Good question. I heard a statistic some time ago (I don't remember where now) that "only" about 5-10% of women like long hair on men, but it seems to me that that number is low. I wonder if the women who respond here would like to offer a "percentage" based on what they know of other women's preferences. I've also heard several women say that they don't like it because "most long-haired men have crummy hair" but when they see a man with well-kept hair, they feel differently.
Dave, Yes, I wash & condition my hair every day. So although from time to time it might be slightly tangled, it is always clean. I can stand my hair when its dirty and I wouldn't expect a woman to like it as well. Jeff.
I prefer short hair on most men. I was raised on military installations, and the military look is what I find most attractive. In general.
There are always exceptions. Take Brad Pitt in "Interview With the Vampire." He never looked hotter.
I think it depends on the guy's attitude, face, physique, and wardrobe. And as Dave points out, it depends on how well it's kept.
I think super-long hair falls into the same category as hats and dramatic clothing: The more attractive and confident you are, the better you can pull it off.
I hope that you have been well and enjoyed the holidays.
First, the mane has really grown....terrific!
Second, I don't know for sure in answer to your question. No hard statistic:) However, I think that the vast majority of women would swing toward a shorter haircut for men. Personally, I like men with longer hair, especially if they take the time to truly care for it..like washing, gentle handling...the whole bit:)
Third, I have a question for you. Do you appreciate or welcome a woman asking you about your hair? By that I mean, do you just welcome the conversation? It's been my experience that men really enjoy it:) Is this typical or what?
Happy 2000 to you as well... Yes, it keeps growing. Its kinda thin at the bottom, but it reaches just below my belt. As to, Do I welcome the attention? Yes... It's nice to have the attention of other women. Women better appreciate the effort that it took to grow my hair this long and and the effort to maintain it. Plus I take it as an oppourtunity to discuss The Hair Boutique website and I usually give them one of my Hair Boutique business cards and tell them to check out the website. Jeff.
Jennifer
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Member
Joined: November 30 2000
Status: Offline
Points: 748
I think you're going to find more women here who prefer long hair on men simply because of the subject of this website! However, I'll be brutally honest (did you expect any less? {grin}). No, I do not care for long hair on men at all. I very much fully support the right of any man to wear his hair any way he chooses, but to me, a virile, masculine man has a short haircut, preferably buzzed. I'm a bit of a traditionalist. I prefer women to have long hair and men to have short hair. I mean absolutely no offense to any long-haired men, but I tend to think of men who "fuss" over their appearance and have a lot of hair to take care of, well, just not exactly at their masculine best....
I'd rather a man take care of *my* long hair, not his! ;-)
This is partly a test to see if this system is working. It gave me grief when registering.
Anyhow, only 5-10%? That seems far too low, from what I've read and heard. Seems most women don't care strongly either way, and that's pretty much where I fall, too. I like both short and long hair on men, though I think I veer toward longer hair. I guess I should say I don't care for crew cuts or shaved heads (natural balding is fine) and that I prefer longer "short" hair on men. However, then I reflect on Mel Gibson's long, flowing hair and blue painted face in "Braveheart," and he was *all man*...
Personally, I prefer shorter hair on men. Though my absolute favorite length is just slightly "long" for a typical man's cut, where the back of the hair curls over the collar, but isn't really shoulder length. It's long enough to look touseled, but not long enough to pull into a pony tail.
I do think that different men look better in different lengths though, just like women. One of my best male friends has absolutely gorgeous light blonde hair that's nearly to his waist (and he's Tall, so that's a lot of hair). I couldn't imagine him with much different of a style. Short hair wouldn't suit his personality at all.
So, I guess that really the most important thing is to have hair that suits your appearance an personality, and to keep it healthy, clean, and neat looking.
I've never heard about *weekly* trips to the barber! But even so, it would be a lot less work than having to shampoo, condition, comb, possibly style, and just having hair in front of the face. The objective at the barber is to cut off the hair so you don't have to worry about it!
A good example might be in the military. In boot camp, can you imagine having to worry about tangles and split ends and washing all the sand and salt water out of the hair? They don't have time to worry about that kind of thing. And in combat, well, long hair is the enemy's weapon! It's easily grabbed, pulled, and can get caught on things (jumping out of an airplane, a man could get hair hair ripped out of his head if it accidentally caught on something as he jumped! Same goes for women, which is why I've never been in the military and have no desire to do so! I do however, have great admiration for people who serve.
I just personally find men with short hair more masculine, sexy, and attractive. That doesn't mean they are, it just means that's my personal preference, which isn't any more right or wrong than anyone else's!
Bingo! Straggly, unstyled, unkempt hair isn't attractive on anyone, male or female, no matter how clean it is. Even very long hair needs the occasional trim to keep it looking neat and healthy. So, my preference depends on the man and the hair.
DaveDecker
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Senior Moderator
Joined: November 28 2000
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3247
Hey Jena, I don't begrudge you your personal preferences, but I want to comment on a few of your other statements.
One of my friends maintains a flattop, and he goes to the barber every two weeks. I've heard him critique the quality of the haircut he's gotten, so for him (at least), the objective at the barber is not about "cutting off the hair so he doesn't have to worry about it." I should think that the objective of anybody who goes to a barber is to have their hair cut the way they want it. Right?
Though hair length can very well be an issue for those who serve in the military, a high percentage of people in the U.S. never serve time in the military. For those that do, engaging in hand-to-hand combat is quite likely rarely done. And what about the helmets... they cover the head and the hair, right? And, as HB's Jane Bullock wrote in one of her articles, having fairly short hair is not a safeguard against the possibility of having one's hair pulled. Hair that's only 2 inches long can easily be grabbed and used as a handhold.
I'm not arguing the case in favor of long hair in the military, rather I'm pointing out that the example you describe as "good" is actually quite unrepresentative.
Dave
Lady Godiva
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Newbie
Joined: December 02 2000
Status: Offline
Points: 42
The purpose of the military crew cut is much like that of the military uniform: to do away with individuality, to create the unremarkable look of thousands of zombie-like soldiers. It's not intended to enhance atractiveness, but to reduce the individual to his barest, most plain, and one can even argue, his most humiliated or "shorn" form. In fact, it emasculates in this regard, generating what military powers hope will be a moldable, compliant lackey. If crew cuts truly were designed for function alone, then they would have been the norm in all the wars of ages past. However, this simply wasn't the case, as artists and photographers have documented. You are welcome to your preference for this type of hair style on men, of course, but keep in mind why it exists in the first place.
Jennifer Eve
Avatar: Lady Godiva by John Collier, 1898
1a F iii hair type
74" to the floor
Jennifer
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Member
Joined: November 30 2000
Status: Offline
Points: 748
>>Hair that's only 2 inches long can easily be grabbed and used as a handhold
True, but two inches doesn't exactly qualify for a buzzcut. {grin}
Would you not agree, though, it would be much easier to use two feet (as opposed to two inches) of hair against your enemy? Two inches can slip out of the hand of restraint more easily.
Jennifer
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Member
Joined: November 30 2000
Status: Offline
Points: 748
The military crewcut exists in the first place for hygiene. Can you imagine the problems someone like you would have with lice!?! It would be a great hinderance to have soldiers scratching their heads with long hair, detracting from their jobs-at-hand. Or else they'd have to spend an awfully lot of time with the treatment to combat it. And while they're spending time doing that, the enemy is advancing farther ahead! Also, there isn't a whole lot of time for shampooing, conditioning, and blow-drying when you're dodging bullets. {grin} Definitely, a short haircut was created as well for uniformity because troops have to work together as a team. But if uniformity were the only reason for short hair, they also could be uniform with waist-length hair! Long hair simply is not practical at all in the military. And that's why I tend to think that long, lovely, feminine tresses are more feminine. I also think it's important to note that they are very selfless and sacrifice their lives to protect your right to complain and belittle them or anything you want!
>>It's not intended to enhance atractiveness, but to reduce the individual to his barest, most plain, and one can even argue, his most humiliated or "shorn" form.
Wouldn't the "barest" form be to let hair grow as long as possible, never touching it? Kind of like cavemen dragging others around type of an image?
>>If crew cuts truly were designed for function alone, then they would have been the norm in all the wars of ages past. However, this simply wasn't the case, as artists and photographers have documented.
It was also common to use leeches as medicine a long time ago! We evolve, which means we change and learn new and better ways of doing things in life.
Lady Godiva
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Newbie
Joined: December 02 2000
Status: Offline
Points: 42
Cleanliness isn't a recent concept, but crew cuts are. I still hold they were invented to shear individuality, because hair color, type, texture and abundance are very difficult to determine when all soldiers are so closely shorn. This makes G.I. Joe look like G.I. Dave and G.I. Don and G.I. Jeff and so on... If they could manage in the past without crew cuts, they could now. And why only the extremes of buzz jobs or really long hair? Is there no compromise?
Such patronizing remarks, Jena. I have relatives who were in the military who would take you to task for what you imply about me. Military leaders don't care about the small soldier. They don't want to see the individual. My terminology reflected their attitude toward the rank and file.
Webster defines "bare" as "devoid of covering or dress," "lacking in embellishment or in interest or attraction, plain, meager" and "bareheaded." This hardly reflects long hair. In ancient times, the shaving of heads was done to humiliate and punish both men and women, to indicate the man was a weakling and the woman a prostitute, or else it was used to indicate a slave or servant rank.
By the way, leeches are back in favor in the medical field. And if changing and evolving are always so great, as you suggest, then are we to be proud we've learned new and better ways of fighting/killing other people?
Jennifer Eve
Avatar: Lady Godiva by John Collier, 1898
1a F iii hair type
74" to the floor
Jennifer
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Member
Joined: November 30 2000
Status: Offline
Points: 748
I think you're introducing some new topics and are starting to take this very personally. I truly do not wish to anger you. I think I'll just agree to disagree at this point!
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)
