Amos Bridges

ABRIDGES@NEWS-LEADER.COM

The website for the downtown barber shop Dapper advertises haircuts, hot-towel shaves and other grooming services "the way you would have expected if you were back in good ole 1887." But one reader questioned whether the shop's men-only policy complies with the civil rights laws adopted in the intervening century.

"Is it legal for Dapper (trendy new downtown barber shop) to deny service to a woman seeking a short, masculine cut?" Kiri Mack-Hansen asked in a message on Facebook.

Mack-Hansen said the question occurred to her after reading a review of Dapper on the website Yelp.com. In it, the reviewer chastised the Springfield business for refusing to serve a woman who requested a masculine cut.

I told Mack-Hansen that I suspected the refusal might run afoul of the city's discrimination ordinance, which I'd studied while writing about a proposal to add protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Although that proposal has not been adopted, the existing ordinance generally prohibits discrimination based on physical gender, along with race, age and other factors.

The first step was to track down the source of the initial complaint. I sent a message to the Yelp.com reviewer, who said the review was based on the experience of an acquaintance, Springfield resident Amber Bond. I contacted Bond, who agreed to meet for an interview.

Bond, who works for a telecommunications company, said the incident occurred "right around Thanksgiving."

"I was going to a black tie charity event and I needed a haircut," she said.

Bond, who wears her hair in a short style some would describe as masculine, said she had seen advertisements for Dapper and decided to check the shop's website. "I looked up some pictures and it looked like kind of the cut I wanted to do."

She said she wasn't sure if the shop would cut a woman's hair but called to check. "I said, 'Do you do a man's cut on females?' and they said 'No.' "

Bond said she asked again, specifying that she wanted a "man's-style cut."

"Their response was 'No, we don't service females because we're trying to create a certain atmosphere for men. (Serving women) would be opening up a can of worms and we want them to be comfortable,'" she said she was told.

Bond said the speaker's explanation offended her more than being refused.

"I've been in customer service 12 years, I would never let one of my employees talk to someone like that," she said, describing the person she talked to as "smirking" and "laughing" during the phone call. "(If the refusal had been presented) in a kinder way, I guess I wouldn't be so upset. But to be told my presence would make people uncomfortable, for being a girl, that made me uncomfortable ...

"Even my grandma goes to a barber shop and gets her hair trimmed up with my grandpa."

Bond said she ultimately went to another downtown salon, where she has become a loyal customer. "I feel like my dollar speaks more than anything … I didn't know how to go about (filing a complaint) anyway."

She shared the story with friends, however, prompting one to post the review on Yelp.

"I didn't expect it to grow," Bond said. "I think they need to follow the law and learn how to speak to people if they are declining service. Be a little nicer if you're gonna say 'No' to someone. But me, personally, I moved on months and months ago."

Legal standing

So what does the law say? Surprisingly, the federal Civil Rights Act doesn't directly prohibit businesses from refusing service to customers based on gender, although it does offer protections based on race, color, religion and national origin. But Missouri statutes and Springfield's City Code both generally prohibit businesses from discriminating based on sex when they offer "public accommodations" such as goods, services and facilities, for sale or rent.

The state law, contained in Chapter 213 of the Missouri Revised Statutes, includes an exemption that allows private clubs and religious organizations to bypass the law in some cases, as long as they are not open to the public. The city ordinance also includes an exemption for hotels, motels and restaurants that are "bona fide private clubs," but the exemption does not appear to apply to businesses offering other services.

On its website, Dapper bills itself as "Springfield's Only Gentlemen's Barber Club," and refers to customers as members. A menu of available services includes a "Gentlemen's Elite Membership" that includes a specific package of services for a set monthly price. But haircuts, shaves and other services also are offered individually and don't appear to require membership.

City Attorney Dan Wichmer said he wasn't familiar with the specific situation at Dapper, but in general, "a barbershop can't refuse women service."

"That's part of our current ordinance ... (that) you cannot refuse service based on being male or female," he said.

Seeking additional legal opinions, I contacted the Springfield Metropolitan Bar Association. Crista Hogan, the association's executive director, recommended several potential sources, but I couldn't find anyone who felt qualified to comment on the issue.

Kelly Johnson, chair of the Mayor's Commission on Human Rights and Community Relations, said she thinks the business could be in violation.

Johnson said the commission, which investigates discrimination complaints for the city and conducts mediation, receives relatively few reports that involve public accommodations. Of those that are filed, "a lot of them have to do with race and a lot have to do with religion."

"It's not the most common ... but that is something we would encourage (Bond) to report," Johnson said.

I asked Johnson whether the exemption for private clubs might apply. Some women-only fitness clubs, such as the Curves chain, have been able to operate while prohibiting men, thanks in part to specific laws passed in some states.

"We've dealt with that with health clubs ... but I've not heard of a barber shop falling under that," Johnson said. "There's a whole list of criteria they have to meet to be a private club ... and if they're accepting walk-ins or people from the general public, they would not be exempt."

U.S. Supreme Court decisions have forced some previously men-only private clubs such as the Jaycees and Rotary to allow female members. The rulings make it difficult for clubs to claim to be private if they seek and accept payments for services or goods provided to nonmembers.

Johnson said the commission also would look for evidence a business had legally incorporated as a private club when considering whether an exemption applied.

Dapper is licensed as a retail merchant and barber shop through the City of Springfield, according to licensing supervisor Buffee Smith, who said that "there isn't a registration you complete at the city to register as a private club."

Records maintained by the Missouri Secretary of State's Office list Dapper as a fictitious business name owned in full by Brownfield LLC, a limited liability company owned by barber Sean Brownfield.

Interview called off

I called Brownfield at Dapper to get his side of the story and see if he could point me toward a legal basis for the shop's policy.

He was reluctant to speak over the phone, without his attorney present, and worried that the relatively new business would suffer from negative publicity.

"We're trying to hit a niche market," Brownfield said, assuring me "We're very well-versed (in the law) and we're completely covered."

After agreeing to delay the story, I scheduled an interview with Brownfield and his attorney, Joshua Neally. At Neally's request, I sent along a list of interview topics — the phone call with Bond, Dapper's policy for serving women and Neally's opinion about its legality — along with links to the relevant state law and city ordinance.

About 45 minutes before the scheduled interview, Neally sent me an email saying an issue with a client popped up and he would have to cancel.

I offered to reschedule the interview but Neally declined, saying an attached statement from Dapper would suffice.

The statement, in full, said:

"Dapper is a barber club which specializes in Gentlemen's grooming, barbering, and the actualization of those social norms and graces that historically characterized Gentlemen. Any statement regarding Dapper, its staff, or members as anything less than civil, well-mannered, or gentlemanly is something that we take very seriously.

"The traditional barber shop is having a resurgence in America, and it seems the cause of this, is a renewed interest in men to no longer accept a general practitioner for their grooming. Just like other industries and professions that specialize their services, whether it be gender-targeted fitness clubs or sports-themed hair salons, specializations catering to services specific to men or women are becoming more common. There are other barbershops in Springfield that specialize in services for men, but what sets Dapper apart, in addition to its expert professionals, is the membership. The Dapper does not simply have clients, but is a community. The gentlemen of the Dapper act according to a code of conduct which focuses on courtesy and civility.

"The Dapper takes its role in the Springfield community seriously and in support of that does constantly evaluate its policies and procedures. The Dapper does not nor ever will permit its staff or members to unlawfully discriminate."

The description of Dapper as a "barber club" and references to gender-targeted clubs and "membership" appear to allude to the exemption for private clubs, but the statement didn't directly address my questions about Bond's phone call or the law.

Absent a formal complaint to the city — which would trigger a human rights commission review and possible legal judgment — I can't give a definitive answer to Mack-Hansen's question.

If I operated a business, the comments from Wichmer and Johnson would give me pause before turning anyone away based on gender. And for any women who've found business doors closed against them, the commission — at 417-864-1038 — welcomes your call.

If you have time, drop me a line and let me know, too.