From: c150-bt@po.berkeley.edu (Manish Vij)
Subject: Long hair and closemindedness (Was looking for attention?)
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 02:36:05 GMT



      ~~~~~
    ///=== ^
   ((((    O
  )))))     >
  ((((
   ))))    -
  ((((


As a reasonably intelligent longish-haired motorcycle-riding electrical
engineering major/English minor desi-amrikan guy from rich white Saratoga/poor 
multicultural Berkeley, I think I can contribute to this thread.

My original question, about tolerance of others, was:

>>> Can you see why an IA kid may grow
>>> his hair long?  

There were a variety of responses. In reality, there are as many reasons why
people choose certain personal appearances as there are different human
beings.

This thread has gone a long way towards exposing the cultural absolutism,
ignorance of American culture, and intolerance that deserve an odious demise.

My personal reasons for growing long hair are as follows, and they are
not of course the same reasons why other men wear long hair.  I would
simply like to express an alternative viewpoint to you who see males with
long hair as some sort of freakish aberration.

Vijay wrote:

>>A need or desire to identify with a clique, perhaps.

True, I prefer being associated with English majors in ponytails than with
East Asian Elec Eng/Com Sci majors.  Conversations which take off
with discussions about literature tend to be snuffed out when EECS is
mentioned.

I love exploding stereotypes.  Last night I went to a garba / dandia raas,
a Gujarati cultural event, at Cal State Hayward.  I ran into several people
whom I hadn't seen for years.  They seemed shocked that the kid who grew
up a bookworm and a computer nerd is now an extroverted, long-haired
biker.

Of course, the long hair is just scalp-deep.  But it is so much fun
to be young and muscular, walk about slowly tanning in the warmth of the sun
without a shirt, grow and shave goatees, moustaches, and five-o'clock shadows, 
hang out in cafes with strange and interesting people, ride motorcycles,
ogle, dance.  This sensual, young lifestyle is ever the sweeter if you
have ever been an ugly duckling.

...To comprehend a nectar
   Requires sorest need. ...

And long hair is very, very sensual.

The American culture also contains deep hero myths which involve extreme
individualism and a fight against society at large.  This metastory translates
into a favorable impression of motorcyclists and men with long hair to the
young and the liberal, and into an unfavorable impression to the old and the
conservative. 

Shashi wrote:

>I used to think that people who grow/shape their hair in certain way are
doing that to get some attention from their peers.<

At my age, generally from those of the opposite gender ;-).

Shashi:

>But then I realized that many of them really choose it as a 'convinience'.
Those who grow them grow them beacause it saves on haircut money...<
  Sumitro:
>If you believe that "convenience" and saving money are the reasons,
then check out their clothes and shoes. <

True, convenience is not the major concern :) but it sure is a nice benefit.

Shashi:

>But I fail to see any other reason that an IA kid can have.

Lots of males in days past have grown long hair as a sign of virility.
The uncut "kesh" of Sikh men, the mane of Samson, and the Native American
warriors' locks projected power.

In other times, the elite in pre-Revolutionary America and in Britain wore
powdered, curly, long-haired wigs.  The average landowner wore a ponytail.

My point is that simply because your perspective does not allow you to view
a male as simultaneously being masculine and having long hair, it doesn't
mean your cultural perspective is the final word.

Sumitro:

>I don't mind kids trying to get
attention/appreciation by peers, adults also do that. But why not try
getting this attention by becoming athletic, good in studies, arts, etc,
instead of gimmicks like long hair, ear-rings, etc.<

Spoken like a true parent!  Bravo!  "Beta, why don't you study instead of
filling your head with such nonsense?"

Nobody claims that long hair and good grades are mutually exclusive (except
for my parents, but they'll come around in good time :-) ).  Nobody says
that being a good student is not to be strived for.

However, what irks me is that members of the II generation generally approach
the question from the negative standpoint: Why do you _have_ to do this evil, 
rather than Why do you do this action?  In other words, the implicit
assumption is that growing long hair, getting a stylish haircut, going dancing,
riding a motorcycle, dating, ad infinitum ... is an EVIL, and you are being
stubborn in not trying to FULFILL YOUR INFANTILE NEED FOR ATTENTION through
some means which is MORE SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE.

Look, folks, it's just not that big a deal at Berkeley.  Same with
earrings: neither long hair nor earrings are exactly "punk" or "deviant"
at UC Berkeley.  They are quite common.

Why?  Because Berkeley, along with most universities in general, is a much
more tolerant and diverse place than the world at large.

Sumitro:

>Ok, I concede. One gimmick is no better and no worse than other.
Still, I think "gimmicks" (or fashion) are usually to get +ve [positive]
attention. Contact Lenses, Plastic surgery, make-up, make people
attractive to others. But long hair? I know these are very subjective
things, but I have a feeling that guys with long hair/ear-rings
go for -ve [negative] attention (notoriety) maybe because some attention
(even -ve [negative]) is perhaps better to them than no attention.<

If I were to walk around in my hometown of Saratoga with a punk hairstyle,
black leather, and chains, I would be asking for attention.  If I were
to do that at UC Berkeley, I would still receive attention but not nearly
as much.

These standards are relative.  They are NOT fixed.  Prejudice against people
who look or dress differently simply based on those appearances is a form
of mental blinders.  Yes, I waited until after my job interview in San Jose
to grow long hair; in this economy, who needs to lower his chances of being
hired?  

Purna:

> as for the ear-rings....i have BOTH my ears pierced, as do my father
and grandfather before me.  originally, i got one pierced in college
on a bet (yes, we HAD been drinking).  anyway, i told my folks and
my father asked "only one?  go get the other one pierced also.  it's
bad luck to only have one pierced!".  before i got it done, many
people i knew tried "peer-pressure" to get me to NOT to get my ear
pierced.  go figure. <

Purna's experience shows how gender roles are also not absolute.  In
his case, he and his male relatives have adopted earrings in both ears,
which traditional American culture associates with femininity.  I know
several sailors who sport small gold earrings who would be glad
to beat the sh*t out of anyone calling them feminine.

Satyen:

>The question of what superficial attribute is considered attractive at 
any time is very much related to what images the media chooses to project.
Some years ago male media idols - rock stars, soap opera stars and the like,
suddenly started wearing their hair long - shoulder length  or longer.
Some women were successfully convinced that this represented an attractive 
attribute - not realizing that they were really attracted to who and what 
the men were, not the length of their hair - but that was all it took for 
the idea that it was 'cool' to have long hair for a man to take hold.<

It has become de rigeur for male rock stars to sport long locks.  Long hair
is certainly associated with virility in that context.  Long hair, like
earrings, are not necessarily feminine. 

I am also attracted to the concept of the androgynous writer, who is
able to escape his/her own world-view to truly understand the experiences
of others of a different gender and upbringing.  The concept that androgyny of
thinking is artistic freedom has been around for a long time.

Now, I'm as beer-guzzlin', baseball-watchin', and weight-liftin' as the
next American guy ;-).  I don't mean mental androgyny in the sense of
entirely excluding traditional gender roles.  I do mean that just as women's
lives should not be dictated by passive female roles, men should not be
forced to repress all emotion and talk like a WWF wrestler in order to be
considered "masculine."  We should feel free to discuss emotions and
feelings and to display love and affection for family members, rather than
fearing it weakens our position as a pillar of the family. 

Sumitro:

>While we are at it, how about extending the list from long hair to other
things "typically" associated with feminine appearance, eg; applying
lipsticks, wearing skirts/saris/(other "feminine" dresses)
   How would you feel about guys wearing "feminine" dresses?<

How would you feel about women wearing "masculine" suit jackets and pants?

Why do you react so viscerally to men with long hair that you feel
compelled to drag out cross-dressing to support you viewpoint?

If I were to interview for a job with you, or if I were dating your daughter
and were to meet you for the first time, would you kick me out of your
office or home upon first glance?

I feel no remorse for growing long hair.  In Berkeley it is considered
attractive by many, unattractive by some.  It's not a big chip on my shoulder.
It becomes that chip when I hear rants on the network or face job interviews
from people who view physical appearance only from their narrow perspective.

The REAL impetus for growing long hair was this:

Purna:

>it may not be convenience OR looking for attention, you know.  it is
possible that some people just look better with long hair! <

I simply think it looks better.  Yes, there are other reasons why I like it, 
which I've analyzed above.  And:

Amirthi:

>What are you implying?  That women would find them unattractive?
   Maybe we should take a poll...how many women here find guys with long
hair attractive?  Is it a turn-on or a turn-off?
   I don't have much of an opinion one way or the other...but most of the
guys I've met with long hair have been fairly attractive.<

:-)  It should come as no surprise to you that college students are interested
in the opposite sex, and that sexuality guides many choices of personal
appearance.  I can't say for conservative states like Texas, where most
males wear short-cropped hair, but in Berkeley at least, a significant
number of women find long-haired men attractive.  It's variously perceived as
different, stylish, hippie, individualist, or "English major."  Whatever.
I like long hair just as I prefer Mocha Almond Fudge over Vanilla ;-).

Fortunately, I'm not attacked by Pat Buchanan as being immoral or less
than a human being because of my preferences; although I cause his stiff
upper lip to quiver with disdain because my hair is long, I'm still basically
okay because I'm heterosexual.

All I ask for is tolerance and open-mindedness.  Is that too much to ask?

:->  I think for the past few thousand years, it has been.

From: hdeshma@eos.ncsu.edu (HARSHAVARDHAN  DESHMANE)

>i dont think, personal appearance should be anybody else's problem..it's a 
choice. Come to think of it, if everyone was dressed the same, it would
make a boring world.<

Amen, brother.  Amen.

Manish

                                          /-\o /-()  -- -  --   -
   Manish Vij    ::    '89 EX500          \_/ \\/ )  -- -    --
   mvij@ocf.berkeley.edu                       |/_\  -- -  --   - 
                                                \_/.  .  . . ........
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian