Do you guys ever expose your temples (NW2-NW3)???
- Thread starter Thickandthin
- Start date
mr.patches
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 33
is that considered a NW2?
This is a legit NW2
That guy is almost pushing NW3, imo, but then again I'm not the best judging norwoods, anyways. Case in point, slight hairline recession doesn't bother women, but I think women would notice on that guy, or say NW3 upwards.
- Reaction score
- 594
Those aren't NW2s, first guy is NW3, last guy is maybe 2.5. Dunno about the middle guy, a naturally super low hairline with dramatic temple recession is a weird look. I've had long hair since I was 17 (12-13 years now). I've always worn my hair down, I don't like pony tails because I've always had a wide, high and flat forehead. I don't comb over or anything, I just let my hair down and it naturally covers my temples unless it's a windy day. I hope my hair transplant will get me back to a solid 2, I want to be able to expose my temples, I want to get a man bun, or have one of those shaved sides, long top styles, or comb my hair to one side without looking ridiculous.
shookwun
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 6,093
doesn't matter where the hairline starts, all though the lower the better for masking the effects.
Do you not see how far back his temple has gone back on the last picture. He has a tiny bit of diffuse remaining, but it's pretty much a NW3 if you look passed the few hairs covering.
Do you not see how far back his temple has gone back on the last picture. He has a tiny bit of diffuse remaining, but it's pretty much a NW3 if you look passed the few hairs covering.
- Reaction score
- 594
If I had that second guys hair, I think I'd just have half the forelock removed and transplanted to my temples. Better a high hairline than a dramatic distance from the front to the temples, it's all about the shape of the hairline, not the position, it's why A pattern people generally look better as they bald.
- Reaction score
- 6,428
I wish I tried some other hairstyles pre-male pattern baldness. Sometimes I style my hair up to reveal the temples, and I'm like fuuark if I was still NW2 this would actually look good. NW3 the temple recession is too deep, and you're visibly balding.
Yeah this is very true. My whole family are natural norwood 2s. But we recede from the very front of hairline like an A. I dont really know how to characterize my dads recession. If you saw him on the street you wouldnt notice his hairloss. His hair is actually still in good shape for 62. But yeah I have seen pictures so I know. So his hairline has moved back probably 2-3 full inches but has kept the same shape. The shape is key. He also shaves the miniaturized hair at the very front which I think helps also because you dont see thinning. But yeah I wonder what a hairloss surgeon would classify his norwood as.
I am a pretty mild NW2, extremely mild and easy to cover up. The answer is I always cover up my temple if possible, and instinctively if the wind blows my hair out of place, I fix it with my hands.
But I don't really think receded temples look bad at all, lots of good pictures in this thread. I do prefer the NW1 look, but if I had a good haircut in mind that revealed my temples I would be up for it.
But I don't really think receded temples look bad at all, lots of good pictures in this thread. I do prefer the NW1 look, but if I had a good haircut in mind that revealed my temples I would be up for it.
shookwun
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 6,093
I have the dreadful U shape pattern. Where the temples just go straight south, and leave the forelock looking odd.
it's not elegant, and manageable like those people A, and M shape recession.
People who retain there temple points and have A, M shape recession aren't even considered balding for most people who have no idea. Not to mention it still looks decent, where as U shape looks like garbage.
it's not elegant, and manageable like those people A, and M shape recession.
People who retain there temple points and have A, M shape recession aren't even considered balding for most people who have no idea. Not to mention it still looks decent, where as U shape looks like garbage.
I have the dreadful U shape pattern. Where the temples just go straight south, and leave the forelock looking odd.
it's not elegant, and manageable like those people A, and M shape recession.
People who retain there temple points and have A, M shape recession aren't even considered balding for most people who have no idea. Not to mention it still looks decent, where as U shape looks like garbage.
Is the U type recession just more advanced V type recession or what? Seems like the majority of "mature hairline" people (stable NW2s) have the V type hairline. The U type seems inevitably to lead to a NW3
- Reaction score
- 594
I have the U shaped recession too. A very wide forelock, then a sudden drop off into my temples The temples aren't actually super deep but the shape is just horrendous. Wish I had an A pattern. Well if we're wishing here...