Post 178: Can you get a man's haircut as a woman?

I have short hair. It isn’t exactly a bob, but it doesn’t reach my shoulders (when it gets close to them, it is my sign that I need a haircut). Meanwhile, one of my male colleagues has hair almost to his waist. He works very hard to maintain it. Now, I’m not writing this to say that there is anything wrong with him having long hair as a guy or my having short hair as a girl. What I feel is wrong is that despite him having more hair, I will still pay more than him at basically every hair salon.

I looked it up, just to confirm. And every hair salon had separate prices for men and women. Even hair salons that had different prices depending on the length of the women’s hair had nothing for the length of the men’s hair. And a haircut for women with short hair still cost more than any male haircut.

At the first salon I checked (Jeff and J Hair Salon), it is $32 for a Master Men’s Haircut. That is a flat rate. The woman’s haircut started at $50 ($50+)! That is an $18 difference regardless of the length of hair for the man or woman. Mint Salon had a $15 difference, with women paying $50 for a haircut and men paying $35. Shine has a similar price difference with women’s haircuts starting at $51, while men’s start at $35. Angelo’s is the closest in price for salons that don’t specify a different price by hair length, with a $4 difference (Women’s: $44, Men’s: $40). At Kast it is $47 for a women’s haircut and $32 for a man’s haircut.  At Refresh women will pay $40 and up, men will pay $30 and up.

The next salons (starting with LUXE) did specify hair length for women, but still not for men. A haircut for a woman with short hair at LUXE is $46. The same service for a man of any hair length is $40. Melika Salon also specifies by length for women and for a woman with short hair it costs $25, for a man it is $22. Which is the closest of any of the salon’s prices that I checked in difference by gender.

That means that women with short hair will be spend an average $11 more than men for a haircut. Which seems super weird to me. When I get my haircut it takes like 10-15 minutes. It is basically just a trim; a snip-snip here, snip-snip there and I’m done.  It is more common with men’s haircuts to need to also get out a razor to clean up the back of the neck and do that kind of shaping, which seems like it would be more work.

And if you are going to specify by length, why both by length AND gender? Why not just length? Or even by time it takes? Is it because salons assume women are  more willing to pay more and don’t have an alternative? Men have barbers which are cheaper, if they want to go that route instead.

I did some research to see if anyone else had these questions, or if anyone had the answers. I found someone who was also surprised by the cost difference (Alexandra Haddow – “Why do women have to pay so much more than men for their haircuts?”). She is located in England and did a price comparison as well. She compared five different places and found an average difference of £16.80 (like $28CAD) more for women than men, the highest point of difference was £40!

She spoke to various hairdressers and they seem to support my thoughts. There was an assumption that women will require more effort and products then men and there is an assumption men will have short hair and women won’t, things just haven’t been updated with the times. And that there is an idea that women are more likely to go for a haircut rather than go to a barber or do it themselves, so they because they are willing to pay and pay more for a good haircut, salons know they can charge them more. One brought up that there is now a “dry cut” where they spritz your hair rather than shampoo it, but when I looked at prices to compare I used the lowest comparable cut for a man and woman. One of those was a dry cut for a woman, for the men’s it did not specify dry or not and it was still cheaper for the men’s.

Her article was posted in 2017 and she suggested some salons were starting to change. If that is reflected in the difference between the $28 difference she found and the $11 difference I found, then maybe it is hopeful it will continue to improve. She also talked about changes in other facets where women were charged more than men, like how women’s razors are more expensive than men’s tend to be priced, and how companies are starting to bring the prices closer. Which, I suppose, is all well and good. But, why bring the price’s closer rather than just make them both gender neutral? Is a man’s skin and hair so different from a woman’s that they need to have separate products? I mean, really? What would happen if I just bought a man’s razor? Sure, it wouldn’t be pink but it would still work.

Actually, there was an event that gave out free men’s razors and it is probably one of the best razor’s I’ve ever used. It is The Gillette Fusion5. It has a mostly metal handle and it takes reusable blades. It costs approx. $13 for the handle and two blades. While most razors for men have a metal handle and made to be reusable, rather disposable, women’s tend to be plastic and disposable. So, it was hard to find a comparable razor. The Gillette Venus Swirl, is most comparable. It has an almost fully plastic handle with a metal ball to allow for more swiveling (the Fusion5 swivels just fine, as is so it seems unnecessary). They both have five blades as well. It does have a little like comb before the razor, to pull up hair better that the Fusion5 doesn’t have. But the Fusion5 has a precision trimmer on the back (which means it has an additional blade), which the Venus Swirl doesn’t have. The Venus Swirl and 2 blades costs $15. It looks cheaper and more breakable and it still costs more. Significantly more considering that I got my Fusion5 for free.

It just seems weird to me.  I wonder, if I asked for a man's haircut, would it be cheaper or would they just look at me like I'm crazy?