abcdefg said:I never really understood why some hair loss, because its common, is just accepted even though its still hair loss. I would say any change in your amount of hair even temples is hair loss and is then some form of mild male pattern baldness whether it gets to Norwood 7 or not. Its not possible to predict and it impossible to get that hair back.
stableforehead said:abcdefg said:I never really understood why some hair loss, because its common, is just accepted even though its still hair loss. I would say any change in your amount of hair even temples is hair loss and is then some form of mild male pattern baldness whether it gets to Norwood 7 or not. Its not possible to predict and it impossible to get that hair back.
Whatever you want to call it, that mature hairline look (norwood 2) is more common than a juvenile hairline on adults, so will never be weird/ not accepted to anyone. Even at 18 I don't really like really low "perfect hairlines" because they make people look, well, juvenile. Norwood 2 is a great hairline.
abcdefg said:[To each his own. I think a juvenile hairline on an adult looks better then a Norwood 2 and a guy with a Norwood 2 still looks partially balding to me at least looks older which is kind of the point of fighting male pattern baldness in the first place I thought.
TheGrayMan2001 said:NW0 hairlines usually look kind of silly. Very few guys can pull it off well.
NW1 to NW2.5 hairlines, with thick density, look the best, varying from person to person and how their hair grows and is styled (or buzzed).
To answer the question, though, yes, most guys experience some recession at the hairline, but the non-balding men usually don't see enough to even realize it themselves.
Look at Bill Clinton now vs 20-30 years ago--his hairline has barely receded, if at all, but his hair has thinned a little compared to how thick it once was. He's still got a full head of hair, which is more than a lot of people around here can say though![]()