QuoteReplyTopic: Locks Of Love - Good or Bad? Posted: July 17 2000 at 12:03pm
To those who see a conspiracy by Locks of Love, no, I doubt there is any conscious conspiracy, or any intent to deceive in their sale of donated hair to support their financial needs, but I also think they minimize public awareness of this. Their intent is extremely good, and they do serve a purpose. BUT...the supporters of LOL are definitely putting undue pressure on long haired women to give up the hair that often means a very great deal to them. Look, if it were no big deal giving up the bulk of one's hair, the children LOL serves wouldn't need it! Hair has a huge psychological importance, to those who have it and those who want it. The coercion that definitely exists to cut it off and give it to LOL is inappropriate. In any case, since it has to sell off some of the donations to get money, money is what is needed most, anyway. Those who freely decide to donate their hair should be saluted, but LET'S NOT DEMEAN THE WHOLE PROGRAM BY PRESSURING WOMEN TO GIVE UP THEIR HAIR OR FEEL LIKE SCABS.
xoom!
Mark
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Newbie
Joined: December 13 2000
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 9
>Locks of Love is not needed. There are plenty of goodlong hair synthetic wigs available. There is not anyreason to pressure a lady to cut her long hair off.There are a large number of excellent quality syntheticlong hair wigs available to all children. The quality ofsynthetic hair wigs has improved,and the cost is less,than human hair wigs. Human hair wigs tend to dry out.
>>>> Keep your lovely long hair and send money to buy wigs> if you feel it worthwhile. You short haired people> could do the same.> Iggy..That is an excellent point. I am glad you brought it up. ( Diane)
>>> Yesterday, an aquaintance at church and later a> stranger at the store mentioned my long hair and> brought up LOL. This thing is almost bigger than> Pokemon.Sorry Jennifer but your statement that says this thing is almost bigger than Pokemon made me laugh.On a more serious note. I am sorry you are pestered like that. ( Diane)>
> There is NO need for Locks of Love.That's your opinion and not fact. It's apparently serving some need, or it wouldn't exist.>Synthetic hair wigs are better than human hair wigsMuch too general of a statement. Synthetic wigs cannot be permed or colored. Synthetic hair cannot have heating implements, such as blow dryers and curling irons, used. Therefore, styling options are limited.There are advantages of synthetic over human. And there are advantages of human over synthetic. A person needs to weigh the two to find out what works best for him.>Human hair wigs do dry outWhere on earth do you get this information? If conditioner is never used on them, yes, they will dry out. However, if properly cared for, they can last a long time.>I would say,that eventually human> hair wigs,will be a thing of the past.It is my opinion that there will always be a consumer demand for both.Jena
Mark
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Newbie
Joined: December 13 2000
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 9
> There is not any need for a lady,to cut her hair forLOL Synthetic wigs are replacing many human hairwigs. Many ladies with hair loss,do like the large numberof new synthetic hair wigs that are on the market.Synthetic hair wigs are of good quality,and they areless expensive. Human hair wigs dry out, so many ladieswith hair loss,now buy the better synthetic hair wigs,which provide excellent hair enhancement. The need forhuman hair wigs has decreased.
Mark
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Newbie
Joined: December 13 2000
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 9
There is NO need for Locks of Love. Synthetic hair wigsare better than human hair wigs,and synthetic hair wigsare lower priced,and provide a lady with a more brilliantenhancement of hair. Human hair wigs do dry out,butsynthetic hair wigs will provide a better hair enhancementfor ladies,with hair loss. There are a large numberof synthetic hair wigs,that are replacing human hair wigs.In my area most of the ladies with hair loss,want thesynthetic hair wigs. I would say,that eventually humanhair wigs,will be a thing of the past.
Mark
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Newbie
Joined: December 13 2000
Location: Puerto Rico
Status: Offline
Points: 9
> There is not any need for any lady to cut her hair forlocks of love. Synthetic hair wigs are replacing manyhuman hair wigs. Synthetic hairs wigs do NOT dry out,and they cost less money. Many ladies with hair loss,are wearing the synthetic hair wigs,which are of goodquality. The synthetic hair wigs give an excellentenhancement to a ladies appearance, and there are a largenumber of synthetic wigs,available.
I konw I will be called selfish, but I have to say this.I have waist length hair, and so many people have told me to cut it and give it to LOL, that when I do cut it, I wont even think of LOL. I am so sick of hearing about the whole orginazation. I wouldn't like it if I lost my hair, but cant realistic looking synthetic wigs be bought cheaper?
Lady Godiva
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Newbie
Joined: December 02 2000
Status: Offline
Points: 42
Ever hear of companies that match employee donations? For every dollar the employee gives, the corporation gives the exact same amount. Many companies that support the United Way practice this. Not only is the employee stuck on a guilt trip for his own donation (and they *really* push!), despite the fact that he may give to his place of worship or other non-United Way charities, but the employee is left holding the responsiblity for the corporate gift as well. "The more you give, the more we'll give, but the less you give, the less we'll give."Talk about coersion! And there's the tax break you overlooked.Jennifer Eve> Bang on, Jennifer!> But please clear something up for me. In Canada, we> also> have United Way, but the employing companies do not> get> tax breaks for the donations of their employees; the> employees do, though. Have I got that right: U.S.> employers> get tax deductions for their employees' donations?> Brian> aq093@freenet.carleton.ca> **********************
Bang on, Jennifer!But please clear something up for me. In Canada, we alsohave United Way, but the employing companies do not gettax breaks for the donations of their employees; the employees do, though. Have I got that right: U.S. employersget tax deductions for their employees' donations?Brianaq093@freenet.carleton.ca**********************> Here in the US, fund drives can be very unpleasant> things, as I and others have experienced. Many> companies put heavy pressure on their employees to> boost the companies' tax credits or public image.> Excellent points. LOL doesn't need a PR firm. It> relies on zealous do-gooders who don't mind laying> guilt trips on others. People get worked up over the> plight of the victims and see no problem in pressuring> even complete strangers...> Also, Dave D. quoted a People magazine article, one> that I've read, too. There is a fact about LOL that> people should be alerted to, especially those> individuals who donate their hair in good faith: the> organization is considering selling some of the> donated hair to raise money to cover the creation of> the wigs. Exactly where the sold hair winds up is> anyone's guess, but if I donated my hair, believing it> would be reserved for some poor, afflicted child's> head, and I discovered it went to some hair auction or> to an expensive wigmaker instead, I'd be seriously> ticked.> I betcha you're right. No offense taken.> Jennifer Eve
I agree Carolyn. If one truly *wants* to give their longhair for the patients who have gone bald because of theirmedical treatment, it is a beautiful act, particularlybecause it hurt to lose the hair (the tears!)If it is because of social coercion, - and small municipalities are known for this - out of fear of whatpeople might do if one does *not* cut the hair for adonation, that is, the perceived notion that cutting one'slong hair is a small sacrifice in comparison to the greatergood it will do for a bald cancer patient, it could giverise to scowls, ostracism, words of hate etc. Most peoplewould have a hard time dealing with such punishment, andwould rather cut and donate the hair to prevent even greaterpsychological pain.Brian************************************> Hi Carol!..> . I just cringed at the footage of women rushing to have their long locks sheared off to donate. I think this thing> was called THE TOWN WHO CUT THEIR HAIR or something> like that. There were lots of young women in tears> when their hair was cut. I kept wondering if these> were all really willing hair cuts or was some of that> "herd mentality"? I can just imagine the> pressure any girl or woman in that town that didn't> cut her hair and donate it.> Carolyn B
Cutting off one's long hair which one loves, is extremelyhard to do. It is the sign of a true gift. Kathie LeeGifford said it has to hurt a little, and the psychologicalor spiritual hurt is excruciating for some. Anyone whohas gone bald, particularly females, because of chemotherapyor radiation, become very despondent over their "new look",particularly if they loved their hair. They adjust to acertain degree, but they may never quite get over what seemsto them an "ugly" appearance until the hair grows back;sometimes it does not grow back. Being unhappy at theirbaldness worsens the prognosis of their illness, usuallycancer, and their mental upset affects the ability of theirbody and the therapy to fight off the disease. If they'retoo conscious of their baldness and are sufficiently sadabout it, they could die because the disease would haveeffectively breached their weak mental defenses, whichgave rise to a weakened immune system. They literally "think" themselves to death.Wearing a good wig made with the donated hair, could improve a patient's appearance in his/her own mind, and bring him/her to a happier disposition as a result. Then the bodyis strengthened by a happier attitude, and destroying thecancer with mind, the body's natural defences, and thetherapy together becomes more likely. So, the donated hairmay indirectly save some patients' physical lives byimproving their mental and spiritual lives.Brian.*********************************************> Here goes: while I think the Locks of Love is a worthy> cause, I also worry that people with long hair will be> coerced into cutting it to "do the right> thing". One of the recent Miss Beauty Somethings,> was it Virginia? was recently in the press for cutting> tons of her hair off "for a good cause".> What are the politics of this issue and is this a good> thing or a thing where you get confused in the issues?> Thanks for bringing the board back. I for one am glad> it is back.> Carol
Thanks for the support folks.. Anyway Jerky, just because I'm not paranoid anymore, doesn't mean they're not out to get me! *s*I love a good conspiracy theory too.. You guys never really landed on the moon did you?Iggy..
> Before I bail out on this angle of the argument, since> you, Iggy and others are spinning off into your own> paranoid anti-long hair conspiracy theories, I want to> point out two things:> FIRST: The woman who founded LOL, Peggy Knight,> suffers from alopecia areata herself and started the> organization to aid children who may suffer from> riducule due to their hair loss from the same> condition or cancer treatment. Hopefully, you don't> see anything sinister or "titillating" in> that.> SECOND: If you read the site, they do publicize that> they accept monetary donations, even providing a place> on the site through which to make a contribution.> Also, they indicate that "Donated hair that is> not suitable for use in children's hairpieces may be> sold at fair market value to offset the cost of> manufacturing.", so it's not as though they hide> that fact either. You can read their press release> here.> I will agree on the point that the donating of the> ponytails is the more dramatic donation and thus gets> all the press, especially since it's such a unique way> to contribute compared to other charities. However, if> the press chooses to concentrate on that aspect, you> can't blame LOL, nor could you expect them to dissuade> whatever positive publicity they can get. If the> cutting of hair as a charitable donation offends you,> then don't contribute to them. However, calling into> question their motives simply based on your own biases> is truly unconcionable.> JerkyFleaHi JerkyMcFlythe more informations I get about LOL, the more is clear that haircutting is the main "sense" of this project, not helping someone.How much is the "fair market value" of hair that is not suitable for wigs?? It must be something around zero. I'm sure that only a very few women would donate their hair if they knew what happens with it after they got chopped it off. The others would prefer to pay the little money of it's value and leave their mane where it belongs to - their own head - except they was nerved from all the folks who are telling them to go for LOL.The fact, that the inventor of LOL has alopecia herself doesn't make the things better. She has obviously a big problem with it and other ladies shall pay for it. If I compare her psycho problems with my paranoia, I must say that I prefer the last one as I don't try to set unguilty persons under moral pressure.That the trash TV is especially interested in very long hair cutting is true because it guarantees millions of low minded viewers - and that's good for business. Do you believe they would ever say "stop folks, we have enough hair now"? Everybody else, yes, but not "Locks of Love".
> Before I bail out on this angle of the argument, since> you, Iggy and others are spinning off into your own> paranoid anti-long hair conspiracy theories, I want to> point out two things:> FIRST: The woman who founded LOL, Peggy Knight,> suffers from alopecia areata herself and started the> organization to aid children who may suffer from> riducule due to their hair loss from the same> condition or cancer treatment. Hopefully, you don't> see anything sinister or "titillating" in> that.> SECOND: If you read the site, they do publicize that> they accept monetary donations, even providing a place> on the site through which to make a contribution.> Also, they indicate that "Donated hair that is> not suitable for use in children's hairpieces may be> sold at fair market value to offset the cost of> manufacturing.", so it's not as though they hide> that fact either. You can read their press release> here.> I will agree on the point that the donating of the> ponytails is the more dramatic donation and thus gets> all the press, especially since it's such a unique way> to contribute compared to other charities. However, if> the press chooses to concentrate on that aspect, you> can't blame LOL, nor could you expect them to dissuade> whatever positive publicity they can get. If the> cutting of hair as a charitable donation offends you,> then don't contribute to them. However, calling into> question their motives simply based on your own biases> is truly unconcionable.> JerkyFleaJerkyFlea,Well, isn't this special. Some folks raise legitimate questions and concerns, and what do you do? Attempt to discredit them as "biased" and "spinning off into paranoid conspiracy theories." Your pooh-poohing of these questions and concerns seems to be an attempt to belittle those with whom you disagree, and shows that you just don't care who gets "touched" in a less-than-positive ways by LOL's media campaign.It was only you, JerkyFlea, who just shamefully associated (by deflection) the word "titillation" with the circumstances of LOL's founder. I can't even begin to imagine why you even made your comment. I'm certain that ABSOLUTELY NOBODY associated the medical condition of LOL's founder with "titillation."That word has been used to describe the circumstances surrounding the method of "collection" so often displayed by the various "for-profit" media agencies (especially TV), which use the spectacle to their own financial advantage.The reality of the situation (as observed from Jennifer's encounters and mine, among who-knows-how-many others not expressed here) is that (a) the general public is fairlywell aware of LOL, and (b) that some among the general public (who themselves do not have long hair) ARE approaching those that do have long hair, and are, at the very least, broaching the subject of LOL, and in other cases, are outright pressuring some to give away their hair. Do you believe, JerkyFlea, that the means justify the ends?I'm not aware of the occurrence of similar pressure being applied by long-haired folks towards short-haired folks, such as approaching short-haired strangers and friends alikeand asking them, "How long have you had short hair? For years? Then why don't you grow your own hair long so that you can cut it off and give it away to charity?" (Notethat I'm not advocating its initiation.) In a general sense, to say that "helping one's self or others" is a noble pursuit, but pressuring someone else into cutting off their long hair for LOL does not qualify as "doing one's own part" for a specific charity.Although monetary contributions are mentioned on LOL's site, I have seen a number of these "collections" for LOL on TV shows, and never once was money mentioned as a potential means of donation, even though several times LOL reps have been in attendance in the audience, and been briefly interviewed on-camera. Why is it that the need for money, which seems to be LOL's biggest need, is never mentioned during the media broadcasts?Dave
Before I bail out on this angle of the argument, since you, Iggy and others are spinning off into your own paranoid anti-long hair conspiracy theories, I want to point out two things:FIRST: The woman who founded LOL, Peggy Knight, suffers from alopecia areata herself and started the organization to aid children who may suffer from riducule due to their hair loss from the same condition or cancer treatment. Hopefully, you don't see anything sinister or "titillating" in that.SECOND: If you read the site, they do publicize that they accept monetary donations, even providing a place on the site through which to make a contribution. Also, they indicate that "Donated hair that is not suitable for use in children's hairpieces may be sold at fair market value to offset the cost of manufacturing.", so it's not as though they hide that fact either. You can read their press release here.I will agree on the point that the donating of the ponytails is the more dramatic donation and thus gets all the press, especially since it's such a unique way to contribute compared to other charities. However, if the press chooses to concentrate on that aspect, you can't blame LOL, nor could you expect them to dissuade whatever positive publicity they can get. If the cutting of hair as a charitable donation offends you, then don't contribute to them. However, calling into question their motives simply based on your own biases is truly unconcionable.JerkyFleaRelated Link:JerkyFlea's Celebrity Hair Spray
3 pm is simultaneously too late and too early to start anything.
Jena. I hear what you're saying but don't you think children would tease another for wearing a wig? Children can be very cruel, they can also be remarkably supportive.Iggy..
To Jennifer..I agree whole heartedly with what your point of view. L-O-L poses a lot of questions as to their raison d'etre. I am appalled that anybody, in particular strangers, should suggest that you cut your hair. Would anyone walk up to someone who was obviously affluent and suggest they part with all their money for charity? I think not.Iggy..
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Topic Options
Post Options
Thanks(0)
