new thread
I posted my thoughts on this in a reply to Treyn's recent post "Need Encouragement, but I think it's an important topic and deserves separate attention.
I know many of us, including myself, stumbled onto this board because we were searching for some support and words of encouragement; words to alleviate some fears and concerns, as well as bestow strength and courage in ourselves to grow our hair long in a short-haired society. Undoubtedly, this board has helped achieve this for me and I am very thankful to those that attend this board and the words that were written. I'd like to give some positive, and hopefully helpful, support back:
I have seen the "2-week" rule mentioned many times when individuals mentioned possibly cutting their hair for various reasons. It takes MONTHS and even YEARS to achieve long-haired goals, and for many of us this is a rocky path since we're confronted with many impediments along the way...close-minded employers, negative societal reactions, personal fears of not fitting in, self-doubts, etc. It only seems logical that where something takes so long to achieve and there has already been a large giving of one's own time, the test for taking that away should give a person ample time to think about throwing it away. If hair could grow long in a couple of weeks, or even a couple of months, I would say the 2-week rule is proportional. But reality is that long hair takes months and years to grow long, and I think the 2-week rule is disproportionate to the possible consequences of cutting.
In reality, I don't think people follow the 2-week rule; history speaks for itself. For example, InUtero and others that have succumbed to cutting their hair, admitted toying with the idea for more than two weeks. I myself, when I cut my hair years ago, thought about the idea for months. Back then, I had a couple of weeks where I thought I'd cut, then I had a couple of weeks where I thought I'd keep it, then I thought about cutting again, etc. This toying with the idea lasted a few months for me before I finally gave in. Even then I wasn't sure if I did the right thing after cutting, but I know I would have felt much worse had I cut it after only the first 2 weeks of thinking I should cut. It's simply not enough time to make a secured decision where you have devoted, or need to devote, so much time.
Therefore, I move that the 2-week rule be abolished and replaced with a 2-MONTH rule. This added time is not only more reasonable and realistic, but it also allows an individual that does cut his hair to feel more secure about his decision and forgiving of himself if he regrets it. I know I would feel much better cutting my hair after 2 months of thinking rather than 2 weeks, even if I regretted it afterwords because I'd know that I waited a full 2 months as opposed to a mere 2 weeks. In fact, it took me a couple of months of thinking and talking to people on this board for me just to decide to REGROW! haha!
We owe it to ourselves to think a bit longer about something that takes so long to achieve. I believe a "2 month" rule allows more support to be given, allows for a more secure decision, is more realistic, is more reasonable, is more proportionate, and is more in line with the goals of those on this board than the 2-week rule. Although I don't necessary believe in a bright-line rule for a waiting period in cutting hair (since circumstances vary for each of us), if I was to reply with a bright-line rule in response to a post requesting advice on possibly cutting their hair, I would advise waiting 2 months rather than 2 weeks.
Your Friend
I like the two year rule. I grow it for two years, then if I don't like it, I cut it. It's that simple. My last haircut was May 2001.
Yea, thats more like it. Long hair takes time and 6 months or a year are really just baby steps. Until you understand by experience what long-term hair growth really is you will always be subject to the type of hair management that you were brought up with (used to) which is to cut (not trim) every so often. Most of the people here in the early stages of hair growth seem to be sweating it month by month; top of ear, bottom of ear, etc. The bigger decisions with "long hair" are things like, do I stop halfway down my back or do I let it go below my butt...that takes years and the decision to keep the long hair is very firmly established by that point.
The zeal I see so often is a good start but you gotta have staying power! If you decided to grow it after seeing Lord of the Rings or because you want to be a rock star then it's a good bet that you will stop at a somewhat short length or cut if all off a few months down the road. Popular images and trends are very powerful but you must understand that and think beyond them because it will become a part of you as opposed to a passing fancy and you will do what it takes to have it. Your life will change and the way that people around you see you will change too. But doesn't that happen anyway?
Hair Religion has added additional logic and reason to this matter...
...it IS a long 'haul'....
...so *something* inspires you to grow but then WHAT keeps you going & growing?
...Takes commitment from somwhere DeeP inside you and...
...maybe for a reason you aren't even sure of...
...It's time to change the by-laws again!
The Rev
In reply to Fitmus's comment that we maybe should have a two-month rule instead of the two-week rule....
Remember, the two week rule has the part about "not wavering once". You don't cut unless you don't waver once for two solid weeks. MOST of the people we see on here who cut and regret later moan about having not followed the two WEEK thing. Yeah, they have the idea floating around for awhile, maybe even for a few months, but it comes and goes. Then one day while they've got the urge to cut, they go for it, but they sure haven't gone for the last two weeks solid feeling good about it.
In Treyn's case, he called his post "Need Encouragement" - that does not reveal an unwavering commitment at the moment he clicked the "send" button. In his post he said, "I am currently in the 'two week rule' about cutting my hair. I have been thinking about getting it cut..." Thinking about is not the same thing as have decided I want to. He went on, "If I do cut it ... which I probably won't hopefully ... This is where I need encouragement. TALK ME OUT OF IT GUYS!!!" Words like probably, hopefully, need encouragement, and talk me out of it, again, tell me the two week clock for Treyn had not began to run. He was not "in" the two week rule as he said; for him it had not begun.
Before lengthening the rule, we would want to consider the other side to the issue. If guys really do want to cut, why make them wait an unnecessarily long period of time? The whole idea of the rule is "how long after a guy leaves the situation Treyn was in behind, and he truly makes up his mind, does he need to wait to be sure?"
A couple of years ago, maybe longer, a guy posted that he had made an appointment to get his hair cut off two weeks hence, and that was his two week rule. Wrong! Until the two weeks of unwavering thought have run, you don't make appointments, you don't do nuthin' but wait. And if you have second thoughts even once, you mark the calendar and the two weeks starts all over again.
Now, has anyone gone for two solid weeks, not wavering once in the desire to cut, then cut and regretted it? If so, then maybe we need to talk about lengthening the rule. Our whole mantra on here is personal freedom though, and if a guy really wants to cut, we don't want to postpone the day for him unnecessarily. Just as guys decide to be longhairs, they also sometimes decide to have short hair! All we want is for them to be sure they've decided, due to the seeming irreversibility of the decision.
By the way, just 21 hours after Treyn made his first post, he recanted. His mane was not at risk at all, had he followed "the rule". :-)
....Hadn't thought about ALL of THAT!
Yes, very good point. I have already forgotten about cutting and placed myself back on the Hair High I was on from the start! PEACE!!!!
Thanks for the insight. I guess the "2 week rule" was just misleading on its face and needed that explanation. That makes much more sense now. Glad to have Treyn back! :)