Rutger Hauer's hairline made me wonder since I've noticed it.
His temples receded deeply when he was young, yet he retained nearly the same hairline and thick hair until dying at 75.
I tried to google whether he was a wig wearer or not, but that search yielded no result, probably because of him being not that famous actor with by a large part B-movie career, so no one cared.
So was that an extreme example of mature hairline that extends to kinda NW3, or something other, like wig or transplant?
The first version came to once I encountered the W.R. Rassman's "Phenotype of normal hairline maturation" paper, which explains the mature hairline as one being coded by different genes than male pattern baldness, that's why it, for example, has larger and more frequent expression in women, but also coming due to androgens, so it's literally "androgenic alopecia", but different kind of one. The paper does not describe maturing as able to go so extremely as in Hauer's case, though, but one can only guess how far can genetic variances go.
His temples receded deeply when he was young, yet he retained nearly the same hairline and thick hair until dying at 75.
I tried to google whether he was a wig wearer or not, but that search yielded no result, probably because of him being not that famous actor with by a large part B-movie career, so no one cared.
So was that an extreme example of mature hairline that extends to kinda NW3, or something other, like wig or transplant?
The first version came to once I encountered the W.R. Rassman's "Phenotype of normal hairline maturation" paper, which explains the mature hairline as one being coded by different genes than male pattern baldness, that's why it, for example, has larger and more frequent expression in women, but also coming due to androgens, so it's literally "androgenic alopecia", but different kind of one. The paper does not describe maturing as able to go so extremely as in Hauer's case, though, but one can only guess how far can genetic variances go.
Last edited: