By Pranathi Yannamani
During Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, Boris Johnson was asked by William Wragg, a conservative MP, when beauty salons would be able to reopen, given that pubs and hairdressers would be reopening on the 4th of July. His tone seemed somewhat flippant, and Wragg and Johnson (as well as many other members of parliament) were not hesitant to make a joke of the matter, laughing at the prospect of attending one themselves.
While this was disrespectful to the constituents on whose behalf Wragg was asking this question (and to the whole UK beauty industry), it also gave the Prime Minister ample opportunity to avoid answering the question directly, and simply say they could open as soon as it would be in a way that was “COVID-secure”. Wragg appeared to smirk as Johnson suggested he felt a “sense of urgency” with regards to beauty salons opening again.
Opening beauty salons would arguably be safer than the recent opening of pubs, as for many beauty treatments, both the client and therapist can wear a face mask (many nail technicians already did prior to the COVID-19 pandemic), while this is not possible in a pub when consuming food and drink. Furthermore, social distancing would be more strictly adhered to in beauty salons than the crowds witnessed on so-called ‘Super Saturday’, where social distancing seemed to become a thing of the past.
It may strike most people who watched this on Prime Minister’s questions as just harmless banter, but could you imagine them joking in this way about the aviation industry? No? Therein lies the answer. The UK beauty industry contributes more to the UK economy than the aviation and motor manufacturing industries, so to make it the object of mockery is foolish and inconsiderate. Furthermore, hair and beauty salons are among the 10 most popular start-ups in the UK, so they comprise a large part of the new and emerging economy. UK beauty industry is highly diverse and inclusive in terms of ethnicity, gender, age and sexuality, more so than other industries which are looked upon with higher esteem.
Given that women aged 16-34 are the largest group employed in the hair and beauty sector, and the beauty sector alone directly employs 370,000 people, there were strong implications of sexism and snobbery in the rhetoric the MPs were adopting that day as women make up a large chunk of those adversely affected by the government’s indecisiveness. Additionally, most of those employed in the beauty industry are self-employed (57%), meaning they could be at higher risk of financial instability in such uncertain times as these.
To fail to recognise the contribution and capabilities of the UK beauty industry is to fundamentally underestimate an entire group of people who are consistently undervalued by those in the establishment and is yet another example of the schoolboy chauvinism regularly exhibited in our government.
What is needed is a shift in the attitudes of those in power, to respect the beauty industry enough to give them a clear answer as to when they may resume their livelihoods again.