its a black void

[Agustin Araujo]

Hair transplant are optimal for those who are NW3 and under who have a thick caliber of hair to give the illusion of density. But in Fred's place his only style will ever be a buzzcut to give some what of a frame to his face. Even then the hairline is to high, wispy, and dried out due to DHT. Not only that but he isn't on finasteride, dutasteride or RU. The hair itself will further minitiruzies over time creating again, a diffused look. Like I said numerous amounts of times to others, hair systems are the only option. When it comes to having an actual full head of hair, style and framing the face it's the only option.

You obviously want FredTheBelgian's hair transplant to fail. He's not even at 100% full results and continues to improve, so your hopes of his failure are at zero. His donor hair is resistant to DHT, so it's not going to miniaturize. He has DPA not DUPA.

Hair systems aren't the only option that exists. Do your research thoroughly before making a statement like that.

 

[swingline747]

There is a scene in Keen Eddie, where some powerful gangster is about to be apprehended. And he might do something bad. Instead he just smiles and says "Everything is as should be".

Both for you, and Exodus, I really feel that the fault is not with our parents for creating bald children, but it is the fault of society for discriminating against baldites, and not allowing us the same coverup options as women.

Fred has several times the grit of normal man. So do I. To claim we are inferior to NW2 men is just idiotic.

So, you have to decide, are we inferior, or is the world stupid for *portraying* us as inferior?

In terms of evolution, survival of the fittest and strong survive, yes we are inferior. A peacock born with no tail, an Elk with no antlers, and african lion with no mane would all be considered inferior animals and not seen by females as genetically fit to reproduce with unless they literally were the BIGGEST, STRONGEST or had the MOST of something else all other males couldnt not take away.
We are animals so by natures terms we are in fact inferior unless we meet those secondary criteria.


http://youtu.be/WaNtcEMXR5Y?t=17m50s

 

[shookwun]

You obviously want FredTheBelgian's hair transplant to fail. He's not even at 100% full results and continues to improve, so your hopes of his failure are at zero. His donor hair is resistant to DHT, so it's not going to miniaturize. He has DPA not DUPA.

Hair systems aren't the only option that exists. Do your research thoroughly before making a statement like that.

God, you really are one of the dumber individuals on this forum.:laugh:

I'm a realist, and understand the gravity of a hair transplant because I underwent one. Yourself on other hand, are a baldite-cuckold for Fred's milk


Donor area is never 100% resistant and thins out over time, especially for early age hair suffers. Ever see a NW7, most have wispy, and very thin donor areas. Not being on medication (finasteride) makes the likelyhood of this happening even more likely.

 

[shookwun]

doesn't matter if it's DUPA, DPA or even male pattern baldness. Hair on the sides and back isn't 100% resistant.


Without propecia you will further diffuse, and have patches all over your head:uglylol:

 

[swingline747]

God, you really are one of the dumber individuals on this forum.:laugh:

I'm a realist, and understand the gravity of a hair transplant because I underwent one. Yourself on other hand, are a baldite-cuckold for Fred's milk


Donor area is never 100% resistant and thins out over time, especially for early age hair suffers. Ever see a NW7, most have wispy, and very thin donor areas. Not being on medication (finasteride) makes the likelyhood of this happening even more likely.


View attachment 29642

Not actually true. My pops and Gramps on that side were/are both N7 with practically untouched donor hair.

As everything in life, a transplant or system is a case by case basis for every individual. There IS NO 100% fix. Maybe to you a hair transplant looks fake, or YOURS looks fake, there are others that looks great. Maybe hair systems always look great but they need constant redoing because of the required maintenance to keep up the look. You will need your existing hair constantly shaped to not look awkward. And god forbid you get into a brawl or do something where it gets tugged..... bye bye lie.

Then again some people are not good candidates for a hair transplant so a system might be their only viable option.

 

[shookwun]

My hair transplant would be considered is a success. In my eyes it is, and isn't due to the fact that the coverage is their, but the density isn't.

What's the point in restoring your hair if it will always have a see through appearance, and the only viable option is a side part. Hair transplants will never give you the freedom of styling it straight up, rather having the hair grow over one another, is the only option for illusion of density.

Those medical adhesives wont get torn off from what I read, the scalp would literally have to come off with it. Worst case scenario, hair's are pulled and the mesh is exposed.

 

[Agustin Araujo]

God, you really are one of the dumber individuals on this forum.:laugh:

I'm a realist, and understand the gravity of a hair transplant because I underwent one. Yourself on other hand, are a baldite-cuckold for Fred's milk


Donor area is never 100% resistant and thins out over time, especially for early age hair suffers. Ever see a NW7, most have wispy, and very thin donor areas. Not being on medication (finasteride) makes the likelyhood of this happening even more likely.


View attachment 29642

In the picture, the man suffers from DUPA.

Of course it doesn't matter if it's DUPA, DPA or even male pattern baldness because according to your knowledge, everyone is wrong but you. :moon: I'm done with you, bye. :finger2:

 

[CaptainForehead]

In terms of evolution, survival of the fittest and strong survive, yes we are inferior. A peacock born with no tail, an Elk with no antlers, and african lion with no mane would all be considered inferior animals and not seen by females as genetically fit to reproduce with unless they literally were the BIGGEST, STRONGEST or had the MOST of something else all other males couldnt not take away.
We are animals so by natures terms we are in fact inferior unless we meet those secondary criteria.


http://youtu.be/WaNtcEMXR5Y?t=17m50s

You think all the NW2's are the fittest?
Look around you. Do the NW2 people around you have the same drive as you? Are as smart as you? Have the same resolve as you?

Many NW6s are indeed unfit (in the evolutionary sense). But so are many NW2s.

Finally, also observe that prehistorically, shaving did not exist. Take a bald NW6 with a full beard, and a long haired NW2 full beard, and the aesthetic gap narrows significantly.

Baldites are here. By definition our bald ancestors must have been fit to reproduce.

 

[rayl]

Thank god Usain Bolt is nw3 and his father is slick nw6. We can make it.

 

[Exodus2011]

You think all the NW2's are the fittest?
Look around you. Do the NW2 people around you have the same drive as you? Are as smart as you? Have the same resolve as you?

Many NW6s are indeed unfit (in the evolutionary sense). But so are many NW2s.

Finally, also observe that prehistorically, shaving did not exist. Take a bald NW6 with a full beard, and a long haired NW2 full beard, and the aesthetic gap narrows significantly.

Baldites are here. By definition our bald ancestors must have been fit to reproduce.

true but on average a norwood 2 is more attractive than a norwood 6.

but i know what you are talking about. i've wondered if there is some kind of compensating mechanism for baldness. like it does seem bald men are smarter than men with hair. it would make sense.

we are uglier, but smarter. so we can use the smarts to gain resources and pussy as a result to reproduce and pass on the baldness.

 

[shookwun]

The only resource that compensates for being unattractive is having lot's of money. 100,000 +

 

[bilboswaggins]

Thank god Usain Bolt is nw3 and his father is slick nw6. We can make it.

usain bolt is not even 30
dw he will get there in time

 

[CaptainForehead]

true but on average a norwood 2 is more attractive than a norwood 6.

If you are male, being average does not cut it in the evolutionary struggle.

 

[uncomfortable man]

If you are male, being average does not cut it in the evolutionary struggle.

And being bald puts you underneath that average. Therin lies the point.

 

[swingline747]

You think all the NW2's are the fittest?
Look around you. Do the NW2 people around you have the same drive as you? Are as smart as you? Have the same resolve as you?

Many NW6s are indeed unfit (in the evolutionary sense). But so are many NW2s.

Finally, also observe that prehistorically, shaving did not exist. Take a bald NW6 with a full beard, and a long haired NW2 full beard, and the aesthetic gap narrows significantly.

Baldites are here. By definition our bald ancestors must have been fit to reproduce.

By natures standpoints you are supposed to breed in your prime, for humans that is roughly 20's MAYBE early 30's. This is also because now our life expectancy is beyond 34. Then we were supposed to breed around 14.
Even with our extended life expectancy procreation beyond 40 is still considered dangerous for the woman and fetus.
In your 20's and 30's looks are the main thing people will acknowledge before anything to have sex. Yes there are plenty of unfit NW2. But you are not comparing apples to apples. Take two men exactly alike except hair and the man with hair gets the girl. by whittling down variables until you are the prime example does not prove your point.

Also going WAY back baldness WAS a sign of health because IF you lived long enough to go bald it meant you had a strong life expectancy. Today we dont usually die of a cold.

 

[Quantum Cat]

Baldness must have had some kind of evolutionary advantage otherwise it would have been consigned to the natural selection dustbin. The increase exposure to Vitamin D from the sun is one theory.

But the main thing is to remember that what cave-women found attractive in a mate was probably very different to what today's materialistic-obsessed women find attractive. 50,000 years ago the ability to hunt and kill a woolly mammoth or protect her from a sabre-toothed tiger was more desirable than how many Louis Vuitton handbags he could afford to buy


- - - Updated - - -

Like I said, women only want one of three things from men:

1) Looks
2) Money
3) Status

I'd delete looks off that list. Only 15 year old girls want Justin Bieber. For any older women financial ability is by far the top priority. Hence why most women would pick a rich ugly guy over a very handsome average-income guy anyday.

I still had to pay for half of my hair transplant, because my father didn't want to contribute.

"Not my fault" he said.

He was a slick NW5 at 24 years old and decided to have a kid, but no, no responsibility here.

did your Dad approve or disapprove of you getting the hair transplant at all?



- - - Updated - - -

Iv'e watched documentaries, and the the trannies aren't the worst part about it all. it's the desperate stereotypical white men we all imagine that go there. Bald, over weight, and generally unattractive males all going their as awkward men out for tail. if it wasn't for the women openly approaching men, these same men would sit by the bar and going to home to their hand, no different then in a western country. Being able to capitalize on a women's economic struggle is a bald mans paradise.

here in the UK you don't need to go abroad to find desperate poor women from Ukraine, Thailand or anywhere else. They all come here thanks to the EU's open-door immigration policy.

I suppose it's the only plus :woot:

 

[swingline747]

Baldness must have had some kind of evolutionary advantage otherwise it would have been consigned to the natural selection dustbin. The increase exposure to Vitamin D from the sun is one theory.

But the main thing is to remember that what cave-women found attractive in a mate was probably very different to what today's materialistic-obsessed women find attractive. 50,000 years ago the ability to hunt and kill a woolly mammoth or protect her from a sabre-toothed tiger was more desirable than how many Louis Vuitton handbags he could afford to buy


Dont forget WAY back women were "property" and the only thing stopping you from really having the woman you want was another bigger guy taking her. Not agreeing with this society by any means just saying. Again tho my baldness equivalent to extended age still stands. Its not so much baldness ever had an evolutionary standpoint nor does it still. Dont forget for every bald guy there is also a sub par woman and eventually both will settle with each other as the pinnacle of their life's possibilities and mate.


- - - Updated - - -





I'd delete looks off that list. Only 15 year old girls want Justin Bieber. For any older women financial ability is by far the top priority. Hence why most women would pick a rich ugly guy over a very handsome average-income guy anyday.


Not true. Don't forget once the woman gets in there (if she is hot) and knocked up shes going to just fool around on you with a hot guy, divorce you and take half your stuff. You are a stepping stone to HER goals. CAN NOT understand why ANY rich guy ever gets married or has kids. Clooney did it right.



did your Dad approve or disapprove of you getting the hair transplant at all?

I did.... um I mean... cough

- - - Updated - - -




here in the UK you don't need to go abroad to find desperate poor women from Ukraine, Thailand or anywhere else. They all come here thanks to the EU's open-door immigration policy.

PLUS FREE HIGHER EDUCATION! You would think all the ficking illegal Mexicans and Hondurans would be ripping the roofs off their homes to float THERE! Seriously I wish we could say that the majority of Hispanic illegals coming into the US were attractive but most of them come from the poor sections and look like tiny broad, neck-less mole people.
WHY is the US still considered the best nation in the world? WE SUCK!

I suppose it's the only plus :woot:

responses above

 

[Exodus2011]

Baldness must have had some kind of evolutionary advantage otherwise it would have been consigned to the natural selection dustbin. The increase exposure to Vitamin D from the sun is one theory.

But the main thing is to remember that what cave-women found attractive in a mate was probably very different to what today's materialistic-obsessed women find attractive. 50,000 years ago the ability to hunt and kill a woolly mammoth or protect her from a sabre-toothed tiger was more desirable than how many Louis Vuitton handbags he could afford to buy


- - - Updated - - -





I'd delete looks off that list. Only 15 year old girls want Justin Bieber. For any older women financial ability is by far the top priority. Hence why most women would pick a rich ugly guy over a very handsome average-income guy anyday.






did your Dad approve or disapprove of you getting the hair transplant at all?



- - - Updated - - -




here in the UK you don't need to go abroad to find desperate poor women from Ukraine, Thailand or anywhere else. They all come here thanks to the EU's open-door immigration policy.

I suppose it's the only plus :woot:

genetics is a very complex science though and its not as simple as "every trait we have nowadays has to have an evolutionary advantage"

it could just be connected to something else, as in the case with gay guys. http://www.crossdreamers.com/2010/02/evolutionary-advantages-of-feminine-men.html. there is the source.

the main quote off it- "We show that psychologically masculine females and feminine men are (a) more likely to be nonheterosexual but (b), when heterosexual, have more opposite-sex sexual partners. With statistical modelling of the twin data, we show that both these relationships are partly due to pleiotropic [more than one effect] genetic influences common to each trait."

think of a gay guy vs a handsome player with just the right amount of femininity. think one direction, russel brand, justin bieber, mark levine, etc.

traits can have more than one gene tied to it. like with allergies i remember reading how it is connected to disease resistance. go ahead and google the source on that, im too lazy haha.

not to mention it could just be chance that baldness is stilll around. maybe back in the day it didnt matter as much or guys just found a way to compensate for it.

i mean the compensation thing is still around. every now and then i see a fit, tall, or muscular bald guy with an attractive girlfriend.

also girls of course could carry the baldness gene and you wouldn't know it unless you saw their family

and even THEN you can go bald when everyone in your (living) family hasn't gone bald.

we are just scratching the surface of genetics, so we cant assume to know everything about it. i don't even know THAT much about it, just the basics

 

[Quantum Cat]

@ Quantum Cat: My father didn't really approve of the hair transplant. He spoke against it many times, saying it wouldn't solve any of my problems.

Yes he said that, comfortably under his hair piece.

sounds like you've developed a far more mature and sensible attitude to male pattern baldness than he ever did. You've even accepted it which he still hasn't at his age, still hiding under wigs. your mother must know his secret by now. maybe he's jealous that this type of hair transplant wasn't available when he was young.



- - - Updated - - -

Dont forget WAY back women were "property" and the only thing stopping you from really having the woman you want was another bigger guy taking her. Not agreeing with this society by any means just saying. Again tho my baldness equivalent to extended age still stands. Its not so much baldness ever had an evolutionary standpoint nor does it still. Dont forget for every bald guy there is also a sub par woman and eventually both will settle with each other as the pinnacle of their life's possibilities and mate.

true, my point really was that for most of human history baldness was probably irrelevant in terms of what type of woman a man could get (or if he could get one at all!), it's only in the last century - or even less, the last 50 years - that baldness has become a deal-breaker, our society has become looks-obsessed, and women have become picky.


- - - Updated - - -

PLUS FREE HIGHER EDUCATION! You would think all the ficking illegal Mexicans and Hondurans would be ripping the roofs off their homes to float THERE! Seriously I wish we could say that the majority of Hispanic illegals coming into the US were attractive but most of them come from the poor sections and look like tiny broad, neck-less mole people.
WHY is the US still considered the best nation in the world? WE SUCK!

I heard one pro-immigration politician trying to persuade us that Eastern European women were all attractive as a bonus. He obviously hasn't seen some of the ones living around my area! :laugh:

 

[swingline747]

sounds like you've developed a far more mature and sensible attitude to male pattern baldness than he ever did. You've even accepted it which he still hasn't at his age, still hiding under wigs. your mother must know his secret by now. maybe he's jealous that this type of hair transplant wasn't available when he was young.



- - - Updated - - -





true, my point really was that for most of human history baldness was probably irrelevant in terms of what type of woman a man could get (or if he could get one at all!), it's only in the last century - or even less, the last 50 years - that baldness has become a deal-breaker, our society has become looks-obsessed, and women have become picky.


- - - Updated - - -





I heard one pro-immigration politician trying to persuade us that Eastern European women were all attractive as a bonus. He obviously hasn't seen some of the ones living around my area! :laugh:

HOT

Humans have ALWAYS been obsessed with looks. Dont be fooled. I have stated this many times. Look at ancient drawings of heroes and kings. They believe many Egyptian pharaohs were actually pretty ugly

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/10/digital-autopsy-shows-king-tut-was-really-ugly.html

Yet in all imaging of him he is depicted quite the opposite.

The Cesar haircut was actually used by many of them to cover their own baldness.

Knights were usually thick haired man beauties.

JESUS was a thick haired good looking guy! Ever see a bald Jesus?

Do not be fooled into thinking this is something new. Even religions need lookers to get people on board.

There was no reason why men who were bald were still able to get women and breed because again even then there were subpar women! Otherwise ugly people would have been bred out centuries ago, and again most breeding was done before the age baldness could really set in just because our preteen would have been considered middle aged.