From the State that doesn't trust drivers to make left turns or pump their own gas, we get this:
I love that last part: it was always illegal, we just didn't actually say so.
And why are Brazilian waxes suddenly the topic of government intervention?
So out of tens of thousands of people, presumably, who have gotten waxes over the years, two people were injured. That seems like a great reason for denying the service to every other adult woman in the State, doesn't it?
And, again, you have to love that last line: it's illegal, but we don't do anything about it if nobody complains.
The reality? This is quite possibly a move by dermatologists to take over some new territory:
Ah, but Libertarians who think the government grows ever more intrusive in nanny-state decisions are wackos, right?
TRENTON, NJ - Things could get hairy in New Jersey this summer for women who sport revealing bikinis or a little bit less.
The painful Brazilian wax and its intimate derivatives are in danger of being stripped from salon and spa menus if a recent proposal to ban genital waxing is passed by the state's Board of Cosmetology and Hairstyling.
Cherry Hill salon owner Linda Orsuto said that women would "go ballistic" if the proposal passed. She said that some women would resort to waxing themselves, visiting unlicensed salons or traveling to other states, including Pennsylvania, in a quest to remain bare down there.
"The clients are going to freak," said Orsuto, who owns 800 West Salon & Spa, on Route 70. "It's a hot issue, and we're going to have to do something."
New Jersey statutes allow waxing of the face, neck, arms, legs and abdomen, but officials say that genital waxing has always been illegal, although not spelled out.
I love that last part: it was always illegal, we just didn't actually say so.
And why are Brazilian waxes suddenly the topic of government intervention?
Jeff Lamm, a spokesman for New Jersey's Division of Consumer Affairs, said that the proposal would specifically ban genital waxing, and was prompted by complaints to the board from two women who were injured and hospitalized. One of them sued. Lamm said that the state only investigates infractions if consumers complain.
So out of tens of thousands of people, presumably, who have gotten waxes over the years, two people were injured. That seems like a great reason for denying the service to every other adult woman in the State, doesn't it?
And, again, you have to love that last line: it's illegal, but we don't do anything about it if nobody complains.
The reality? This is quite possibly a move by dermatologists to take over some new territory:
Orsuto said that the proposal may be the state's way of diverting a long-established salon procedure "perfected by aestheticians" to the medical community, where hair can be removed via laser treatment by dermatologists.
Ah, but Libertarians who think the government grows ever more intrusive in nanny-state decisions are wackos, right?
Comments
anonone
No carpet, no evidence.
This is too wacky for words.
I can just see the animated commercial