Personally, I don't see why the finger is pointing at Starbucks in this case, the Starbucks store manager said they were a little loud, and that affected other customers. Besides what kind of operation is coffee shop makeup? If it had been any other coffee shop makeup and the same had been driven out, would there still be this news? Would there still be such a high level of social concern? I don't think it's very likely that if they were driven out just because of the makeup, there should have been other reasons, perhaps the woman in question didn't make it clear, or some other factor that was purposely not posted.

I myself also spend a lot of time at Starbucks. It does seem a bit disconcerting to be driven away just for wearing makeup! I once came across two people chatting at Starbucks and then actually started smoking inside the store. The waitress came over to stop them, but they wouldn't listen and it escalated to the police. When the police came, the two just said they were chatting and the waiter chased them away, and didn't say a word about smoking in a public ****ing place, so you can't just listen to one side of the story.

We also note that the report says "the store has refunded the money for the meal and given two coupons as compensation". Perhaps the clerk did apologize for her inappropriate behavior, or perhaps the store was forced by public pressure to make a big deal out of the situation. But I have to say, Starbucks Coffee is a restaurant, leisure attributes of the store, encountered customers, whether it is a telephone consultation or face-to-face inquiries about whether you can make up in the store, should not make a positive response, should be politely refused, after all, make-up and some other with the store environment is not very harmonious behavior, the store's operations and consumption of customers have a certain impact, it can be said that both sides are at fault, should be avoided so things! This is the first time I've seen this.