Abstract

Libertarian Robert Nozick, on my reading, responds to Bernard Williams by saying that if Williams thinks the way we should distribute medical goods is based on medical need, he is analogously committed to the distribution of haircuts based on need. As I read him, Nozick wonders why other aims to do with haircuts matter less for Williams than the “proper aim” of getting a haircut: can’t a barber set up a business because he likes conversation with a variety of people and give haircuts according to whom he likes conservations with? I argue that a socially just attempt to distribute opportunities for haircuts will have to take into account other aims of a haircut than reducing inconveniently long hair. Haircuts have social functions, including subtly signalling sexuality. More subtle signals may be important in imperfectly liberal societies. This paper challenges an assumption which may be widespread on this database (or maybe not - I am the last one disposed to make it?): one assumes that a Williamsian approach applied to haircuts is all about preventing inconveniently long hair.