Mod to Suedehead - Page 691

Originally Posted by Little Queenie 

When I first saw it, it reminded me of those awful pictures that Victorian phrenologists used to make their odious pronouncements on the merits of people's social acceptability!

Originally Posted by Bob the Badger 

 The sideboards look to me like they are stuck on or dyed. Not a look I recognize from 1969. Not amongst the 15/16 year olds anyway. Both profiles look odd and I wouldn't want to bump into either of them down a dark alley.

Originally Posted by Watermelon man 

They asked me how I knew, it was Esso Blue
I of course replied
With other brands one buys
Smoke gets in your eyes

Originally Posted by corker23 

Ay-up. I'm a bit of a newbie here but I was hoping for some advice on these DM's: http://store.drmartens.co.uk/p-8006-dr-martens-jameson-boot.aspx apparently the zipper tounge thingy can be removed so that they can be worn properly. Seem good for the price?

Originally Posted by Man-of-Mystery 

Call me an armchair leftie but I'd much rather be a Roundhead than a Cavalier!

Originally Posted by Man-of-Mystery 


Well this is me in 1969 with sideboards. Okay, I was 18 going on 19, but I saw quite a lot of guys with this look.

Originally Posted by Bob the Badger 


In those days I stayed within my peer group. Someone two years older was considered old and one year younger was considered a kid. I remember going into a pub full of 22/23 year olds and we walked out because they were old men! Only one of our group could grow the sideburns and he had them .As soon as I could I grew them as well but I was about 18 then and my hair was a lot longer. My side burns looked like yours but the previous profile photo they don't look so good to me.

Originally Posted by corker23 

Ay-up. I'm a bit of a newbie here but I was hoping for some advice on these DM's: http://store.drmartens.co.uk/p-8006-dr-martens-jameson-boot.aspx apparently the zipper tounge thingy can be removed so that they can be worn properly. Seem good for the price?

Originally Posted by Little Queenie 

Is it the contrast between the thickness of the hair forming the sideboard and the shortness of the hair on the head? In the phrenologist's photo they're not very well-groomed either, whereas Paul's are neat and have been trimmed into shape.

Originally Posted by Bob the Badger 


In those days I stayed within my peer group. Someone two years older was considered old and one year younger was considered a kid. I remember going into a pub full of 22/23 year olds and we walked out because they were old men! Only one of our group could grow the sideburns and he had them .As soon as I could I grew them as well but I was about 18 then and my hair was a lot longer. My side burns looked like yours but the previous profile photo they don't look so good to me.

Originally Posted by bunty 


Like the word 'ponce' will have to start using it again

(I was called a 'prune' yesterday, that's a good early 70s insult)

Originally Posted by Brideshead 

I agree. Why is it when skinheads are depicted that the author / journalist always seems to select especially unattractive examples? Skinheads were often immaculate and yet these are seldom seen in the images that remain today.

Originally Posted by Brideshead 

I remember well staying within my peer group too. Just occasionally you would mix with older or younger guys but it never worked out.

1969, one of the first times I was allowed to go on holiday without my parents and it was on the understanding that there would be some 'sensible' older boys in the group. I suppose their ages ranged from 17 to 19. We stayed on a caravan park at Bognor. And God were they sensible! No coming in late, proper English breakfast every day taking turns to cook and wash up, etc. Me and my peers left them to it on the Thursday and went home - via the newly-discovered Squire Shop where we blew the last of our holiday dosh!