Transgender Army reservist Kendall Oliver was denied a haircut for being trans, and it looks like he’ll be taking his case to court.
A few days back, we told you about how Oliver tried to get a haircut at a Rancho Cucamonga barbershop (oh so cleverly named “The Barbershop”), who turned him away and misgendered him while doing so. Owner Richard Hernandez said:
“It’s a shame for a man to have long hair, but if a woman has long hair, it’s her glory and it speaks to being given to her as her covering, and I don’t want to be one who is taking away from her glory.”
Instead of letting Hernandez transport us all to the 1950s, Oliver is fighting back.
After seeing Oliver’s story on the news, senior litigation counsel Gregory Lipper from Americans United for Separation of Church and State contacted him and plans to represent him in a lawsuit. Speaking to The Guardian, Lipper said:
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
“Most courts have rejected attempts to use religion as an excuse to discriminate. The question isn’t just could [Oliver] have found somewhere else to get a haircut … We know from the civil rights movement that there’s a deep stigma to being told, ‘We don’t serve your kind here.’”
Oliver may have a case. California has a civil rights act that prohibits this kind of discrimination, and Lipper sees it as a clear violation:
“Whether I don’t want to cut the hair of women or of people who identify as men, but I deem to be too feminine, however you spin it, this is a clear refusal to cut hair based on sex or gender or perhaps both.”
Americans United has represented gay and lesbian clients in some recent lawsuits against business owners who’ve hopped on the “religious freedom” bandwagon and used their religious beliefs to deny services to LGBT people. In his case, Oliver definitely welcomes the help. He told The Guardian:
“If I have the opportunity to keep things advancing … I would like to try.”
As incidents like this are swiftly met with legal action, the next few years should be interesting for this arena of the LGBT rights battle.
twigg
frankly if a business doesn’t want to serve gay people, interracial couples, atheists, etc, i would want them to post it on their door . firstly because i wouldn’t want to give them a dime and would rather support inclusive businesses instead, and since 60% of americans are okay with homosexuality and would find this offensive that business would go under in a matter of months .
Will L
So, is he just looking for a fight? Some of these lawsuits seem to be planned.
I find it odd that anyone would just happen to walk into a strange barbershop for a trim. Where was his regular barber? Judging from the picture, this isn’t a standard buzz cut so it’s unlikely that you can walk into any barber and have it shaped.
If he identifies as a man, why would the barber have any reason to question anything? Was he carrying himself like a man or like a butch lesbian?
I’m all for equality, but I don’t like setting up a business if it’s OBVIOUS that you aren’t welcome.
Stached1
@Will L: Exactly. It’s just a haircut, and he/she could have just as easily gone somewhere else, or asked for a different barber at the barber sho to cut his/her hair.
Sukhrajah
It is unintelligently easy to rag on Queerty when they do a poor job of writing, titling, researching, and editing an article. In some cases, it is wholly justified.
However, this is a good example of all of those things coming into a well authored, brilliantly tagged, astutely titled, and well edited piece.
Keep up this quality of work! Understanding wholly that Queerty.com is not primarialy for their journalistic standards – this is a good look, and avenue, and you guys did this one quite well. Please uphold this standard.
dwes09
@Stached1: And ultimately it is “just a motel room for the night”, or “just a rental agreement” or “just two ‘roommates’ trying to act like they can get married” or “just some restaurant”…should i go on?
There are local ordinances that require non-discrimination. businesses are apprised of this when the get their license. If this ass believes God requires women to have long hair, he can impose his will on his daughter or wife, but not on the general public that he has agreed to serve.
If you are willing to allow this form of discrimination, you are by extension saying you are willing to go back into the closet (where you may still be for all I know) to keep the evangelicals, fundamentalists and dominionists happy. When they finally get their way and re-criminalize homosexuality, don’t act surprised. It is after all, just a few perverts snubbing their noses at the one true God. There are people out there who want to make homosexuality punishable by prison sentences or (for a few of them) by death. It is little increments like acquiescence to refusal of service that lead the way. It is highly unlikely that this trans-man went looking for a fight (and i expect that twisted logic from the fundies not another homosexual). And even if he did, better than allowing this fool to assume he can impose his religious belief on everyone. If he won’t cut trans hair, why not refuse to cut Black hair or Jew hair? Perhaps his “sincerely held religious belief” requires that!?