BlueHeronDruid wrote:  In Daytona Beach we went everywhere in our boxers. We were tanned and young but... no one gave a shit! 

 BlueHeronDruid wrote: 
She'd fit right in down here.

 islander wrote: 
BS!

I took muzik out to the Elevated and the Safeway - while she was in her pajamas. Nobody batted an eye!

 islander wrote: 
you're such a Geranimal.

 islander wrote: 
Katoomba!

 BlueHeronDruid wrote: 
 They mock me when my belt matches my shoes.

 edieraye wrote: 
Late to the game but - I know that my hair styles have made huge differences in the way I was perceived - though I can't say for sure about treated. In corporate America I wore both styled, just-past-the-shoulder dos AND really short hair and everything in between. Over time, gradually, I went "native" - no lipstick, no mascara, no hair color. That upset the apple cart at work (with male co-workers) and with my mother ("You're suck a pretty girl - why don't you try to look nice?") but I was also aware of the reactions of strangers.

And that is one of the reasons I love living in Pete. It's definitely a come-as-you-are town.

 Lazy8 wrote: 
This isn't what I got out of the article.  The eye-opener to me was how hair length makes a difference to how men react to women and how much more they are harassed with longer hair.  Political statements are necessarily a reaction to the real-world situation and it is too bad that women have to consider how they will be approached by strangers when choosing what they "want to do".

edieraye wrote:
I think she's reading way too much into the ravings of these creeps, and I don't like having her represent my gender with their opinions.

But let's say that they actually do represent some fraction of the male of the species, and you cut your hair off to spite them. You've granted them power over you. You're playing to that audience, whether it's to please them or annoy them.

What do you want to do? It's your hair. If it's going to be a political statement then it ought to be entirely yours, not a reaction to somebody else's.

 Lazy8 wrote: 
I will have to more closely follow this thread, but I was taken aback by the photo of the Three Sisters in the Blue Mountains. It's where hobbitt learned he doesn't like open heights.

Gimme head with hair
Long beautiful hair
Shining, gleaming, Streaming, flaxen, waxen
Give me down to there hair
Shoulder length or longer
Here baby, there mama
Everywhere daddy daddy
Hair, hair, hair, hair, hair, hair, hair
Flow it, show it
Long as God can grow it
My hair

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
I find both attractive myself. I also like women with glasses. I look into the eyes, not the decor. I'm still a pig tho! 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:  

I understand completely which is something that you should probably be worried about.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
But you do it so well my friend.

 Proclivities wrote: 
Right: we all have uniforms, like it or not. The piece about *whateveritwas* in Australia where no one gave a thought to style... still a uniform. Go hang out there with neatly pressed slacks and a belt that matches your shoes... see if you fit in.
 
I have come to a convenient conclusion that I look my best (a low bar) if I'm wearing jeans and a cotton shirt with the sleeves rolled up. To you it's casual, to me it's cultivated. And since I have always considered myself (willingly or not) to be an outsider, the double-negative uniform sort of takes hold: if I really want to fit in with a group that fits into the same niche in society as I think I do, I'd wear a lot more black and have some obscure (placement & meaning) tattoos. But I can't come up with one out there enough and it's way more thrilling to go around every day fitting in with these people. It's all a mess, really. But the hair thing, it is funny what people assume based on haircuts. Around here, the most MOR kids have mohawks or spiky hair and those kids wouldn't get out of line stylistically for anything. But that's part of a cool-kid uniform, isn't it? Like Alternative Rock, once it stopped being remotely alternative, the safe haircut is the radical one. The radical haircut is a Beach Boys side part with Brylcreem. 
 
If you're cutting your hair to fit in to anything, you have a problem. If you like the way it looks, great! If you cut it and someone says "I liked it better before," then maybe they have a problem. If they assume you're more feminine/masculine/gayer/straighter then it's not you, it's them.

I do not have any idea what I'm talking about so I'm going to stop now (too late)  

 edieraye wrote: 
No, I didn't read it that way, I guess I worded my post too broadly (no pun intended), or with too much hyperbole.  I just saw her referring to the sentiments in that cited, prior article as some sort of prevailing undercurrent.

*added:  As an inverse, I've known "professional" women (lawyers, doctors, academics, etc.) who sometimes felt that they were not taken as seriously (by men and women) if they had long hair or wore their hair down.

 Proclivities wrote: 
My ex hated that I gradually got my hair cut shorter and shorter during our relationship, even though it went through changes that made it looked better short. But, he had some very strange ideas, and as I have said before, he didn't make me feel very attractive, regardless what length my hair was.

 Proclivities wrote: 

Good point, I was going to say something similar but you talk a lot purtier than me.

Often I find appearances to be deceiving...and, oddly, often redeeming. Of what? Yes. To that point.

 ptooey wrote: 
To me, what's irksome about that writer's piece is that she's basing most of her projections of the aesthetics of an entire gender on the idiotic ramblings of a misogynistic website.  When blogs plainly feed off each other it may be time to re-assess one's sources and motivations.  One may also want to stop considering “manospheres”,  game forums, and personal dating manifestos to be meaningful indicators of all of society.  I've never had a preference regarding women's hair length and have known very few men who have ever expressed a preference.