new thread
From all the postings here we all have our own definitions of 'long'.
For someone who always used to have a buzz, an inch is long. For someone who has always had waist length hair, shoulder length would be short.
What would be your own immediate and considered definitions of long?
My own view:
I would, objectively, say that long is long enogugh to tie back.
Agree. It felt like long hair the first time I tied it back. 2 1/2 years on I'm now going for Victor/Sergey length (i.e. wasit length and beyond). That IS long.
BTW I'm just starting to get over the paranoia I felt when no-one answered my earlier post about conditioner ingredients. Nobody loves me. Perhaps I should change my nickname to 'Fragile Ego' !!!
O...I missed your post completely!
Otherwise, I would have said something...
since I seem to alsways have something to say about everything...
I use Aussie MOIST conditioner. My hair feels great...
NO snarls...NO tangles...NO problems...
(but I also have to use L'Oreal MELTing Gel (as a sort of leave-on conditioner to control flyaways and to add a bit of moisture)...
BTW: I wash my hair every day...
I would definetly say that when I can get all my hair comfortably into a ponytail, then I will consider myself an accomplished longhair. That also for me defines being out of the awkward stage, but that's just my opinion. Peace and good question, by the way.
What would I define as long? When people tell me it is time for a
haircut. That varies depending on how anal the people are who
tell you to get a haircut.
When you decide how long your hair should be, ultimately it
is you who decides when it is the right length.
I don't consider hair long until it is mid-back. But I am an extremist.
Challa
I once had an HR manager tell me to get my hair cut when it was on my collar - she was an extremist... ;-)
Personally, it bothers me when someone makes tells someone who feels his hair is long - and likes it - that he doesn't have long hair because it isn't **** long.
Your hair is long when you feel it is.
Well, that depends. I think you're mixing up "the right length" with long. People should, and indeed do, have the right to have their hair at whatever length they want. What they consider to be the right length, is the right length for them, whether or not other people think it's too long, or too short.
For me though, i would generally say that there are deffinitions of length. I would agree that being able to tie back the majority of your hair, is a good mark. However, it's obviously possible that hair can look "long" before this.
Why would it bother you that someone could label a person's hair as not long? My hair is getting on for my shoulder-blades now, and i would consider it quite long. It's a bit longer now than alot of(most women, really) women tend to have their hair. Still, i wouldn't consider it especially long. If someone was to claim that my hair wasn't "long", that wouldn't really bother me... Sorry, but it just seems a bit weird.
Actually, that question is just as valid reversed...
Why would it bother you that someone else had a different definition of long? Until it's listed in the dictionary with a specific length, both definitions are equally valid.
But I'll be glad to answer your question: Anyone familiar with the Buzzboard knows "Military Father" who actually has the audacity to define "Haircut Rules" and think people should follow them (actually, the *REAL* mystery is the people who fawn on him as if they believe his malarky. You can get a real laugh out of following these people.) The same type of attitude comes can come from person A saying "Your hair isn't long until it meets *MY* definition." I consider both positions arrogant.
To me long is past the shoulder. Mid back.
But, I had hair that I sat on until the age of 13. Now THAT was long (and long ago)!
You should grow it that long again - it would look fabulous!
I would say anything passed the shoulders.