My guess is,in the 60’s, it was seen as un-macho.
Also, most of the men who had long hair were against the war.
So it was also seen as unpatriotic.
Well=====Now we know that Jesus looked like Saddam Hussein.
In the late 60’s & early 70’s I wanted long hair and mom said, “no way, it’s ugly.” Then in the late 70’s I discovered punk and cropped my hair short and mom said, “you have such nice hair, why not keep it longer?”
Good times.
I expect that’s about how it’s been since human males discovered you could cut hair. I also think “shameful” is just parental control mechanism #672.
I think military “fashion” may have been some influence. I have seen some family photos from the thirties where the men have closely cropped hair on the back and sides but really long bangs or locks off the top going down the front. They would have probably looked “unconventional” or outdated twenty years later. Even the trendiest haircut of today is bound to go the way of the mullet.
There is no genetic (or real geographic) barrier between the “Middle East” (however you may define it) and most of Europe. Only the rise of Western Christianity and Islam really separated the two areas some 1400 years ago - in terms of human evolution - very recently.
To me, Syrians and Lebanese look like many Greeks and Italians. In fact, most Europeans are descended from “Middle Eastern” neolithic farmers. Of course the further north in Europe you go, the blonder people tend to be, but for every jet-black haired Irishman or Welshman there is a redheaded Iraqi or a blue-eyed Syrian.
Try this site: http://www.costumegallery.com/hairstyles.htm
Acidkid: were you referring to any of the articles on that site in particular? Thanks for the info!
It seems that shorter hair came into fashion because it indicated that one could visit the barber regularly and thus had a good job to afford frequent hair cuts.