notes@ucbcad.UUCP (10/03/83)
#N:ucbesvax:25900001:000:881
ucbesvax!turner Oct 2 12:12:00 1983
Why do so many men see shorter hair as being necessarily less
attractive? I admit, long hair can be a pleasing spectacle, but the
amount of maintenance it seems to require makes me wonder if this isn't
just another example of a standard of beauty that derives from hobbling
women. (High heels are not the most extreme example; the Chinese
practiced foot-binding--their idea of "dainty" went to an immoral extreme.)
"Helpless is Beautiful" is, I hope, on its way out. Living in
one of the punk meccas of the world, I've had the odd experience of
feeling attracted to women with intense, sultry eyes, long legs, and--
1/4-inch hair! Now that's a little short for me, but you see my point:
get past your cultural programming, and there's *still* something there
that you can't pin down.
Somewhere in the Eye of the Great Beholder,
Michael Turner (ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner)ellis@flairvax.UUCP (Michael Ellis) (10/05/83)
Long hair is not necessarily as time consuming as some women would have you think. Admittedly, having long hair with that fako cosmo look DOES require the daily removal and re-application of many chemicals, not to mention all the machinery, and so on... The problem seems to be that most people believe that long hair has to look a certain kind of way. I'll never understand the lunacy of peer group pressure. My long hair takes only about 10 minutes out of my day. If it were 2 feet long, I don't know how much extra time it'd take, though (it's 1 foot at the longest parts now). BTW, women with skinheads and mohawks can be quite beautiful, too. There are so many ways people can look, it's too bad most people select from such a limited set of choices. -michael