Talk:Blond/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

World Book Definition

Blond or Blonde is: 1. light in color 2. having yellow or light-brown hair, light eyes, and fair skin.

So according to WB, light brown hair is considered blond(e). Blond seems more of a category than a color, and under that category fall many different colors, including lighter shades of brown hair.

And yes, it does seem to be misconcieved as being only "yellow" in colour.

~~JP

anon post 1

Hey you guys. That woman in that pic at the bgottom of the page is totally hot....well it looks like she would be an absolute 12! Who is she? Can we see a picture of her face? Just so you guys know, 5% of all America is blond. 1 in 20 people. I would guess that of the white population, about 15%. Just so you guys know also,

74% of all natural blondes have what is described as dirty/honey/caramel/butternut/ash/sandy/sandy ash/auburn bronze/golden brown/buttery/ blond. Basically deeper shades of blond with more eumelanin.

About 10% have what is described as platinum/champagne/sand dune/silver/white/pale sunny/golden/Nordic/flaxen/ blond. Shades of blond with very little or no eumelanin and little phaemelanin.

About 15% have yellow/straw/ blond. With a 90/10 split of phaemelanin and eumelanin, respectively.

About 1% have strawberry blond hair a reddish shade of blond, usually attained from having one red headed parent and one blond parent, similar to auburn hair.

anon post 2

This article conveys the common misconception that blond hair is bright yellow. Actually the lighter hair can be colored naturally is "red," called strawberry blond in this article. Complete lack of pigmentation gives pale yellow, but that albinism, not blond.

Not correct, in my opinion.
Red hair = red hair, there is a special topic in wikipedia about what causes red hair. Blond hair is not red by itself (only when mixed with the "red hair" feature is it more or less "reddish").Blond hair is yellowish or whitish and not red.

wiktionary

Move to Wiktionary? -- Seth Ilys 19:56, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Maybe a copy could be put there, but I think that what could be said about blondness (i.e. what mammals it occurs in, traditional perception as most beautiful hair color in women in the West, stereotyping blond women as unintelligent, &c.) is enough to leave it here. Check out Red hair for an example of how this page could be expanded. -- Djinn112 00:31, Jan 27, 2004 (UTC)
Fair enough. More than enough reason for it to stay. :) -- Seth Ilys 04:45, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Australian Aboriginal Blondes

I have seen a great occurance of natural blondes in the Aboriginal population of Australia. How come this has not been addressed in the article? Blonde hair is not only a European trait. Picture of Blonde Aboriginal Children of Australia

--203.208.88.578 19:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I am not going to deny this phenomenon. However, I have two objections. 1) Your sample image is of very low quality, and the light hair colour could just as well be caused by the effect of the sunlight on the photograph. 2) These are children, and as we all know (or should be aware of) many children and younger people have light(er) hair (this is also true for Eastern Asia); hair colour (even in Scandinavia) often darkens considerably when adolescents and young adults get older, before or interwoven with an opposite effect of hair turning "grey" - so on one hand hair gets darker while at the same time (or somewhat later or even earlier) part of one's hair gets lighter (turns "grey"). This is nothing unusual and can be observed with almost every blond person, I suppose, some only get a darker shade of blond, others get completely dark brown or nearly black hair. It would be interesting to see better images of Aborigines and especially of older (adult) Aborigines.

'Blondus' vs 'BLONDVS'

Is there a 'standard' for writing Latin in Wikipedia? I doubt it.

In English, Anglicised Latin words are of course written in the modern manner, as are Latin quotations (very often mediaeval rather than classical or ancient) used in English. However, etymological studies within Romance languages are a quite different affair. I was referring to the ancient language known as Latin, so I wrote in the ancient language known as Latin. And, in that language, lower-case letters did not exist. If people want to use lower-case letters when discussing such etymologies, that is acceptable, but no changes need be made to the texts of those of us who are a little more pedantic on these matters.

If a Wikipedia policy contradicts this, it is wrong and I'll have to change it. However, I don't believe there is such a policy. BLVNDVS stays. — Chameleon My page/My talk 02:07, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I'm of the opinion it looks ugly, myself. That could originate from years of having studied Cicero and Virgil in lowercase, mind. However, I note that it is general Wikipedia practice to provide the (ahem) romanized forms of words in other languages, when quoted in etymological discussion. Logically this would result in something like
  • 'BLONDVS' blondus
but that looks like it came out of the Department of Redundancy Department. Really, we should be writing to the casual user. To paraphrase the Wikipedia Japanese MoS, anyone who knows enough to understand 'BLONDVS' can take care of themselves.
Also, and equally importantly, I have never seen (in dictionaries or in linguistics texts, treatises, or discussions) the style 'BLONDVS' used in discussions of etymological studies. Typically the romanized forms -- to be precise, the anglicized forms -- are used, even for the Greek from which the Latin originally came.
Besides, if I recall correctly, nine times out of ten they didn't bother writing the '-VS'. And that would be no help at all. --Aponar Kestrel (talk) 02:08, 2004 Aug 31 (UTC)

Marilyn Monroe - Redhead?

Can anyone actually find any reference that Marilyn Monroe was a redhead? (as per caption in photo)

I can only find information that she was a brunette!

Could we not use a picture of a natural blonde on this article? Bastie 17:35, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
BTW, folks might be interested to see her natural hair color. Bastie 21:27, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
And Ellen Rocche is not blonde either Bastie 11:50, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
The link has broken, so here's another picture. The caption is clearly incorrect, as she does not have "natural blonde hair". Bastie 06:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
If you go to Reelclassics.com they have a gallery of Marilyn Monroe pics and a in a few from her pre-stardom days her hair is brunette while in others it appears more auburn. My sister is a huge Marilyn fan and has many pics of her and I would say she's got enough red in her hair in some pics to say she was a redhead. She also has a book in which she talks about her mother and there's a quote along the lines of "my mother had a fiery temper to match her red hair" so redheads ran in her family. Where I'm from, the slighest amount of red in a person's hair doesn't make them a fiery redhead but a redhead nonetheless. Could also be the colour tinting of old photos that make it appear more red but either way, she wasn't a natural blonde. 154.20.12.109 07:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

USA American, Canadian and West Indian statistics?

Can anyone find them out?

Roman blondes

Weren't blonde wigs a mark of prostitution among Roman women?

If this is a joke you are a racist bastard.Cameron Nedland 00:40, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Take it easy, s/he might be having other information than you... Foant 13:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

That's actually true:

In ancient Rome, the law stated that prostitutes were to either dye their hair blonde or wear a blonde wig to separate themselves from the upstanding brunette female citizens of Rome. [1]

Etymology

The etymology section is misleading on the subject of gender: the predominant French system of gender simply doesn't exist in English, even among 'careful writers'. We wouldn't say a finger is 'long' but a hand is 'longue', for example, because neither word has any concept of gender attached to it. What is meant by gender in English is a semantic notion of gender, ie it's based on the meanings of nouns rather than the nouns themselves.

There are some people who use 'blond' to describe a man's hair, and 'blonde' to describe a woman's hair, and indeed this convention is currently used in the article. But it makes no sense at all to call this a careful emulation of French. In French, the phrase 'Ses cheveux sont blonds' could mean 'his hair is blond(e)' or 'her hair is blond(e)' - the adjective is inflected according to the noun it describes, which is 'hair', not the person who owns the hair. AFAIK this curious form of inflection doesn't exist at all in standard French, and by the looks of it it's an example of 'confusion' which arose when the word passed into English usage.

It's not so much confusion but adaptation to the English gender system, which is a natural one. — Chameleon 09:08, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Heraldry

Because it's totally unclear what meaning the baroque punctuation is supposed to convey, I removed the following obscure passage:

In heraldry, a "woman" is, almost without exception, young and blonde, though she is nevertheless somewhat redundantly blazoned crined or {i.e., "crined" (her hair [is the tincture to be named]) "or" [gold]}.

—Herbee 10:32, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)

I don't see your problem. — Chameleon 10:48, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

particularly Scandinavia?

"Researchers predict the last truly natural blonde will be born in Finland - the country with the highest proportion of blondes." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2284783.stm strictly speaking Finland is NOT part of Scandinavia, but one of the five Nordic Countries or, if you wish, it's part of Fennoscandia.

Can someone cite a source for this amusing tidbit:

Sweden, the largest and most populous of the Nordic countries, for example, has the highest percentage of both males and female who make use of hydrogen peroxide and related chemicals to change their natural hair colour to that of 'Nordic Blond/e'.

Bastie 14:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I would also like to see a source for the "blonds by country" statistics. Bastie 18:55, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Me to, until then I suggest removing the information. Foant 13:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Emotion and blondness

Some research suggests that fair hair, being characteristic of young children, evokes parent-like feelings of affection and protection in others.

What is the source for this? -- Beland 04:52, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Edit

I helped in the dissapearing blonde theory section, AND cited my sources. I suggest somebody started a list of natural blondes, please. (excuse my English, I don't think I phrased that last sentence correctly; English is not my first language as you can see). I say the whole article is factual, but I think there needs to be more added onto explaining the topic of 'dyed blonds' and different varieties of blonde. --4.253.123.30 22:06, 6 December 2005 (UTC)Insomniak

multiple edits 11 December 2005

I removed the unsorced section "Blondes all over the World". If a source can be found then it can be put back. I rewrote the "Theory of the Disappearing Blonds" section and moved the external links into it. The spelling in the article was a mixture of UK and US but now seems to be UK only. I don't have a US spell checker installed so if you want to change it back I'm not bothered. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:10, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

image revert war

there seems to be a revert war between having either the seemingly unnatural hair color on some "eurasian" woman vs some "brazillian" woman. i think both pictures stink, but until we find a better one we should stick to the brazillian one. other suggestions? Foant 20:50, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

You are right, they aren't representative for the article but the eurasian girl pict looks like a light brunette. Jfreyre

Why do you guys have such discrimination of old blond females? Just b/c she's not as sexy as that young blond doesn't make her less of a blond! (Oahc 22:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC))

Protection

The article has been protected due to the reversion war; please see the dispute resolution process. // Pathoschild 06:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I like the rule that, whenever possible, use an imagem from Commons. The relevant categories I could find there for candidade picures for this article are Portraits_of_men and Portraits_of_women. Among them, my favourites (in this order) are:
  1. Image:Ellen_Roche-saidshjds.jpg (picture of Ellen Roche (the Brazilian lady))
  2. Image:A_tattooed_lady.jpg (some surfist lady)
  3. Image:Sylvia_Saint_001.jpg (picture of Sylvia Saint, not pretty sure if she is really blond.)
The english teacher picture (Image:My_english_teacher,_Sue!.jpg) simply doesn't cut. The picuter is ugly (and I'm talking about the PICTURE, not the lady). --Abu Badali 13:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Whoever put that picture of Ellen Rocche, I totally support it!! If you want it, i have some photos where you can check out if she's a real blonde or not *cough* —This unsigned comment is by 200.222.3.3 (talk • contribs) .
Image number one is a fake blonde and so is image number three. And image number two is a woman with light BROWN hair, that highly disqualifies her as a blonde. Maybe we should just have people post good quality pictures of their own hair? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.109.200.197 (talk • contribs)

Photo- An Adult With Natural Blonde Hair

A Natural Blonde
A Natural Blonde

This women has natural blonde hair. She is English and both her parents have brown hair.

Out of her 4 grandparents: Two were natural blondes, one was red haired and one brown haired.

Although she has never used man made products to lighten her hair. Exposure to sunlight does intensify the colour.

Her hair thickness is very fine and bodily hair is very fair.

(80.0.172.114 22:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC))

Nice, I support this photo! :) Foant 15:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Too much light on the hair.

Newsflash, her hair IS light. It's not the light, her hair is just really shiny and light hair reflects light more. I support the picture, I think it's beautiful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.109.200.197 (talk • contribs)

Tagging for cleanup

This article needs some work. The "disappearing blonds" theory is not explained adequately and seems to have been written by someone who doesn't understand basic genetics (e.g. the meaning of "dominance" applied to genes).

Further, the origins of blondness needs serious improvement. Sources need to be cited, and other theories explained. In particular, AFAIK the currently accepted explanation for blondness -- and low melanin concentrations in human populations generally -- is the Vitamin D hypothesis. --Saforrest 18:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Improving the quality of article content is not what the cleanup tag is for. -- Stbalbach 18:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Also the origins of blond" is fully sourced and cited, and the disappearing blonds section is clearly explained to be a hoax. It seems like your only concern is that the article needs to be expanded, which covers about %99 of the articles on Wikipedia. -- Stbalbach 18:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

The theory of dissapearing blondes is not a hoax. It is entirley pheasible and relatable.-dbusboy 03:14, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Were you replying to me? I didn't say the theory was wrong, though I also think it is. I said the description of it in the article was was based on a misunderstanding of genetics. Claims like:
The dominant genes (brown hair, black hair, brown eyes) 'overthrow' the recessive genes or metaphorically, endanger them.
are based on a complete misunderstanding of genetics: in particular, the difference between carrying a gene and expressing it.
Right now, the gene for blondness has a high frequency in some human groups (e.g. Scandinavians) and a low frequency worldwide. With greater mixing of human groups, the number of actual blond people may decline, but the frequency of the blondness gene will not decline unless people carrying this gene have fewer kids than average. That might happen too, but I don't see what argument being made in the article. --Saforrest 19:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I think that they meant platinum or pale blonde, in which case it is possible due to the fact that blondes such as the one above have a type of albinism which is becoming rarer. Blondes with dark blonde hair,however(dirty blonde & such) will never dissapear.-Dbusboy 02:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

"Fair hair" versus "Blond hair"

I'm curious why all the image captions were changed from "blonde hair" to "fair hair". Since the article is called "blond", should we be shy about pointing out what blond means? Also "fair hair" is somewhat old-fashioned. -- Stbalbach 06:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I've always thought that "fair hair" was a somewhat more inclusive term that covers off the lightest shades of brown / 'dirty blond'. --Pondle 14:49, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

It might be a subjective/regional term what "fair hair" means. OED has no specific definition for "fair hair". Under "fair" they have: "Of complexion and hair: Light as opposed to dark." .. which is open to interpretation. I think since the article is called blond we are better off sticking with that term. The women in the pictures are clearly blond. -- Stbalbach 23:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly a police description of a suspect in my locality yesterday referred to a man with 'fair' as opposed to blond hair - this seems to be a commonplace in physical descriptions used by British police forces, especially in relation to men.--Pondle 23:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Percentage distribution

The below was moved out of the article because there is no source provided and they seem to keep changing every few days. If they are to be re-added, each and every statistic needs a direct source listed. If there are multiple sources for each statistic, than multiple sources and statistics should be listed.

--Stbalbach 02:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Note: : Some of these studies may not have been methodologically robust. Note: Wales, Ireland and Scotland also have relatively high proportions of red hair Maps of the distribution of light hair and eyes among Europeans can be viewed here

Stbalbach - I originally provided this information: the numbers come from a variety of sources cited in Carleton Coon's "Races of Europe". The book itself is online at a number of sites on the net - I included the link. While Coon's racial thesis is discredited, the studies themselves were just anthroposcopic surveys of hair colour, although they didn't all use the same definitions or methodology, as noted in the text.--Pondle 18:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, the problem is other wikipedians were editing the numbers - probably based on (uncited) sources (a good faith assumption). With something as non-scientific as this (what scientifically constitutes "blond"?), we might be better to cite external sources, but not actually list any percentage numbers directly. No two sources will ever agree. The best source would be a census, that reports what people say about themselves ie. "%50 of Germans call themselves blond according to xyz [extlink]". -- Stbalbach 05:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes I'm all for putting the link to Gene Expression back in, this was an excellent article, with maps, that also challenges the origin of 'blondness' thesis expressed in this entry. BTW this whole entry is very poor - why on earth are we using pictures of non-natural blond(e)s like Brad Pitt and Ellen Roche? I'll try to do a big rewrite if I get the time this week.--Pondle 14:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Which English

Which version of English is this article supposed to be in? I see that there are both spellings of colour/color spread throughout the article. The first sentence of the second pargraph has both and in general does not improve the article at all. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I say American because it's shorter.Cameron Nedland 01:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)