LONG-HAIRED WOMEN DON'T DESERVE THE BRUSHOFF
Printed From: HairBoutique.com
Category: Hair Talk
Forum Name: Hair Politics
Forum Description: The politics of Hair is a slippery slope...
URL: https://talk.hairboutique.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=8614
Printed Date: March 14 2025 at 1:01am
Topic: LONG-HAIRED WOMEN DON'T DESERVE THE BRUSHOFF
Posted By: brulist
Subject: LONG-HAIRED WOMEN DON'T DESERVE THE BRUSHOFF
Date Posted: June 01 2000 at 11:34am
a clip from the chicago tribune. god bless women who resist the pressure of the fashion nazis!!
Copyright 2000 Chicago Tribune Company
Chicago Tribune
May 31, 2000 Wednesday, NORTHWEST EDITION
SECTION: WOMAN NEWS; Pg. 7; ZONE: FNW; First person.
LENGTH: 959 words
HEADLINE: LONG-HAIRED WOMEN DON'T DESERVE THE BRUSHOFF
BYLINE: By Lauren Ruby. Special to the Tribune. Lauren Ruby is an attorney who
lives and works in Chicago.
BODY:
Recently I've been considering polishing my image. I've worn the same clothes
to work for years and I can't remember the last time I had a manicure, let alone
a makeover. I wanted some expert advice so I picked up a copy of "Put Your Best
Foot Forward: Make a Great Impression by Taking Control of How Others See You"
(Scribner, $24). The authors, a pair of seasoned jury consultants, maintain that
appearance, body language, voice, communication style, speech content, actions
and environment project often-indelible ideas about who we are and how we're
likely to act. They identify characteristics that send undesirable messages and
suggest that readers interested in improving the way others respond to them
develop personal "impression management plans."
I didn't like the taste "impression management" left in my mouth, but I kept
reading. I couldn't deny there were valuable lessons to be learned in
discovering how others perceived me, whether I chose to act upon that
information or not. I tried to set judgment aside and take a look at myself
through the eyes of a stranger. How did I come across? What did my words,
demeanor, handshake, clothing, car and house say about me?
From reading the book, I realized that people may assume I'm less capable and
competent because of the fact that I drive an old car and dog hair clings to my
coats and sweaters.
Those I address may doubt my trustworthiness when I rely upon big words to
get the point across. And the relatively large amount of personal space I like
to maintain around me may mark me as distant, even unfriendly. These lessons
hurt, but I'd vowed to be tough. I could handle it.
I kept my cool until halfway through the book, when I read, "your hairstyle
should be an important component of your impression management plan." Uh oh, I
thought. Here it comes. Sure enough, after decrying long hair on men, the
authors (a man and a woman) stated in no uncertain terms that if an "older
woman" wanted to make a good impression she, too, should cut her hair, for
"older women who wear their hair long are judged as less competent,
sophisticated and socially adept." I was aboard a crowded commuter train when I
read the offending paragraph. My long hair was still damp from the shower and
I'd been swishing it around absentmindedly, trying to get it dry. I felt my face
flush with embarrassment.
But wait--could I be sure they were talking to me? The authors sidestepped
this issue neatly in that they never defined their demographic. Perhaps I was
off the hook, at least for the time being.
While I'd look out of place at a fraternity party, I haven't exactly achieved
senior citizen status, either. Then again, maybe it worked like the prices in a
trendy boutique. If I had to ask, I had my answer.
I buried my face in the book, but it didn't get any better. "When we see an
older woman with long hair, our antennae quiver. Something doesn't fit. Is she
insecure? Doesn't she accept her age gracefully? Does she keep her hair long in
the hope that it makes the rest of us think she is younger than she really is?
Doesn't she realize her hairstyle is too 'young' for a woman her age?"
For shame! How could I show my face at work? I fought the impulse to run back
home and hide under the covers. I could understand how people might be startled
when their expectations were undermined. But would they really assume I was
immature, ignorant or just plain odd, all because of the way I wore my hair?
Could such a small thing actually irritate or even anger them? Apparently so.
It hardly seems fair, given the fact that my very identity is wrapped up in
having a substantial head of hair. It's always been the first thing people
notice about me; complete strangers comment on it all the time.
I've never worn it short save for one misguided experiment in high school
some 20 years ago. Sure, I complain because I can't run a comb through it, it
takes forever to dry, and with the least bit of humidity it's out to here. But
cut it? That's another story.
Contrary to what the authors suggest, I don't keep my hair long in order to
look young. If anything, my hair renders my age more apparent, particularly
given the fact that I tend to dress simply and wear very little makeup. The
lines on my face appear more pronounced without bangs or short layers to divert
attention from them. Oddly enough, I'm enjoying the effect. Although I'm sad to
think so much of my life has passed so quickly, I'm relieved that people finally
are taking me more seriously because I look my age. And I like to think long
hair lends me an air of dignity, as it does in a number of cultural contexts
other than our own.
Even before I read the book I sensed my resistance to cutting my hair had
turned into a small act of defiance, a mini-rebellion. Why should I deprive
myself of something that still looks good simply to fit in? I get a kick out of
thwarting expectations and thumbing my nose at convention. There are also
practical reasons for my reluctance to cut my hair. A head of long, thick hair
keeps me very warm during frigid Chicago winters. When I pull it back in a
ponytail on a cold day, I shiver and wonder how those with short hair stay
comfortable. And finally, no sooner did my mother lose her hair (to cancer, by
way of chemotherapy) than her life followed suit. If my hair is flourishing,
what happened to her can't possibly happen to me.
So if you happen to spot a mature woman with luxurious locks, don't be too
quick to draw conclusions. She might have a host of perfectly valid reasons for
hanging onto her hair. And if pride and vanity play some small part in her
decision, well, can you really blame her? She might be older and wiser but,
after all, she's only human.
Chicago Tribune, May 31, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
LOAD-DATE: May 31, 2000
|
Replies:
Posted By: Beatnik Guy
Date Posted: June 01 2000 at 8:15pm
Cool...thanks for posting this. Excellent to see a long haired woman defending her decision in the press!
Chris
-------------
|
Posted By: dianefromcanada
Date Posted: June 02 2000 at 6:11pm
I reallly enjoyed your article. Thanks for sharing this.
I guess as long as we are the way we are as human beings we will tend to judge others eventhought it is very wrong.
Who really cares if someone has hair or not or the lenght of it. It doesn't make a person more competent or less nor does it make a person more special or less for the length of their hair.
This really bugs me this whole thing when hair becomes more important then what is inside the heart in our personal lives or when hair is the barrier of what people think we can accomplish.
Hair shouldn't be a factor as long we keep ourselves looking professional, clean etc.
-------------
dianefromcanada
|
Posted By: DaveDecker
Date Posted: June 04 2000 at 9:57pm
While I applaud Ms. Ruby's sense of self-determination, I am thoroughly unimpressed with the authors of the book, "Put Your Best Foot Forward: Make a Great Impression by Taking Control of How Others See You."
The authors of subject book counsel both cowardice and prejudice. They advise kowtowing to convention in a misguided attempt to control (the perceptions of) others, instead of rightfully criticizing the vast majority of people (themselves included) for committing a series of appearance-based prejudices.
The authors exposé is an example of the smug arrogance of the majority position. Their denouncements of long hair seek to (1) pressure those who have it to surrender their individual pursuit of happiness, and (2) to reinforce the self-righteousness of those who already have short hair.
How many copies of this book would be sold if the authors were to criticize the vast majority of people for their appearance-based prejudices and to suggest that they undertake a critical self-evaluation of their own adverse prejudgement of the character of a person by the length of his or her hair? How many people would choose to be the recipient of unfavorable criticism over being the recipient of reassuring (but undeserved) strokes? Not many, and my guess is that the authors would probably sell a lot fewer books if they took the "high" road. This seems to suggest that the authors may themselves be guilty of insufficient courage, sacrificing the opportunity to truly enlighten their readers for the $ake of greater book $ale$.
The authors are reportedly seasoned jury consultants, experienced with the proceedings of the judicial system. Yet, to the best of my knowledge, what matters in a court of law are the facts -- "who said what" and "who did what" -- not "who wore what." In the area that I live, there was recently a series of trials (one for each of those accused for their participation in a certain high-profile crime). The accused had apparently taken their cue from the authors of subject book (or others who preach the same mantra), presumably in the hopes of gaining sympathy from the jury for being "dashingly-coiffed and stylishly-suited"... but the ploy failed, for they were all found guilty as charged.
As fate would have it, I have been called to jury duty within several weeks. I can't help but wonder just how much the attorneys will love me and my thigh-length hair. :-)
-------------
|
Posted By: Ally
Date Posted: June 06 2000 at 10:09am
Dave~
I understand what you're saying, but does it make sense to criticize the authors for appearance-based prejudices when their book is on /image/? How could they have possibly written that book without tsk-ing at /any/ aspect of physical appearance?
I don't see how criticizing long hair on older women would increase their profits. My feeling is that they probably believe what they wrote.
ANY advice they could give is bound to shock, embarrass, or infuriate someone. "Don't wear flesh-colored hose." "Never wear fuschia lipstick with coral blush." "If you're overweight, do something about it." "Short women should not wear long skirts."
All they can offer is /their/ experience and opinions. Presumably you value their expertise, or you wouldn't buy the book.
I'm nearly six feet tall, and every "image" guide I've ever read had advised me on how to dress to minimize my height. Women over 5'8" are listed under "figure problems." Well, I don't have a figure problem. My body is killer, and I wear three-inch heels to aggrandize my stature. Am I mad at the writers? No. I just don't read those books, because I know what to expect.
They are addressing a particular audience that /wants/ to conform and be safe.
Ally
-------------
|
|