Analyzing the mature hairline

[abcdefg]

"Do you not understand how someone could see YOUR post as flawed? Alright lets really think about this excluding preconceived perceptions or the coinage of the term "mature hairline". Do women get mature hairlines by middle age? no. Do some men never lose any hair? yes. Does every man get to a Norwood 7 if they have lost any hair in their life? no. So why is there this magic point along the line of male hair loss that people call the "mature hairline". From my point of view it just makes sense to call this a very mild form of hair loss because that is exactly what it is. Hair has been lost. I also think it is foolish to think that someone that is at this point may not go beyond this point at a later time as hairloss is unpredictable at this point minus observations of male family members. That said, it is true that they may not go beyond this point. What is the difference between that and someone that will or will not go past a Norwood 4, or a Norwood 5, 6? Is that just a very mature hairline? A very very mature hairline?"

I pretty much 100 percent agree with this. I am in this boat of a mature hairline with not much family history but I may as well treat it like male pattern baldness because its hair loss and I want to stay a Norwood 1 and have no way to know how much worse it could get. There is no way to regrow hair right now.

 

[abcdefg]

Also male pattern baldness has no physical effect on someone's health so why is it such a problem? Well it mainly changes how old you look and how other people perceive you and possibly just your own self confidence. So if you are a Norwood 0 and you do not care if you progress to a Norwood 2 then that means you look older which is the whole point of trying to stop male pattern baldness in the first place. I mean all a Norwood 7 does is make you look even more older then a Norwood 2 so if you dont care about one why about the farther along Norwood 7?

 

[Nene]

Damon's probably a Norwood 1.5 at worst. He's got thinning in the temple regions but no major recession.

Damon is well beyond 1.5, he's at least a 2 and might even be pushing 3, go look at some more recent photos.

http://www.india-server.com/news/matt-d ... 21864.html

 

[TheGrayMan2001]

I was at an event with a bunch of people today where half the people were males age 20-25\26. Almost every one of them had some kind of recession going on. I saw one guy who could not be older than 25 or 26, he was FULL bald. Almost a NW7, definitely past the point of an NW6. Not a single hair on his scalp. He didn't shave it either, though his hair is blonde and it was cut short.

By recession, I mean you know it isn't just a NW1\NW2 that's going to stay there forever. It was definitely some type of balding. But hardly anyone had a loss of density except for a couple of guys that had their hair grown out longer so it was less obvious.

 

[fodandahalf]

Damon's probably a Norwood 1.5 at worst. He's got thinning in the temple regions but no major recession.

Damon is well beyond 1.5, he's at least a 2 and might even be pushing 3, go look at some more recent photos.

http://www.india-server.com/news/matt-d ... 21864.html

I wouldn't say any worse than a norwood 2, and it's not a look that screams 'hair loss.' Just looks a little older than a few years ago (who'd have thunk?)

 

[Nene]

Damon's probably a Norwood 1.5 at worst. He's got thinning in the temple regions but no major recession.

Damon is well beyond 1.5, he's at least a 2 and might even be pushing 3, go look at some more recent photos.

http://www.india-server.com/news/matt-d ... 21864.html

I wouldn't say any worse than a norwood 2, and it's not a look that screams 'hair loss.' Just looks a little older than a few years ago (who'd of thunk?)

1. I didn't realize the comment was from two years ago. 2. I never said his look screams hair loss. 3. I stand by my statement that his hair looks like it is heading beyond Norwood 2 if it already isn't. 4. I don't appreciate your sarcasm Noob.

 

[fodandahalf]

And I don't appreciate the idea of somebody who uses the word 'noob' thinking he even deserves to keep his hair. Seriously, you must be at least 17 years old. And I'm guessing far older by your pessimism. All you claim is that you're better at hair loss than me, which I didn't even realise was a bonafide skill.

 

[Nene]

And I don't appreciate the idea of somebody who uses the word 'noob' thinking he even deserves to keep his hair. Seriously, you must be at least 17 years old. And I'm guessing far older by your pessimism. All you claim is that you're better at hair loss than me, which I didn't even realise was a bonafide skill.

I'm 27 and words like noob and troll are simply internet jargon, they have nothing to do with being young or old. If you frequent threads and forums often enough, it'll become part of your everyday lexicon regardless of your age. I'm not "better at hair loss" than you, since it's not a skill that one can be good at. The Norwood scale is by no means an exact measure of hair loss, what Norwood level a person has reached is open to interpretation, so if you think Matt Damon is a Norwood 2 thats fine, but you don't need to be a wise buy when someone expresses their opinion of something that is to a large extent subjective. That being said, I still think he's pushing Norwood 3 and it's not because I'm a pessimists, it's because it looks like beyond Norwood 2 to me.