new thread
Has anyone opted to go 'natural' for a lengthy period of time by using water only to cleanse your hair? My hair doesn't start to look decent or fall into place until 3+ days without shampooing. I was never a fan of shampoo even with .5 inch hair and it's only bothering me more now that my hair is longer. Any positive or negative experiences to share about only using water?
I'll probably reduce my shampooing to once a week regardless.
Yeah i was thinking bout just using water to clense my hair but i dont know. Im sure back in the Bible times they didnt use shampoo or conditionar in there hair they just used water to cleanse the oil out. And Kurt Cobain never washed his hair at all. So its really up to you if you want to do that.
I have always wanted to, since using shampoo does moderate damage to hair by removing the oils, and since I like using as few of the capitalist-made, capitalist-distributed, unnatural, pollution-producing, trash-producing chemicals made these days as I can.
So, unless somebody can give me a good reason not to, I think I'd like to help others and myself by venturing into the unknown realm of shampoo-less washing. After about two weeks I'll tell you all how it goes. Besides, shampooing--depending on how much I use--turns those nice-looking waves at the end of my hair into the annoying-ash L's I described before!
Then you'd better stop washing your body with soap too.
What's so bad about capitalism? Don't like it? Move to cuba.
Cuba? Hah! I'm libertarian socialist, commonly known as anarchy (good site at infoshop.org), so the last thing I need is some crazed dictator telling me what to do.
I DO use soap, but very little of it, and only when I see an obvious need to. SOME soap IS necessary if you want to wash away bad odors, transmission fluid, or whatever other water-resistant problems you have so that you're socially acceptable; but you don't need shampoo to do any of that for your hair unless you're dipping your hair in transmission fluid or other staining water-resistant liquids on a regular basis. Seeing as how I'm not a michanic...
"I like using as few of the capitalist-made, capitalist-distributed, unnatural, pollution-producing, trash-producing chemicals made these days _as_I_can_."
BTW, I'd also like to know how shampooless washing has gone with others.
your some 15 year old punk ass kid that thinks its "cool" to rebel against the government, trying to fit in with the other "cool kids" that force themselves to hate the US government for no other fact than to be different
you have no real reason to hate the government, you still choose to live here, and your doing nothing to stop it
on top of all that, you're a hypocrite. you go against the US government system so much, yet you continue to use corporate americas products
so if you can stop, smoking ciggerates(phillip morris), eating most manufactured foods(kraft, etc.), not drive american cars(GM), stop using most appliances(GE), then stop being a 90's "nu-punk" little prick and dont take for granted what you have in this country
...if this WAS some sort of joke post, forgive the long rebuttal.
If it was for real, I'd like there not to be any arguments or insults in the future. This board seems peacefull, inteligent, and unserious, and I'd like not to have either of us ruin it.
My apologies go to anybody this might have bothered!
I have never in the entirety of my life received so much criticism and insult about so many things which didn't apply to me, and been so inaccurately described by someone who knew so little about me in ONE post. I would think this is some kind of joke post IF it didn't seem so genuinely insulting and if the ideas brought up in the post didn't seem so honest. For the sake of not letting an inaccurate insult stand against me, and only for that reason, I feel inclined to respond, but not in the insultive manner "john" has here, as that would only further degrade the anarchist movement.
I'm 18. I have NEVER cared about being "cool" or whatnot, which would explain why I never fit into any particular set of "cool kids." I don't hate the US government itself per se, but I do believe that an anarchist society would be far better for society, and for our planet. History proves it, and so I welcome you to do some research: Particularly on native American cultures, and on the Spanish revolution of 1936, in addition to many others.
I am anarchist because I want more liberty; I want to spread liberty; I want show the virtues of personal responsibility; I love the planet and the welfare of humans and animals alike; and because history shows that capitalism causes liberty, personal responsibility, human & animal welfare, and the planet as a whole to deteriorate because these values are placed below the capitalist value of profit.
Assumptions, assumptions...again, "hate" is not the word I'd use. I don't "hate" the US gov't, but I do see better options, and I see anarchism as one of them.
I'll take the liberty of assuming that you don't "hate" the US gov't since you were motivated to write this. Additionally, I'll assume that you are for free speech. Why do you think it's a bad thing to say that the US country could be improved by undoing the US government? Don't I have the right to suggest better alternatives to our government--without having to move out--like our forefathers have for 200+ years? Or do you think that anyone who does so should leave? If so, your current ideas are hypocritical, and so you should reexamine them.
Additionally, I don't have the liberty to move away yet, because many other countries are far less liberated than the US. That's WHY I'm anarchist: there is no anarchy these days, and so one must be created. I happen to feel that the best place to spread anarchist ideas is where liberty is valued most, here. Moving to another country would do nothing good for me, nothing good for liberty, nothing good for the planet, and would be futile as a political statement. In fact, the only ones who would likely benefit if anarchists just went away would be the top 10% of the population who owned more than half the wealth and did far more than half the damage to the planet and their fellow humans.
As for stopping it, I'm doing what I can as well as I can in the situations I'm in.
This part has SOME degree of truth, but it does nothing to show me as a hypocrite, and indeed shows me as being dedicated to my cause.
I DO use corporate products, but: 1.) I use far fewer corporate products than most others in my situation do. 2.) I encourage small business and low- or non-profit causes the best I can. 3.) I don't have an alternative to using many corporate things due to many circumstances. This is because our government controls what we use through taxes and stipends, and because non-capitalists means of living are made nearly impossible both here and world-wide. Capitalism is naturally imperialist, as seen in history, and tends to take over land and resources for capitalist purposes. Living off the land or in a commune is thus difficult or impossible. This is made worse because of how young I am. 4.) Due to these stated reasons I CAN be an anarchist despite my inability to be perfect in the process and 5.) there is a definite need for an anarchist movement.
Or maybe I can explain it another way. You are likely anti-slavery, and feel sorry for the native Americans killed in the spread of the US. You are likely also against slave-like work conditions. Does wearing clothing made from sweathouses make you a hypocrite if you have the option between wearing clothing or being nude, cold, and embarrassed? Does eating food made by underpaid workers so you don't starve make you a hypocrite if you want those workers to get paid more? If the only roads available to your workplace had once been worked on by slaves, would you be a slave-driver if you had the option between staying employed or becoming another welfare case and chose to stay employed? This land was SAVAGELY taken from natives and was ruthlessly deforested and polluted by the US government, as was the rest of the world by other imperialist countries. Does that make you a indigenous-person-killing, racist, deforesting imperialist, or can you still simultaneously be a citizen of some government and a humanitarian? I can be an anarchist while forced to live under capitalist circumstances and unable to escape them. In fact, when there is no means of escaping capitalism and big government, there HAS to be a movement which gives us other options. Many Abolitionists, for example, had to use slave-made goods.
Although I do want all drug laws to be taken away, I don't personally use any drugs. Not even aspirin. I TRY to eat as many raw and less-manufactured foods as possible, and to be vegetarian, but once again circumstances often forbid it. I actually do get anywhere I can by walking, biking, and car-pooling. I use as little electricity as I can, and when I do have to use it, I try to communalize it--that is, get as many people to benefit from the least electricity as possible. Same for water, gas, etc.
I am not a "punk," or anything of the sort. In fact, I don't really see much in punks, as they are often as capitalist as anyone else is, and because they scare unknowing people like you from the idea of anarchy. In fact, if you were to actually see me, you'd swear I was pretty refined, and even conservative, just because I don't spend money and time to look weird.
Finally, I have nothing against pride in one's land, but anybody who takes pride in being richer and more comfortable than others is just sad. That's why I'm trying to CHANGE the world, unlike the big apathetic portion of America. When Big Brother does everything for you, you tend to become apathetic or less-caring about world problems, or even local ones. I don't take for granted my ability to learn and change the world: I use it.
Finally, as an end note, I'd like to address your idea that all anarchists are weirdo punks. First, these are not anarchists at all, and second, most anarchists throughout history were just like everyone else except in one aspect--they were not afraid to trust the power of ordinary men and women to rule themselves, and believed in the human ability to think and act morally without being coerced by others.
In the future, I will not respond to any other post which has so little to do with hair and so much to do with insulting my beliefs.
Too...early...in...morning...need...coffee...Too...much...reading...hurts...eyes...
That's a lot of freakin' words. :) Sometimes you can say more with a concise statement than with a lengthy discussion. Just a comment.
1. What's so bad about capitallism?
2. Do you have a job? Pay bills/rent?
Well, I don't know what this has to do with hair, or what you would consider concise, so I'll try to sum up each of the answers to these questions in five sentances or so, and let your imagination and your own research elaborate upon the rest.
*It seems I wasn't as concise as I wanted to be, so I put a summary of my semi-concise statements at the bottom.*
1. Capitalism, as you'll note if you read enough about history, tends to do two things mainly to our planet: Capitalist societies always grow, even--or especially--during famines and plagues; and capitalist territory turns diverse ecosystems into farmland, roads, and buildings intended to serve only human needs, and the needs of the richest humans at that.
Either one of these things alone would be fine by me: American and African tribes spread without disrupting the ecosystems of the land, and small anarchies or communes disrupt only small areas of land, and don't tend to spread, while capitalism (both with bartering and currency exchange systems) always spreads and disrupts, as it even continues to today.
Capitalist societies tend to use slaves (even as they do today), and wealth is almost always concentrated so that less than 10% have half the wealth. When capitalist countries are rich, the richness is kept to a minority, and when they are poor they tend to spread, taking all in the way as slaves, or simply killing them if they resist.
Capitalists tend to spread and additionally tend to create slavelike labor because of "production for the sake of production;" they tend to create a lower class by putting the means of production and technological knowledge in the hands of the few; and tend to create bogus non-productive-labor forms of profit, such as real estate sales/rent and extra police/military to enforce bogus laws, by enforcing private ownership of land and resources using the state.
2. I'm gonna vent some heat here, sorry. Not at you, but at the whole capitalist attitude I recieve.
I don't have a job or bills yet, but that doesn't mean I can't have a political opinion which doesn't agree with yours for a few good reasons:
I have always been interested in the world around me, and always been looking for ways to make it better. I was actually NOT an anarchist untile a few months ago when I found reasons to doubt out big government, capitalist ways. I was interested in protecting our planet and creating a free world BEFORE I decided that anarchism was the philosophy which fit my beliefs best.
After researching a lot about our government, I found that our current government and capitalist economics caused more damage to earth and freedom than it helped. I'm assuming that for this question, you thought that if I didn't have a job and bills I was unqualified to be an anarchist due to inexperience with capitalist currency.
Well, I don't know why that matters, and here's why: I don't need to be poor, broke, and working slave wages to see how bad the capitalist society works because I can see it happening to my family and friends just fine. I don't need to be some South American peasant who is always hungry and poor to see capitalism do that either. And I don't have to live in the places and times of libertarian socialism to know that it may just be better, because we have history books to show us that there's more than just capitalism and big government as an option.
If all kids just came out of high school automatically believing what they're told just because they don't have jobs, then 1) schools wouldn't be doing their jobs and 2) Society would change for the better so slowly it wouldn't matter.
Additionally, I'm more in a justified position to support anarchism than some real estate sales person or some rich, spoiled "punk" is to support capitalism because I have to live with the bottom-of-the-barrel junk capitalism has dealt me and my friends and family.
Summary
1. Capitalism destroys the planet, distributes wealth very unequally, is imperialist, and decreases freedom for the majority.
2. No, but I don't need to be poor and work slave wages to see how much big government and capitalism suck, because studying history and seeing it suck for others is good enough for now. When I get a crappy job, or get a job which makes me rule over people with crappy jobs, I'll be sure to tell you how much more capitalism sucks then. If you are one of the elite, then you just won't understand until you go through it. Then, if you still think that the majority of the world should be poor and that people should rule one-another when libertarian socialism has been shown to work, you can be an honest capitalist.
Well, these are just my beliefs, research, and opinions, and I'm sure my ideas will develope over time just like anyone else's. In the mean time, I suggest that anyone who still thinks that history doesn't show libertarian socialism works--or is at least an option--should look up tribal history in America, the Spanish Civil War and Spanish Revolution era, and the success of modern anarchist communes in particular.
Sorry for the long answer! Hope the summary helped. :)
Jesse
I certainly hope to have a child like you one day. Very impressive! Research, critical thinking skills, create your own opinions, support, what more can anyone ask from you? Don't change man!
I haven't heard someone speak about true Anarchy with such knowledge in a long time. Well done, you seem to have an understanding of it.
People usually associate violence, destruction and rebellion with Anarchy but those only loosly fit varying ideas of "a"narchy but speak nothing of "A"narchy. Just like anything else there are many faces to a subject. Take religion for example; some believers can kill in the name of "god" but then other believers say that they are not acting for "god" because they killed.
If one researches Anarchy its easy to see how long-haired males, in a society that prefers short hair, have some (however remote) tendencies toward the true ideals of Anarchy.
Everybody has to find what works for them in a world that is not black and white. It helps to at least learn about other systems of thought before settling on what everyone else around you accepts.
wow
and writing such an unfounded, untolerant and insulting message is actually better?
even if what you wrote was true, it wouldn't be worse than your own attitude.
take care
-vincent
(oh, and i do wash my hair with only cold water most of the time. except in unusual circumstances, i shampoo only about 1-2 days a week. no problems so far, and it's been about a month. YMMV. good luck!)
Many have tried not using shampoo. The old oils will get
rancid & make your head itch. Hair oil does that believe it
or not.
Plus you may be opening the door to other scalp problems.
Keep it at least half clean...
Wow, sounds bad. Well, if washing without shampoo DOES do that, which seems to be agreed apon by most experienced longhaired men on this board, I'm gonna find out the hard way.
I do believe you, but I still like experimentation. If my little experiment doesn't work, it just creates even more solid evidence against not using shampoo, and I essentially lose nothing in the process--since I will end the experiment after the first time I get a serious comment about the condition of my hair, or when unusaul itching occurs. If it does work, then it goes to show that hair should be treated on an individual basis, and that it is indeed possible to be fine without shampoo.
So, even though I do trust the facts given to me, I see that it can only benifit me and others if I go ahead with doing it.
To make this little experiment as sound as possible, I should state the conditions of my experiment.
PROCESS: I will not use shampoo during the duration of the experiment unless my hair gets unusually dirty (i.e. getting some dirt or other unusual substance in my hair which cannot be washed off with water alone).
I will wash my hair with warm water every day, and then adjust according to how often I need to.
The experiment will end when my hair turns stinky or unusually itchy, or if it developes a serious problem.
Wish me luck.
It may get more oily at first when you go past your normal shampooing day.
You may want to add one day in between washings every so often (every 2 weeks to a month) at first. This will allow your scalp to get used to not replacing the oils according to your usual schedule.
n/t
A few years ago a guy posted what amounted to an manifesto about his idea for a religion related to hair that was against the use of shampoos,etc. and for adopting completely "natural"? practices when it comes to hair hygiene. This had nothing to do with my presence on the board and seemed a bit strange to be taken seriously.
I don't think we ever heard from him again after this thread about his revolutionary and idealistic brainstorm and if you go to look for his web page it is long gone.
Intentionally going without soap of some sort to really clean your hair doesn't appeal to most people in the modern world where it's much easier now and often necessary to be clean whenever possible.
There are reasons that soaps are so widely used and chemistry tells us why water can clean in some ways by itself but not in others. Though shampoos can affect hair in other ways than just cleaning it, other products are there to stop, reverse or just keep the bad effects from happening in the first place and designed to work in tandum with the "unnatural" shampoos. Sure they have chemicals of different sorts but so much of nature is governed by chemistry and it's chemicals that to try and divide the two completely doesn't make sense.
If your problem is a hair type that reacts to cleaning in a way that you don't like then "minimizing" shampoo use but not completely eliminating it will probably be the practical solution that you settle on. Myself I only use a little shampoo about twice a week and gently clean it more regularly with a light conditioner.
Hey, try it but don't feel bad if you decide that using poo isn't all that bad after all, NOBODY will hold it against you. ; )
But just remember that I'm not doing this as a religion, but as an experiment. I'll quit if it gets bad, and spread the good word if it's good. I have no intention of letting my hair "clean itself naturally," but instead it will be cleaned with water, like most things are cleaned. (I had a good laugh there.) If I look terrible, smell terrible, or itch terribly, I'll gladly revert to minimalizing shampoo, like you suggested and like I've almost always done. Thanks for the advice.
BTW, I liked your site, even if it hadn't been updated recently last time I looked.
Tried going for 5 days without shampooing or using conditioner and from day 3-4 my hair was fine, the natural oils produced by the scalp actually made it very manageable and held the style well.
By Day 5 it was looking pretty greasy and started to smell, so I washed... That was back whilst I lived in England, as I live in Tenerife now its much hotter, I can only really ever go max 3 days before I need to wash.
My hair is really "hugh grant" floppy after I shampoo... so I would really love to be able to go longer than a couple of days without people not wanting to sit neat me.
Is that how long you go without WASHING or SHAMPOOING. You kind of switched words in this paragraph here.
Sorry if that was unclear.
I once managed to go 5 days without shampooing or conditioning, (just rinsing,) but by the end of the 5 days my hair stank!
These days I live in a warmer climate and there is no way I can go more than 3 days between shampooing.
I'd say its do-able depending on where you live and how much you sweat, but I wouldn't recommend it!
How often you need to wash your hair and what with is different for every person.
It will depend on
- how much hair you have
- the type of hair you have
- how quickly it gets dirty from the environment
- how quickly it gets greasy/dirty from natural oils and sweat
I am luck in that I am out in the open air a lot, so this time of year, I only need to wash my hair once a week, after I have played soccer for an hour.
It is said that if you never wash your hair, it settls to a natural balance, and doesn't look dirty, but I bet it would smell.
O/T,but a true story. There was a man who lived about 20 miles from here who said he didn't believe in washing his body, and had not done so for 22 years. He looked OK from a distance, but everybody knew him as smelly Smith.
Some people have success by "washing" their hair using a silicone-free conditioner instead of shampoo. All conditioners have a mild surfactant ingredient to aid in rinsing, and it seems to be enough to cleanse without stripping or causing frizziness. I have been successful replacing shampoo with conditioner-only washing every other wash, but I still need shampoo on the alternate wash-days, or my scalp gets flaky; others I know have reported never having to use shampoo at all, they use conditioner-only every wash. So, depending on your results, maybe you want to try conditioner-only washing. The "silicone-free" stipulation is important to avoid build-up that doesn't wash out with conditioner.
I seldom use shampoo. It was really trashing my hair several years ago and I eased out of using it. Now I only use it if my hair acquires an odor. This only happens if it gets under my armpit or if I've been around something smelly like the sulfury geysers at Yellowstone Park. Plain old dirt, like you get from a dusty hiking trail, will usually just wash out with lots of water, but if you get a lot of dirt up there, you may need to shampoo, also.
Washing in water is an art. It takes time to gain the experience to judge what state of oiliness your scalp is in, and to know how much water, and how hot, to use. Some days you'll want to let some oil build up and you'll wash in cooler water - water too cold to stand under so you'll apply it with cupped hands. Other days you'll feel things are getting a bit gunky up there and you'll want to wash in warmer water to flush it all out. Your hair may get too dry if you do that every day though. All this depends on how oily your scalp is, and you'll learn to achieve balance with your oiliness level using different temperatures and quantities of water.
If you get warmer water on the ends of your hair (which will happen when you wash your body), this doesn't matter much, and it may even help. The fresh oil is up top, and if you lose the older oil in your tips, when you gently wash the top with cold water, that water will bring that fresher oil down to replenish your ends. This situation suggests you should wash your body first and keep your scalp area dry. Then wash your scalp in cooler water at the end of your shower.
As soon as your hair is wet enough that you feel water on your scalp, massage your scalp all over with your fingertips. This will help lift the oil off of your scalp and get it in your hair. You may want to apply a small amount more of water at this point to help the oil move away from your scalp.
You will always want to get your hair wet enough that it drips substantially from its ends. If you don't, the fresh oil up top will not be carried downward in your hair. You'll notice this when you comb because it will be tangly below the level of your ears instead of well-lubricated.
If you wash in water your hair may look greasy when it first dries. This is actually just a fine coat of oil on the surface of your strands and it is good for your hair. To change its greasy look, just stroke your hair a few times with your hands. This will "polish" it and it will look very clean and healthy after you do. You can't do that when it is still quite wet; wait until it is dry or mostly so.
Washing in water may need to be done more often (such as daily) than with some conditioners (which may outlast scalp oil when it comes to attractiveness). However, because water is so mild, washing daily is possible.
During the day your scalp will continue to make oil. This will from time to time cause a mild itch. You want this oil to get in your hair because your hair needs it and your scalp doesn't. A mild massage with your fingertips (not fingernails!) will move the oil into your hair and stop the itch.
As for results?
I have fine curly hair that needs to be washed every day to draw the curls back together. Washing in water is so mild on my hair that a daily wash became possible. When I shampooed often, my hair began to develop split ends about 10 inches away from my head, and it just wouldn't grow longer. It also was very scratchy to the touch beyond about four inches in length. Now my hair grows to terminal length (at 22 inches) and I have no split ends at all! It is also silky to the touch all the way to its ends.
From time to time I've asked close friends if my hair had an odor, and they've consistently assured me it does not.
As some in this thread suggested, it does take time for your scalp to adjust to not being shampooed. In my case, it also over time stopped having dandruff, something that had plagued me for life. I wore a black shirt all day yesterday and last night it didn't have a single flake on it.
Well, knowing that it's possible is pretty encouraging!
Oh, yeah, it's almost been a week since my last shampooing, and it seems to be going OK. No smells, hair looks great, very few itching problems...then again, this is only the beginning!
Glad it's going ok for you Jesse. Today is my 6th day as well and nothing bad has happened yet. It doesn't smell and the color is a lot richer. :)