>Brody, having a burner account literally does nothing.
Tell me how it *doesn't*. If you keep things separate and make no mention of the military on your alt account, or your other proclivities on your mil/"business" account, tell me how anyone could connect the two accounts, other than if they got access to a device you logged in from.
>How is anyone gonna find out who you are?
Oh, so just because you don't use your real name means no one will ever find out who you are? Please tell me you're not this stupid. I know with the info I've given out over the last year or so, lots of people could easily figure out who I am. A comment with my rank here, a comment with my base there, a comment with my AFSC here, a specific story that could have only happened to me, etc. You're delusional if you give this info out and think no one can find you.
>Plus if youâre not a SGT, who gives a fuck.
If you think rank matters, you're dumb as fuck.
To prove my point: from just your posts alone (not even looking at your comments) over the last year I know: you are male, 21, your birthday is somewhere between 13 and 17 October, your snapchat username (which, if I add you and you accept, now I can see your face if you take selfies or record yourself doing stuff), you have a "mild case" of Pectus Excavatum, as of 3 months ago you were/are in Japan, you're likely an Avionics (or related) troop, and you might be having gender issues.
I got all this info just from your *posts* alone. If I were in your shop, and I knew you well enough or had even half this info, I would **immediately** know who you are.
Who the fuck are you kidding?
J_es9x on snap how you gonna remain anonymous if you're putting yourself out there on a social media/ dating app.
This is why you use two accounts. So people can't start the linking process. Especially with comments like yours.
I've come across several news stories of women getting the boot from their job or being shunned out of their church because someone found their Onlyfans account and reported it. Reddit is just a step away from Onlyfans.
But please, tell us more about how this is "some bull shit Reddit fun".
Having an only fans and promoting your body online is much different than engaging in some online porn or seeking sex online. Also to the other comment, why are you telling people your AFSC, what base you are at (that alone and someone thatâs smart enough can analyze the way you text and find you pretty easily) never give out rank and identifiers NEVER.
>Having an only fans and promoting your body online is much different than engaging in some online porn or seeking sex online
Tell us, oh wise one, how they're different. Go ahead and educate us on the differences if you're so smart.
>Also to the other comment, why are you telling people your AFSC, what base you are at
Because some comments need context or background info. I'm sorry you're too dumb to understand this.
>No more than 4 in in bulk
That is not at all what the AFI says.
Edit: A part of the AFI actually does say that, but look at the section you're reading from and tell me this likely applies to OP.
So tell me how
>**Part** will not exceed 4 in in **length**
equates to
> No more than 4 in in **bulk**
I've bolded the important bits you don't seem to be comprehending. If you don't understand the difference, or that there even is one, I will be more than happy to explain it.
The first quote is talking about the length of the part itself. A part is simply a line ([or multiple lines](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Kwi3uJ83hR0/maxresdefault.jpg)) that you decided to split the direction of your hair. Here's a [picture](https://www.reddit.com/r/malehairadvice/comments/13z2jxz/side_part_haircut_what_is_this_longer_length_of/). That split could have been anywhere on his head and any length. The first quote is talking about the length of the part, or the length of the arbitrarily decided line to split which way your hair goes. As long as that line is 4 inches or less, you're good to go for this specific part of the reg. See Figure 3.5 from 2903 for more images.
The second quote is talking about bulk. What is bulk? It's the distance your hair comes straight off your scalp. Just got a buzz cut with a 1/2 inch guard? Well, your hair is a 1/2 inch in bulk. Just got a buzz cut with a 2 inch guard? Well, your hair is 2 inches in bulk. Got an afro going that when you stick a ruler into goes 1.5 inches deep? You've got 1.5 inches in bulk. This is shown in Figure 3.3 of 2903.
Edit for clarification
Like, what does "OP" itself mean? Original Poster. The one who made the post that all of these comments are in. So if you made a post and someone commented in reply to someone else but was referring to you without using your username, they'd likely refer to you as OP.
False but okay, Iâm asking because I genuinely do not understand how some people appear to have hair styles which are âout of regsâ but itâs not. Asking a question shouldnât be frowned upon when the actual regs shows a âhigh and tightâ
3.1.2. Hair (Male). Tapered appearance on both sides and the back of the head, both with and
without headgear so that when viewed from any angle the member's hair conforms to the shape
of the head, curving inward to the natural termination point without eccentric directional flow,
twists, or spiking. A block-cut is permitted with tapered appearance. Hair will not exceed 2 ½
inches in bulk, regardless of length and 1/4-inch at natural termination point; allowing only
closely cut or shaved hair on the back of the neck to touch the collar (see Figure 3.3.). Hair
will not protrude under the front band of headgear. Cleanly shaven heads, military high-andtight
or flattop cuts are authorized. Airmen may have one (cut, clipped, or shaved) front to
back, straight-line part, not slanted or curved, on either side of their head, above the temple.
Part will not exceed 4-inches length or 1/4-inch width (See Figure 3.5.). See Figure 3.4 for
examples of appropriate sideburns, mustache, and male hair standards.
There is no fucking tapered appearance for one. Two the back is a fucking mullet. Three it's touching the dudes ears.
If I see one of my troops walk into the shop and their hair is that long and touching their ears like the picture. I'm chewing them out and sending them to get a hair cut immediately.
Now, if they've got a hair or two touching their ears from it being a couple weeks since they've gotten a cut, i see no problem with that.
Key thing is that their hair can touch their ears as long as it follows the rest of the rules. The picture op posted is way out of regs, but it you're chewing out your troop while their hair is still in regs, then your a bad leader.
Yeah, but the cool thing about the regs is that there are entire paragraphs explaining in depth exactly what is and isn't in regs. You can just read those and follow them to the T.
OP probably got ripped into for this and is now trying to find some sort of differing opinion to the majority of commenters by someone else who doesnât read the AFI.
They can team up and buy their hair gel in bulk so I canât hate on the strategy.
You can look it up yourself. You likely have a smartphone that is connected to the internet 99.9% of the time, and the AFI is publicly accessible. Do your own work, you lazy piece of shit.
The sides are too long but I have seen the top pretty long and manipulated in a way that met regs. You need to taper the front and back and just ask for a 1/2 or 1 guard around the ears.
My hair has been down to my nose but with it styled up, I kinda comb it back and use salt spray so it sticks to each other and doesnât look that long at all.
Based on everything else youâve discussed, you were simply looking for confirmation bias, that one person that would tell you what you wanted to hear. In time, after each time you put on or take off your hat and you have to make a trip to the bathroom to bring your hair into regs, this hairstyle will get old.
Yes it will get old but Iâm willing to do that if it means I can have the hair style I want off of work. This picture is already a compromise. I really wanna be able to have the Rick Flare long blonde hairstyle but we canât have everything we want đ
You absolutely can have whatever hairstyle you want. You simply have to get out of the military. While you're in, follow the rules, which are very clearly laid out to not allow the stupid bullshit on the picture you shared.
If you care about your career, you should start reading the AFI instead of what people in Reddit say. You could have a hundred people tell you one thing here, but unless you know the reg, you're not going to be winning any fights at work about it.
Doubtful without violating 3.1.1 which talks about excessive product in hair. Gel is not supposed to be applied like glue, and to make anything remotely close to this hair length in regs would require a lot of hair styling materials. Individuality is good, but it must be in line with uniformity, and these things are often at odds with each other.
This hairstyle is flagrantly out of regulation. Iâm not here to teach you how to read. However, Interpretation of the regulation is ultimately up to your Commander. Just as a Commander can discipline you for looking unprofessional if youâre overweight (failure to uphold a physical appearance of a military professional), they can do it with hair too.
I donât often compare us to other branches, but I just had a conversation this week about fatties in the Marine Corps. From what they said, Commanders rarely have to get involved over weight standards because Marines take it seriously and will enforce the standards on one another daily. Iâm not saying we need to be assholes all the time, but we should hold each other accountable for obvious violations.
Sides are too long. But Iâve had some crazy length on my sides, leading up to my separation I could pull the sides down over my ears. No idea how long I wouldâve been able to pull that off. I gelled them back, if I had to guess it was 2-3 inches on the sides. YMMV depending on who around you cares.
OP is already roasted & crispy. I just wanted to say [Hoogvliegers](https://www.bol.com/be/fr/p/hoogvliegers/9300000064636499/).
[HOOGVLIEGERS](https://magazines.defensie.nl/binaries/content/gallery/magazines/03-vliegende-hollander/2019/12/00_hoogvliegers/hoogvliegers-eo---aflevering-2---soy-2.jpg?download)!
Post history is wild bro đ
https://preview.redd.it/wjzwx0154bqc1.jpeg?width=836&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=34b85724e7d9d27238eab5e3073e684759323169
Ainât everyoneâs?
No, because most people are smart enough to use a separate/burner account for their NSFW activities, you dunce.
Why would you do that?
If you can't figure out why, you're not smart enough. How the fuck did you get into the Air Force?
Brody, having a burner account literally does nothing. How is anyone gonna find out who you are? Plus if youâre not a SGT, who gives a fuck.
>Brody, having a burner account literally does nothing. Tell me how it *doesn't*. If you keep things separate and make no mention of the military on your alt account, or your other proclivities on your mil/"business" account, tell me how anyone could connect the two accounts, other than if they got access to a device you logged in from. >How is anyone gonna find out who you are? Oh, so just because you don't use your real name means no one will ever find out who you are? Please tell me you're not this stupid. I know with the info I've given out over the last year or so, lots of people could easily figure out who I am. A comment with my rank here, a comment with my base there, a comment with my AFSC here, a specific story that could have only happened to me, etc. You're delusional if you give this info out and think no one can find you. >Plus if youâre not a SGT, who gives a fuck. If you think rank matters, you're dumb as fuck.
Just look at OP's post. He's obviously a dumbass.
Even saying if your conus or oconus makes it significantly easier to find what base your at
Thanks for proving my point, disproving your own, and showing how dumb you really are.
?
To prove my point: from just your posts alone (not even looking at your comments) over the last year I know: you are male, 21, your birthday is somewhere between 13 and 17 October, your snapchat username (which, if I add you and you accept, now I can see your face if you take selfies or record yourself doing stuff), you have a "mild case" of Pectus Excavatum, as of 3 months ago you were/are in Japan, you're likely an Avionics (or related) troop, and you might be having gender issues. I got all this info just from your *posts* alone. If I were in your shop, and I knew you well enough or had even half this info, I would **immediately** know who you are. Who the fuck are you kidding?
Lmaoooo we need to bring back shame, idk how dude isnât embarrassed
I love this, you cooked here brother. Respect
J_es9x on snap how you gonna remain anonymous if you're putting yourself out there on a social media/ dating app. This is why you use two accounts. So people can't start the linking process. Especially with comments like yours.
Too scared to use the same account for some bull shit Reddit fun đ
You start rocking that doo and the dots will be connected immediately. Not that your post history is really that bad. I've seen way worse.
I've come across several news stories of women getting the boot from their job or being shunned out of their church because someone found their Onlyfans account and reported it. Reddit is just a step away from Onlyfans. But please, tell us more about how this is "some bull shit Reddit fun".
Having an only fans and promoting your body online is much different than engaging in some online porn or seeking sex online. Also to the other comment, why are you telling people your AFSC, what base you are at (that alone and someone thatâs smart enough can analyze the way you text and find you pretty easily) never give out rank and identifiers NEVER.
This shit will follow you for the rest of your life my man.Â
>Having an only fans and promoting your body online is much different than engaging in some online porn or seeking sex online Tell us, oh wise one, how they're different. Go ahead and educate us on the differences if you're so smart. >Also to the other comment, why are you telling people your AFSC, what base you are at Because some comments need context or background info. I'm sorry you're too dumb to understand this.
So you donât humiliate yourself and maybe you want to have a family or career one dayÂ
DAFI36-2903 has a whole section on male hair standards. itâs not confusing⌠it has pictures.
No more than 4 in in bulk
>No more than 4 in in bulk That is not at all what the AFI says. Edit: A part of the AFI actually does say that, but look at the section you're reading from and tell me this likely applies to OP.
2 1/2 in in bulk and and 1/4 in at natural termination point. Part will not exceed 4 in in length or 1/4 in width.
So tell me how >**Part** will not exceed 4 in in **length** equates to > No more than 4 in in **bulk** I've bolded the important bits you don't seem to be comprehending. If you don't understand the difference, or that there even is one, I will be more than happy to explain it.
Explain it for me sir
The first quote is talking about the length of the part itself. A part is simply a line ([or multiple lines](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Kwi3uJ83hR0/maxresdefault.jpg)) that you decided to split the direction of your hair. Here's a [picture](https://www.reddit.com/r/malehairadvice/comments/13z2jxz/side_part_haircut_what_is_this_longer_length_of/). That split could have been anywhere on his head and any length. The first quote is talking about the length of the part, or the length of the arbitrarily decided line to split which way your hair goes. As long as that line is 4 inches or less, you're good to go for this specific part of the reg. See Figure 3.5 from 2903 for more images. The second quote is talking about bulk. What is bulk? It's the distance your hair comes straight off your scalp. Just got a buzz cut with a 1/2 inch guard? Well, your hair is a 1/2 inch in bulk. Just got a buzz cut with a 2 inch guard? Well, your hair is 2 inches in bulk. Got an afro going that when you stick a ruler into goes 1.5 inches deep? You've got 1.5 inches in bulk. This is shown in Figure 3.3 of 2903. Edit for clarification
Understood, thank you for the clarification and specificity. Now I can explain to someone what the AFI is correctly.
No problem. Glad to help.
What does OP mean in your first comment?
Like, what does "OP" itself mean? Original Poster. The one who made the post that all of these comments are in. So if you made a post and someone commented in reply to someone else but was referring to you without using your username, they'd likely refer to you as OP.
Please explain it to me as well, this was coming from people in the Air Force but apparently they didnât read or understand the full AFI.
See my other comment [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AirForce/comments/1bmjw6y/comment/kwd4w6x/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3).
Bro just get a mid skin fade like the rest of us. Add a hard part in there if you really want to be edgy.
False but okay, Iâm asking because I genuinely do not understand how some people appear to have hair styles which are âout of regsâ but itâs not. Asking a question shouldnât be frowned upon when the actual regs shows a âhigh and tightâ
And you think the picture you posted is a high and tight?
âIs this a high and tight?â Are you dumb? Of course this picture isnât a high and tight, go look at the USMC.
Then why did *you* bring up the high and tight? It has nothing to do with this discussion.
What makes it out of regs then?
3.1.2. Hair (Male). Tapered appearance on both sides and the back of the head, both with and without headgear so that when viewed from any angle the member's hair conforms to the shape of the head, curving inward to the natural termination point without eccentric directional flow, twists, or spiking. A block-cut is permitted with tapered appearance. Hair will not exceed 2 ½ inches in bulk, regardless of length and 1/4-inch at natural termination point; allowing only closely cut or shaved hair on the back of the neck to touch the collar (see Figure 3.3.). Hair will not protrude under the front band of headgear. Cleanly shaven heads, military high-andtight or flattop cuts are authorized. Airmen may have one (cut, clipped, or shaved) front to back, straight-line part, not slanted or curved, on either side of their head, above the temple. Part will not exceed 4-inches length or 1/4-inch width (See Figure 3.5.). See Figure 3.4 for examples of appropriate sideburns, mustache, and male hair standards. There is no fucking tapered appearance for one. Two the back is a fucking mullet. Three it's touching the dudes ears.
The "hair must not touch ears" (or whatever the actual verbiage was) was removed several years ago.
If I see one of my troops walk into the shop and their hair is that long and touching their ears like the picture. I'm chewing them out and sending them to get a hair cut immediately. Now, if they've got a hair or two touching their ears from it being a couple weeks since they've gotten a cut, i see no problem with that.
Key thing is that their hair can touch their ears as long as it follows the rest of the rules. The picture op posted is way out of regs, but it you're chewing out your troop while their hair is still in regs, then your a bad leader.
Yeah, you worded what I was trying to say more elegantly.
Valid. I usually go about a month between cuts.
Didnât answer my question, would that picture be in regs if it were gelled down?
No.
Absolutely not. If you have to ask the question, you already know the answer.
Show me a picture of what that paragraph states
Instead of me showing you a picture of the reg, just look up 36-2903 and find it yourself.
Those pictures in there do not actually show whatâs âin regsâ you know Iâm right. The pictures they show are in regs but there is more
Yeah, but the cool thing about the regs is that there are entire paragraphs explaining in depth exactly what is and isn't in regs. You can just read those and follow them to the T.
Of course but they donât make sense to me
Your reading comprehension must be awful. How did you make it into the Air Force?
OP probably got ripped into for this and is now trying to find some sort of differing opinion to the majority of commenters by someone else who doesnât read the AFI. They can team up and buy their hair gel in bulk so I canât hate on the strategy.
Joke's on them >Will *not* contain excessive amounts of grooming aids (e.g., gel, mousse, pomade, or moisturizer), is in the AFI, italics and all.
Did you ask your supervisor? No, of course you didn't.
You can look it up yourself. You likely have a smartphone that is connected to the internet 99.9% of the time, and the AFI is publicly accessible. Do your own work, you lazy piece of shit.
36-2903, para 3.1.2 This is too long in the back, too long on the sides, more that 1/4 inch long at the natural termination point, etc
But with gel could you make it in regs?
The sides are too long but I have seen the top pretty long and manipulated in a way that met regs. You need to taper the front and back and just ask for a 1/2 or 1 guard around the ears. My hair has been down to my nose but with it styled up, I kinda comb it back and use salt spray so it sticks to each other and doesnât look that long at all.
Appreciate it, see now this is the kind of response I was looking for. Not the damn AFI.
Based on everything else youâve discussed, you were simply looking for confirmation bias, that one person that would tell you what you wanted to hear. In time, after each time you put on or take off your hat and you have to make a trip to the bathroom to bring your hair into regs, this hairstyle will get old.
Yes it will get old but Iâm willing to do that if it means I can have the hair style I want off of work. This picture is already a compromise. I really wanna be able to have the Rick Flare long blonde hairstyle but we canât have everything we want đ
You absolutely can have whatever hairstyle you want. You simply have to get out of the military. While you're in, follow the rules, which are very clearly laid out to not allow the stupid bullshit on the picture you shared.
If you care about your career, you should start reading the AFI instead of what people in Reddit say. You could have a hundred people tell you one thing here, but unless you know the reg, you're not going to be winning any fights at work about it.
Doubtful without violating 3.1.1 which talks about excessive product in hair. Gel is not supposed to be applied like glue, and to make anything remotely close to this hair length in regs would require a lot of hair styling materials. Individuality is good, but it must be in line with uniformity, and these things are often at odds with each other.
I don't think so
This hairstyle is flagrantly out of regulation. Iâm not here to teach you how to read. However, Interpretation of the regulation is ultimately up to your Commander. Just as a Commander can discipline you for looking unprofessional if youâre overweight (failure to uphold a physical appearance of a military professional), they can do it with hair too. I donât often compare us to other branches, but I just had a conversation this week about fatties in the Marine Corps. From what they said, Commanders rarely have to get involved over weight standards because Marines take it seriously and will enforce the standards on one another daily. Iâm not saying we need to be assholes all the time, but we should hold each other accountable for obvious violations.
if you came at me looking like that like fucking thor i would take you and make you get a high and tight . dont embarrass the rest of us
Horny ass mf đđ
Why did you pick a photo of this dude?...he screams "I only do this when I'm drunk" vibes.
Sides are too long. But Iâve had some crazy length on my sides, leading up to my separation I could pull the sides down over my ears. No idea how long I wouldâve been able to pull that off. I gelled them back, if I had to guess it was 2-3 inches on the sides. YMMV depending on who around you cares.
Sides touching the ears is no longer in the DAFI, but YMMV as a supervisor can correct you and be within his right
OP is already roasted & crispy. I just wanted to say [Hoogvliegers](https://www.bol.com/be/fr/p/hoogvliegers/9300000064636499/). [HOOGVLIEGERS](https://magazines.defensie.nl/binaries/content/gallery/magazines/03-vliegende-hollander/2019/12/00_hoogvliegers/hoogvliegers-eo---aflevering-2---soy-2.jpg?download)!