- Joined
- Mar 1, 2020
I keep seeing people on /pol/ and elsewhere admonish dudes to trim their fingernails if there is so much as 0.5 millimeters of free edge. Like, literally. They tell them to trim it ALL off, all the way down to the quick. Is this a thing, now?
Seriously, go on 4plebs and look up people saying "trim your fingernails" on /pol/ in response to people posting images of their hands. It's a cavalcade of people bitching nonstop about man hands with any white showing on the tips of the fingernails at all.
Take this, for instance:
There are people who actually think that this is too much free edge. That this actually needs to be trimmed down to the quick. I consider these to be very short fingernails.
Is this some kind of weird cultural thing now that I'm not aware of? Do people really cut their fingernails daily, now, making sure that there is absolutely no white visible on them at all?
I was always told to do the exact opposite of this; that if I cut my fingernails too short, I'd get ingrowns. In fact, the literature on the matter seems to reflect this.
If you cut your nails to the quick every time, you're asking for trouble. Basically, you should trim your fingernails if there's any excessive overhang of the free edge past the fingertip (if you're a man). There's just one little issue here; not everyone has their hyponychium in the same place. Some people have their hyponychium way back from the fingertip, especially if they have a condition that damages the nailbed, like onycholysis, where the nail plate is lifting off the bed, resulting in more free edge:
If someone with severe onycholysis (like in this picture) trims their nails all the way down to the quick, their nail will cover only half of their fucking fingertip and will be susceptible to ingrowns when it grows back.
Therefore, it stands to reason that the length of the free edge of the nail should be trimmed relative to the fingertip, not the "length of the white area", which is arbitrary and differs from person to person.
I don't know, though. What do you consider is a reasonable fingernail length for men?
Seriously, go on 4plebs and look up people saying "trim your fingernails" on /pol/ in response to people posting images of their hands. It's a cavalcade of people bitching nonstop about man hands with any white showing on the tips of the fingernails at all.
Take this, for instance:
There are people who actually think that this is too much free edge. That this actually needs to be trimmed down to the quick. I consider these to be very short fingernails.
Is this some kind of weird cultural thing now that I'm not aware of? Do people really cut their fingernails daily, now, making sure that there is absolutely no white visible on them at all?
I was always told to do the exact opposite of this; that if I cut my fingernails too short, I'd get ingrowns. In fact, the literature on the matter seems to reflect this.
If you cut your nails to the quick every time, you're asking for trouble. Basically, you should trim your fingernails if there's any excessive overhang of the free edge past the fingertip (if you're a man). There's just one little issue here; not everyone has their hyponychium in the same place. Some people have their hyponychium way back from the fingertip, especially if they have a condition that damages the nailbed, like onycholysis, where the nail plate is lifting off the bed, resulting in more free edge:
If someone with severe onycholysis (like in this picture) trims their nails all the way down to the quick, their nail will cover only half of their fucking fingertip and will be susceptible to ingrowns when it grows back.
Therefore, it stands to reason that the length of the free edge of the nail should be trimmed relative to the fingertip, not the "length of the white area", which is arbitrary and differs from person to person.
I don't know, though. What do you consider is a reasonable fingernail length for men?
