Hair-less-ness is not baldness

People are unanimously categorised by their hair volume at the time of writing. One cannot in actual sense discriminate people by their hair details. This is not necessarily a remark to downgrade people who are not having sufficient volume of hair, but the way people are categorised as having such scant amount of hair, for that hair is representing a conducive personal appearance for those who are dealing with them (as if the other parties do not have hair volume standard for themselves).

The above is not an exaggeration when we all are discussing about hair. Again it should not be exaggerated as a hair-raising article for those who are in media or even fashion industries. Financial and banking industries are still in confusion as to the optimum hair volume a particular person should maintain at any particular point of time : not to mention the colour (color), length and style therefore.

It is quite a near sensitive issue posed by many employers who are not comfortable when their staff are losing hair and  their level of confidence is at nadir when they chart their employees' level of satisfaction working in their companies. Office gossips and politics are generally intertwined and people are too sensitive to talk about someone's hairstyle in the office or in magazines or in public. It is advisable not to exaggerate when a few people who are in near-bald category are promoted to higher level positions. Again it is not advisable to exaggerate about hair in any place or in any way.

Some people would be sick for a few days when their hair volume and styles are pointed out in an informal discussion. The existence of hair expert centres, clinics or establishments to provide for hair treatment and growth facilities are to be seen as a positive undertaking by business ventures that are keen to counter the negative hair growth effects. It is imperative to mention that hair follicles do have their own nutrients supplied via blood vessels to the scalp. Does it mean that hair-less or near-bald people are giving their hair less nutrients for themselves and thus their hair?

Many people would ponder why majority of genius people do not have favourable hairstyles and again it is not good to exaggerate about hair in any place or in any way when some of them cover their hair to such an invisible way as cannot be seen by others. Be it genius or otherwise, those people are also uncomfortable to exaggerate about hair issue anywhere.

Be it as it may, people are gifted in many ways and forms. The imperfection does create harmonious environment when we do have respect to each other as human beings. Many people are sensitive even to a very small issue before them such as haircuts, hair scarves, turbans, hair colour (color), plaits, hairdo, hairdressing the quantum of which spreads from the public to first ladies and so forth as the continuum proceeds.

Standing in front of a mirror sheds an image of our personal appearances. Having less hair deteriorates motivation (as de-motivation does itself) of those who see them with less hair or no hair. Again, it is not a joke when someone talks about your hair, is it? Some people will accept with credible inclination to upgrade themselves, but to others, they would be in great despair as to quote that hair-less-ness is not baldness.