Hair and Nature?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by justlookin

I think it's subjective.

I've found that men who let their hair grow long (whatever long is) never 'fixes' it, it's long and it's flowing freely. On the other hand, women with long hair (whatever long is) will many times style their hair so that it's really no longer, in appearance, than women who have shorter (whatever shorter is) hair. For example, both women will expose the neck in their hair styles. So, what's the difference between the woman who has longish (whatever longish is) hair that is above the shoulders and the woman who styles her hair, though it be longer (whatever long is) so that it's appearance is the same as the woman with the shorter hair?

Here's a couple of examples, one with hair longer than the other but visually about the same.





In my subjective view, the woman's hair in the top image is more appealing. Is that nature telling me, instructing me, or is that just visually a personal preference? And would the bottom hair length be long on a man?

Back to the question of how short is short and how long is long. Or maybe the question should be what is short and what is long?

No. See definition of what Nature means in first post.