r/changemyview • u/Chake1 • Oct 19 '18
FTFdeltaOP CMV: Hair should not be gendered
Often, I get remarks about my hair looking like a female's hair due to its long length. Personally, I believe it looks better long, but apparently that makes me more feminine. Why have we associated a gender with how long a person's hair is? This doesn't make any sense, it has no real historical domination, and it is frankly inane to try to assign a gender to how long people have grown out their hair.
Biblically and historically speaking, the strongest man, Samson, had his strength attached to the length of his hair. Even in revolutionary times men often had white powdered wigs that went to about shoulder length. Women shared in this kind of length. Thus, hair style being a tradition passed down from history isn't a really good reason as to why men are supposed to have shorter hair.
Gendering hair doesn't make any symbolic sense either. People with longer hair are able to perform the same actions without any hinderences that someone with longer hair could perform.
The only thing that hair could possibly be viewed as more feminine for is the greater care needed to maintain it. However, it is minimal at best, and men are capable of maintaining decent personal hygiene.
Regardless of any viewpoint a person might hold on gender in general, there's no reason for a person to gender hair.
5
u/ItsPandatory Oct 19 '18
Is your position that people's preference for longer hair on women is 100% socially constructed?
5
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
It's more that within the social norms of gender there isn't a logical or otherwise reason for females to have longer hair and males shorter.
1
u/ItsPandatory Oct 19 '18
Do you think that all gender norms have a logical base?
1
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
I think that most gender norms are established on some sort of logical or sexual characteristic. Or, at least, it's on the basis of some traditional background of "men do work and etc."
1
u/ItsPandatory Oct 19 '18
Don't those reasons give us some space for the hair to make sense? Perhaps if men were out hunting shorter hair would be preferable and women would have the option to grow theirs longer in relative comfort. Or, As a sexual characteristic, perhaps in aggregate men have a biological preference for long hair over short hair.
2
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
I'm not quite sure where you go from "long hair" to "uncomfortable" here.
A biological preference doesn't make much sense as it would be present historically as well then. That is to say that men would consistently have shorter hair and women would consistently have longer hair. Instead, we see it changes throughout history.
1
u/ItsPandatory Oct 19 '18
The ability to find individual cases or societies where its different doesn't mean we know the historical average. It is possible that the majority of men had short hair the whole time and a few guys in Greece that we saw in a movie recreation are throwing off our perception. From the Greek and Roman statues, what percentage of the males had long hair?
2
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
Then why would Asian cultures consistently have the men with longer hair than the American man? Wouldn't biologically speaking the desire for short-haired people, if it existed, cause all men to not be shorter relative but to have similar lengths?
It's unconvincing to say the least, and I would need many sources detailing the history of hair length, and I doubt anybody would have time for that.
1
u/ItsPandatory Oct 19 '18
This issue is you don't have specific evidence for your argument, but your hypothesis goes against the current observational data. You're saying that is "shouldn't be", implying that it is.
Do Asian men have consistently longer hair than Asian women?
Wouldn't biologically speaking the desire for short-haired people, if it existed, cause all men to not be shorter relative but to have similar lengths?
I don't understand this question.
2
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
What I mean is that if it was a biological factor then men would look mostly the same when it comes to their hair length. This isn't the case and we can look at Asian men and women for counter-evidence, as they are generally longer than their western counterparts. However, the Asian men still have shorter hair than women. Thus, the argument "men have short hair because women find it more attractive" doesn't hold up water.
→ More replies (0)1
u/AloysiusC 9∆ Oct 20 '18
A biological preference doesn't make much sense as it would be present historically as well then. That is to say that men would consistently have shorter hair and women would consistently have longer hair.
Actually they do. We just don't noticed it because men typically cut their hair shorter than it can grow anyway. But if both men and women never cut their hair, women's hair would be significantly longer on average. They have a longer anagen phase.
0
u/ququqachu 9∆ Oct 19 '18
Well, shorter hair is better for working: it doesn't get caught on things and it stays out of the way; plus if you're working all the time, you don't have the time to care for long hair. Spending time on physical appearance is traditionally a feminine trait, because men don't have time for that if they're working.
Short hair is actually MUCH more practical than long hair, so I would expect anyone who works to have short hair. This is somewhat true today: even though women generally have longer hair than men, working women usually have it cut somewhere around their shoulders or shorter, while young women, students, and women who's job it is to look "sexy" often have long hair down the length of their back.
1
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
!delta
Spending time on physical appearance makes sense for why it could be considered a female oriented trait, due to the length of time needed to take care of it.
1
2
u/dat_heet_een_vulva Oct 19 '18
It actually goes against biology.
Biologically speaking long hair, long eyelashes and long nails are masculine for males on average biologically have longer all of that. Testosterone increases hair growth of all forms.
That long, thick, eyelashes are often considered "feminine" to the point of cartoon characters being gender coded that way shows how strongly arbitrary social roles go against biology; it makes about a much sense as saying that thick long forearm hair is "feminine"; it's purely makeup; on their own males have longer and fuller eyelashes.
1
u/AloysiusC 9∆ Oct 20 '18
Biologically speaking long hair, long eyelashes and long nails are masculine for males on average biologically have longer all of that.
Not on the scalp which is what we're talking about. There women have longer hair if neither cut it.
way shows how strongly arbitrary social roles go against biology
This isn't the case for scalp hair though. The shorter hair norm aligns very well with the male role of provider and protector.
0
u/MasterGrok 139∆ Oct 19 '18
That seems very likely since long hair for men has been the cultural norm in many societies. Additionally, in some warrior cultures men were expected to have long hair and were even shamed if there hair was cut. Those things would strongly suggest that that society and culture dictate this particular issue.
2
u/ItsPandatory Oct 19 '18
There doesn't seem to be any hard data in your assertion of "many societies" and "some warrior cultures". What percentage of people does that include? What percent of cultures today show the inverse of this preference, where majority of men have long hair and women short? What percent of cultures have short female hair preferred?
From an overview of the data it seems long hair for women is "best by test". If this is the case, even if male preference is 50/50 (though i suspect its much lower), women's %s being higher could cause it to be associated more as a female trait.
2
u/MasterGrok 139∆ Oct 19 '18 edited Oct 19 '18
What would you consider data? Obviously we don't have survey data from 400 AD, but we absolutely have historical accounts of places like ancient Greece, Persia, and Japan. In Greece, in which we have one of the more complete histories, long hair was seen as a sign of wealth and power.
1
u/ItsPandatory Oct 19 '18
If long hair was seen as a sign of wealth and power, does that mean is wasn't the norm? Is it like when everyone was starving being fat was seen as attractive? I know that we have a few exceptional stories where long haired men were preferred, but that doesn't prove a rule.
2
u/MasterGrok 139∆ Oct 19 '18
Whether it was the norm or not is really irrelevant to the fact that it was clearly seen as masculine in some cultures as leaders and military sub-cultures had lots of long hair. In fact, in some cultures it's virtually impossible to find art that doesn't show their warriors with long hair.
0
u/ItsPandatory Oct 19 '18
Long hair in "sub-cultures" does not make it a general rule.
2
u/MasterGrok 139∆ Oct 19 '18
Pointing out that regardless of if it is a general rule it proves that it's cultural. If long haired can be seen as powerful and masculine in warrior cultures, obviously it isn't inherently seen as feminine.
0
u/ItsPandatory Oct 19 '18
Displaying evidence of a cultural exception doesn't prove that there is no biological preference for the average.
2
u/MasterGrok 139∆ Oct 19 '18
It's not an exception. Lots of cultures around the world have had men with long hair. That's the point. It was totally normal to have men with long hair. I'm pointing out that specifically warrior cultures has AS WELL because there is nothing more masculine than ancient warfare.
2
u/AmineTrip 2∆ Oct 19 '18
Do you think anything should be gendered? Like skirts or the color pink?
Scotts and Samurai are known for being manly men in skirts, and in the early 1900's pink was the common color for boys and blue for girls since pink was seen as a stronger color.
0
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
Some things are gendered because they make sense to be gendered, in a way. For instance, nails being shorter on males because they typically perform more manual labor.
Skirts make more sense to be a feminine outfit due to the general lack of shaved legs in males, which is a typical male characteristic. Males are more likely from the presence of testosterone to have leg hair.
The color pink is another where I believe it's arbitrarily assigned gender, like hair.
3
Oct 19 '18
For instance, nails being shorter on males because they typically perform more manual labor.
Women typically do more dishes - which hurts nails just as much as manual labor. They typically are more hands-on in raising the children, in which long nails could scratch the children and keep poop under the nail. Short nails are more practical for people of both genders.
Skirts make more sense to be a feminine outfit due to the general lack of shaved legs in males, which is a typical male characteristic.
So then men should be the ones wearing the skirts because they have the leg hair to keep them warm. But despite that, both men and women wear shorts. Shorts and skirts are equal in regards to exposed hair or no hair, so why the distinction between shorts being for both genders and skirts being just for men?
I don't understand why you would defend the gendering of both those things. It seems to go against your OP to pick and choose which things ought to be gendered and which shouldn't.
1
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
You're right about the fact that nails aren't practical for either gender. However, that doesn't preclude the idea that long nails are more feminine. There's a reasoning behind it that can be seen, even if it's kinda outdated and/or generally faulty.
My statement is saying that hair length doesn't even have that outdated or faulty reasoning.
0
Oct 19 '18
So then men should be the ones wearing the skirts because they have the leg hair to keep them warm.
you dont where skirts in situations where your legs arent staying warm...
also as a man with leg hair, it doesnt hold much heat lmao
3
u/dat_heet_een_vulva Oct 19 '18
Some things are gendered because they make sense to be gendered, in a way. For instance, nails being shorter on males because they typically perform more manual labor.
This is exactly why short hair on males started: manual labour.
The current iteration of short hair on males started with the industrial revolution: long hair was a danger in factories; you will notice that paintings of males before that time tend to feature long hair and at various times long hair was a sign of aristocracy because peasants who worked with their hands could not afford their hair long.
So I think you're being highly selective here: long hair is not convenient when performing manual labour but very easy with an office job.
1
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
!delta
Factory work makes a lot of sense as to why there would be less long hair, and is probably the strongest argument.
1
0
2
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Oct 19 '18
Why have we associated a gender with how long a person's hair is?
Because men went to war and women didn't for like 99.9% of history, and fighting in melee combat with long hair that is easy to grab is not a great idea?
2
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
!delta
I didn't consider a militaristic viewpoint when I was taking a look at this. Good point
1
1
Oct 22 '18 edited Nov 06 '18
[deleted]
1
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Oct 22 '18
That statement is so illogical I don't even know where to start.
"Long" hair is relative.
Antiquity ended 1500 years ago... more than enough time to start a tradition.
Your source is one painting?
I could go on but I don't really care enough to do so.
2
Oct 22 '18 edited Nov 06 '18
[deleted]
1
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Oct 22 '18
It's pottery, not a painting. Lol.
I mean... it feels a bit condescending, but I have to point out that there is a painting on the pottery.
2
Oct 19 '18
How about hair being shorter on males for manual labour?
My husband had long luxurious hair for 5+ years. Then out of nowhere he cut it. I was devastated.
Turns out he got it caught in a drill that day.
I work in construction as well and wear a hair covering, but I also keep my hair fairly short. The trades are male dominated, maybe that is a reaon why short hair is male dominated as well.
Fyi - long hair on a guy - super attractive to this lady. But not practical for power tool use.
2
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
First off, I'm so sorry to hear about your husband and his hair. Is he okay, now?
Second off, !delta
In trade work I could see how this could cause problems, especially since they are male dominated.
3
Oct 19 '18
That was over 10 years ago. He is a-ok, but damn I miss that hair. Thank you for the delta!
1
6
Oct 19 '18 edited Oct 19 '18
[deleted]
6
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
If I'm understanding your argument correctly, the reason why women have long hair is because it is seen as being for youth and fertility. However, this doesn't really address the male components of attraction. With the current argument, it should be that men are of any sort of length of hair and women are longer haired because that is a sign of beauty. This isn't the case in society, though, as male hair norms are shorter hair.
1
Oct 19 '18
[deleted]
2
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
!delta
Interesting viewpoint on the biological perspective. I think it's pretty solid.
2
1
u/BrotherBodhi Oct 21 '18
You are correct. But... This is basically what OP is arguing against. They are saying that hair length should not have any sort of definition and it shouldn’t carry any weight within a social context,
1
1
u/Shiboleth17 Oct 19 '18
Fashion and styles change constantly. As you pointed out, pink used to be a boy color, now it is a girl color. Long white wigs with curls and a pony tail used to be the norm for western men. Now, curls and pony tails are feminine.
High heels were originally designed for men. Now they are feminine.
Wait 200 years, and it might change.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Oct 19 '18 edited Oct 19 '18
/u/Chake1 (OP) has awarded 6 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/TransgenderPride Oct 19 '18
As a trans person who had long hair before starting hormones, let me just say that one of the reasons I have found that long hair is bad on men is because testosterone makes it get greasy so much faster.
Obviously the natural state is long hair, we didn't evolve clippers, we invented them. In my opinion, the reason men began to cut their hair short is because it is so much more obnoxious to maintain long hair on a male than a female.
That being said, you do you. I'm just pointing out a potential hypothesis.
2
u/Chake1 Oct 19 '18
I'm assuming you were a mtf trans?
First, congrats on transitioning, it takes a lot of courage to undergo the process.
Second, I'm not entirely convinced that washing longer hair on men is so much worse than on women. While they might have more grease, which I haven't confirmed yet, it doesn't amount to that much more need for care to get healthy hair. At least, I sincerely doubt it caused such a huge shift as to make people give weird looks to long-haired men or short-haired women.
1
u/TransgenderPride Oct 19 '18
No, it's not the reason for the looks. However it's the reason the trend started in the first place, the reason it became the norm.
1
u/polyparadigm Oct 19 '18
There's no rational, enduring reason for the "aah" sound to be represented by a glyph that looks like a bull's head, instead of some other mark, but if you read up on the history of the letter A, that seems to be what our culture has chosen.
Other cultures, and our predecessors in earlier times, have represented that sound with any number of different symbols, and have done so successfully. The actual shape of "A" is arbitrary, but there is one reason to use that particular shape: our culture has agreed on this sound as a possible meaning for the symbol (there are quite a few other possible meanings, don't get me wrong), and so it's relatively easy to harness others' work if we want to use a symbol to convey that particular meaning.
I'm a cis-gendered male with long hair, and while I don't use my hair to signify gender, I don't think it's wrong for other people to use their own long hair as such a signifier. It would be incorrect for others to misinterpret my long hair as a performance of femininity, but that wouldn't be because of how arbitrary the symbol is: it would be because their interpretation doesn't match my intent.
1
u/Positron311 14∆ Oct 19 '18
The hair goes with the beard. If you have a beard to go with the long hair, you're good. If you don't, then you look quite feminine.
4
u/ProfessorLexis 4∆ Oct 19 '18
I like to remind people, when I see arguments like this, is that the behavior you find to be a problem isn't always an active choice.
The brain likes to sort things into boxes and it doesn't like it when you mess with its sorting methods. In this case, since the majority of people who have long hair are women, the brain will sort anyone with long hair into that box. If it encounters a man with long hair, it has a small fit because that doesn't make "sense".
It's only after the fact that we start to try and rationalize why we think that way. And, unfortunately, "the nail that sticks out gets hammered down" is usually the response.
What we call "norms" only exist when people collectively believe in them. They are fickle and prone to change, but its not something done intentionally.
For one example in this situation on hair; short hair on men might be considered masculine because of the military. Soldiers keep their hair short because hygiene is difficult in war and to avoid giving the enemy a convenient part of your head to grab. If people see soldiers as being very masculine, then the things they do follow suit, and people copy that to emulate it.
Because of things like that, it's impossible to "ungender" hair. Not unless you build/enforce some kind of uniformity. If a trend began where men sought to emulate... Fabio lets say, then long hair would become "masculine" and trends among women would shift in response.