new thread
This is in reply to the thread 'Confused About Long Hair Article', which apparently no longer exists (that's what I was told when I tried to reply).
As Scooter already said, Wikipedia typifies the net as whole, i.e. any bozo can post anything without any guarantee of accuracy.
In addition, it sounds like the entry was written from a psychologist's point of view, and they tend to think that any deviation from the norm is bad.
What it should have said was that long hair is a possible indicator of someone who knows how to think for themself. The vast majority of people on this planet have few opinions of their own, but just predigested opinions that they got from someone else. Therefore, any harmless deviation from the norm is a positive thing, as it shows that one os not a blind follower. Of course, those in positions of power tend to oppose that PoV, as they often view blind obedience as positive, which of course it isn't in reality.
I did not see the Wikipedia article, but I must ask, "How many psychologist do you know?"
I am one. Psychologist are interested in the "norm," meaning average, only in so far as they are interested in population trends, something we do need to understands.
But psychologist are far more interested in "individual differences," and like Kinsey who studied wasps, and had a huge collection of specimens observed that no two are alike.
Anyone who advocates conformity is not a psychologist. Psychologist are descriptive and not prescriptive.
Alas, many people think they are an call themselves psychologist without qualifications.
Psychologist Caledonianj
Hey, I'm the one who wrote the article (most of it). Isn't that pretty much what it already says?
... "long hair typically signals a separation from structures and rules"
I added the word "person's" between "a" and "separation". The source is academic. If you have a problem with something on wikipedia, just drop a (friendly) note on the discussion page of the article that has a problem.