An army of cosmetologist-informants, cont’d

New Illinois legislation signed by Gov. Bruce Rauner will force hairdressers, as a prerequisite of licensing, to take training in detecting evidence of domestic violence [Ann Althouse, New York Times] Earlier here (Ohio requires training in recognizing signs of human trafficking) and here (programs in at least eight states as of 2006, generally not however conscripting the beauty professionals’ participation).

More from Mark Steyn:

…in the Fifties one in 20 members of the workforce needed government permission to do his job. Now it’s one in three. The original justification for requiring a government permit to cut another person’s hair is that a salon contains potentially dangerous chemicals such as coloring products. Making the license conditional upon acing sexual-assault training courses is not just the usual Big Government expansion but the transformation of the relationship between a private business and the state.


  • Is there required training for barbers to detect evidence of domestic violence against males?

  • Are they taught it’s not a good idea not to set their clients’ heads on fire?


  • I thought that the original reason to license barbers was to ensure that they knew how to (and did) sanitize their instruments, so that customers would not get barber’s itch and other preventable maladies when getting a haircut.

  • I presume they will be trained to a “preponderance of evidence” standard.