would end up with
hairdresser=barber
hairdresser=hairdresser
for these 2 different kinds of buisness. Does that make sense?
But a barber may well say that he does not do any ladies hair styling because this is not discrimination due to a person’s sex but by reason of his profession.
1 Like
This is a reasonable argument for a shop=barber tag. A common counterargument is that barbers are a type of hairdressers and we generally prefer sub-tags over new main tags for added nuances. IMO either method would be fine, but we need a consensus for one preferred method so we don’t end up edit warring over it in the future.
2 Likes
Of course. That is down to competency of the requested style, rather than a person’s sex. The same is true for a man wanting a perm. The barber may refuse because they do not offer that service.
1 Like
Why do we use so many different tags for “building” or “craft” and so on? Because they stand for different objects. If a barber would understand himself as a hairdresser, he would call his shop hairdresser and not barber. So we should tag his business as barber shop.
I can agree with having a primary tag for barbers (because I see them sufficiently distinct), but we also do generalize in other fields (particularly when it comes to eating places, we don’t have bistrots,diners,milkbars,osterias,trattorias,pizzerias,steak houses,fryers,fish&chips,teahouses,irish pubs,enotecas,Italian bars (that’s only a quick incomplete selection of mostly Italian categories, many more to be expected elsewhere), (I think we can talk about this as well).
OK, how about style (or hair_style?)=* to show that the barber / stylist can cut hair in this fashion?
e.g style=afro / cornrows / dreadlocks / punk
1 Like
I fully agree with you and to do so we would need reasonable options for both methods to find out if a consesus can be reached (by a poll for instance).
So far we have a reasonable proposal for 2 separate main tags
shop=hairdresser
shop=barber
For the method of using subtags there is
shop=hairdresser +
hairdresser=barber (for the barbers shop)
hairdresser= ?? (for the hairdressers shop)
Any proposal for a reasonable subtag for the hairdresser who is nothing but a hairdresser? Something which makes it clear to every mapper without reading some explanation in the wiki?
I don’t think that would be necessary. We also have many cases of highway=service without a fitting service=* tag and that is also acceptable / accepted.