In Quebec, a hair salon's online booking system that required clients to choose between 'man' or 'woman' for appointments sparked legal action from a non-binary customer, Alexe Frédéric Migneault. The Quebec Human Rights Tribunal ruled against the salon, stating that the limited gender options amounted to a violation of rights, resulting in a mandated payment of $500. While no service was denied, the case highlights the complexities of language and rights in today’s society.

Critics of the ruling, like Julia Malott, argue that enforcing strict categories such as 'man' and 'woman' in booking forms is an overreach of the human rights framework, suggesting that it could set a troubling precedent for how language is used in services. They assert that this allows for potential legal disputes over issues that many view as trivial compared to actual service discrimination. The discussion suggests a broader societal debate about evolving gender identity and how institutions adapt to these changes.

The implications of this ruling extend beyond just the salon; they raise important questions about the balance between accommodating diverse identities and the practicalities of service provisions. There is concern that such cases could undermine the credibility of human rights institutions if they become arenas for disputes over semantics rather than genuine rights violations. This situation illustrates the ongoing challenges faced by businesses in creating inclusive environments while remaining within legal frameworks.