This sexual equality thing’s gone a bit too far now, hasn’t it?
IT’S most certainly true that we didn’t go far enough with this equality thing in the past. Heck, it was only in the 1970s that a woman could have a bank account without some bloke signing for her. Only in the 80s that mortgages became unisex. And only in the late 80s that the tax system started to treat women as economic individuals rather than just hangers on to any household they belonged to. So, Hurrah! Civilisation has improved.
But it can all rather be taken too far. Just a couple of weeks ago the EU imposed two “equalisations” upon us. Annuity rates must be equal: thus, despite women living longer than men they must get the same pension per year for any particular amount invested in an annuity. So, women get more money than men from the same investment. At the other end of the lifetime, they also insisted that car insurance must be sex equal. Despite young men being vastly more expensive to ensure than young women. So, women’s insurance rates have risen based on the stupidity that we must all be equal in outcome, not just opportunity.
And now here’s the next one:
Denmark, which like its Nordic neighbours prides itself on promoting equal treatment for men and women, has taken gender equality all the way to the beauty salon.
A ruling last month by Denmark’s Board of Equal Treatment effectively stated that price differences between men’s and women’s haircuts were illegal.
It ordered a salon advertising women’s haircuts for 528 crowns – £59 – and men’s haircuts for 428 crowns – £48 – plus an extra fee for long hair, to pay 2,500 crowns – £281- to a woman who had filed a complaint.
This is just insane. Women’s cuts tend to be more complex than male, female hair tends to be longer than male. No one has any problem with a Number 2 buzz cut being the same price for everyone but that’s not actually what is being insisted upon, is it?