If enacted and interpreted broadly, the bill could potentially place salon professionals at legal risk for providing haircuts or styling services to minors that affirm their gender identity, especially if those services are seen as part of a broader transition.
A proposed bill in Arkansas, HB1668, titled the Vulnerable Child Protection Act, proposes that Individuals (including non-medical professionals like stylists, teachers, etc.) who “knowingly cause or contribute” to the social transition of a minor may be held liable in civil court for personal injury or harm, even years later.
And to define social transitioning, the bill says: “‘Social transitioning’ means the adoption or expression of a gender identity other than a person’s immutable biological sex as determined by the person’s genetics and anatomy at birth. The term includes, but is not limited to, changes in the person’s name, pronouns, hairstyle, clothing, or the use of a restroom or changing facility.”
First introduced in 2024, and now under discussion, the Arkansas bill suggests that providing a haircut or hairstyle that supports a minor’s gender identity could be considered aiding this “social transitioning.”
This means that a salon professional who provides a haircut aligned with a minor’s gender identity, even at the request of the parent or guardian, could be exposed to civil liability under the proposed statute.
The Industry Responds to Arkansas Bill
Jamie DiGrazia (she/they), Sam Villa Ambassador, Redken Artist, Owner of Logan Parlor Salon @loganparlorhair and Founder of HAIR HAS NO GENDER™ NFP (HHNG) @hair_has_no_gender, offers inclusive education and LGBTQIA2S+ resources that support everyone’s right to a safe experience. As a leader of the movement in the professional industry, MODERN asked DiGrazia to comment:
“Arkansas Bill HB1668 is not just an attack on self-expression—it’s a direct threat to businesses through fines, fees, and legal scrutiny. Salons, retailers, and other service providers could face penalties simply for allowing people to present themselves authentically. Are we really going to fine businesses for giving someone the haircut they feel best in? This bill is blatant discrimination, punishing professionals for doing their jobs and individuals for looking the way they want. Hair is art, identity, and self-expression—no government should have the power to police that. This legislation isn’t about protection; it’s about control, and it puts small businesses and personal freedoms at risk.
“Gender-based pricing in the beauty industry is not just outdated—it’s a violation of basic human rights. Charging different prices for the same service based on gender is discriminatory, leaving women paying more, men paying less, and non-binary clients excluded from the pricing structure altogether. The time commitment, complexity, and products used to achieve the end result—not gender—should determine cost. States like New York, California, and Massachusetts have already banned this practice, but federal protections are needed to ensure fairness nationwide.
“Transparent, equitable pricing not only protects businesses from legal and ethical risks but also fosters an inclusive industry where all clients feel valued. It’s time for the beauty industry to evolve.
“Gender nonconformity isn’t a challenge for the beauty industry—it’s an opportunity. Creativity, self-expression, and individuality are at the heart of what we do, and breaking away from outdated gender norms only expands our artistry. When we move beyond restrictive labels, we create a more inclusive, innovative, and welcoming industry where every client can truly be themselves. Hair has no gender, and embracing that makes our industry stronger.”
For reprint and licensing requests for this article, Click here.