Alex Witt

Kramer wrote: The first thing I notice about a woman is her hair. The thing this forum says to talk about is hair. It's not a forum about a woman's other features. It's about hair. I'm not challenging your continuous insinuation that I "only see the hair," because, while it's not entirely accurate, it is partially true. But there's nothing in the rule book saying I'm wrong to do so. Further, you don't write the rule book. Now, look at the hair in the side by side photos. Eliminate the other features. Which hair do you like better? My choice is crystal clear, whether or not other features are considered. Please don't bring this up again. Please!

Um, as much as I hate to jump in here, fatmoogas does have a valid point.  Whilst I can completely understand that you judge solely on what their hair looks like, this forum by all means considers the person's other features.  Many, MANY threads have discussed the fact that someone's hair is not flattering on them...which is directly related to their features. 

I'm sure we are all familiar with the concept of someone having an absolutely great haircut/style that is unflattering or not as flattering as another style to them.  For example, Rene Russo's long curly blonde hair is beautiful.  But her shorter, layered red hair, IMHO, was MUCH more flatterig on her. 

The flip side would be someone like Alyssa Milano who has looked terrific short and long, though if you didn't take into account her whole look, you may say long looked great and short looked awful.

So, while you may love someone's hair for what it is, that doesn't mean that it's unreasonable for the rest of us to question whether or not it's the style that enhances their features the most.

Oh, and for what it's worth, I think Alex Witt looks good both ways and am impressed that she (and oddly several of the other MSNBC anchors such as Chris Jansing) has managed to grow her hair out in the generally cookie cutter world of female anchor styles.

JF