[thaumaturgy]

I didn't really want to derail this into a conversation about boobs; the takeaway should have been that, while certain physical attributes are more or less appealing to most people, the particulars matter a lot less than the attractiveness of the person as a whole.

[Udo]

I think the boob analogy was interesting, so why not talk about it.

But to bring this back together: my main hypothesis really comes down to the point that "hair" trumps "no hair" if all other factors are eliminated. Sure some people may look awesome without hair, and most men can make up for this and other shortcomings in many ways.

I agree, the whole person counts. But I assert that even an attractive and successful bald man would be more desirable if he had hair. And for the not so attractive and successful, the difference of having hair can be the whole bowl of wax.