Become A Member | Forum | Profiles | Personals | Classifieds | See Who's Online ...
 
View Topic
  Message Boards : Love / Health : View Topic : 9 Posts, Page 1 of 1
  HomeNewNoticesHot TopicsPollsStatsBlogs Login / Register
 
Is Hair Back?
 
 Poll Choices 5 Total Votes
20.00% / 1 Vote
0.00% / 0 Votes
60.00% / 3 Votes
20.00% / 1 Vote
 You Need To Be Logged In To Vote In Polls ...
 
# 1 : Wednesday 3-5-2017 @ 16:22
 
 
Madonna, Lola Kirke and Emma Watson must have smelled that hair is becoming trendy again.
In Quebec, "Maipoils" is launched.
[Literally "may-hairs" or "my hairs" ; Hairy May-ry if you will; some sort of a Mo-vember for women]

It aims at retaming body hair, without going all pre-pubescent!


Since my sister made a disgusted face when we were teenager at the idea that I would not shave my arm-pit, I have understood how the youth-obsess media and a largely hebephilic advertisement industry have twisted most people's perception of pilosity.
Reply
 
 Recent Message Board Topics
Dead Thread 2017
13 Reasons Why Not
The Homophobic Incident Thread.
Mother Pride Block Party 2017 - Sat June 24
Coronation Street Part 3
Brexit
Electro Sex
Arranging Meetings
 
Hey! If you enjoy shooting the breeze with like-minded people, check out
our Message Boards
• Advice • Coming Out
• Computers • Current Affairs
• Discussion • Food & Drink
• Going Out • Humour
• Health • Music
• Newbies • Sexual Issues
# 2 : Thursday 4-5-2017 @ 11:34
 
 
Hirsute women are not my idea of feminine. I know it was all the rage in the 70s. Maybe the ladies are following the guys in this respect but I doubt you'll see a bearded lady any time soon!

Would straight guys fancy a lady with hairy pits?
Reply
 
# 3 : Thursday 4-5-2017 @ 12:36
 
 
Someone said :
[...]
Would straight guys fancy a lady with hairy pits?

Most who don't have a twisted mind, a mind twisted by advertisement, porn masquerading as fashion.
There is no objective reason for women to go beyond a bit of trimming, nothing but sexism and submission.

Good to see positive role models emerging:

Video Link : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyKUg78Z-Y0

The question itself "Would straight guys fancy a lady with hairy pits?" suggests that women are defined by the men they can attract, in order to be maintained.

No one really (seriously) asks "Would straight ladies fancy a guy with hairy pits?" It should tell you something about your own ingrained sexism...
Reply
 
# 4 : Thursday 4-5-2017 @ 14:13
 
 
Well, I m not attracted to women sexually so that point is moot.

A lot of (mainly straight) women I've talked to dont like the idea of being overly hirstute. Does that make them sexist?

Also, men are increasingly becoming sexually objectified. More men are grooming than ever before.
Reply
 
# 5 : Thursday 4-5-2017 @ 14:47
 
 
Twisted mind is going a bit far. Good old natural selection has clearly shown there is an overall male preference for smooth women that has evolved over thousands, if not millions, of years.
Reply
 
# 6 : Thursday 4-5-2017 @ 14:57
 
 
I still can't believe women have butt hair
Reply
 
# 7 : Thursday 4-5-2017 @ 15:22
 
 
Someone said :
[...]
Also, men are increasingly becoming sexually objectified. More men are grooming than ever before.

Which is far from being a progress.

And there is a difference between "overly hirsute", and being reasonably groomed.

Someone said :
Twisted mind is going a bit far. Good old natural selection has clearly shown there is an overall male preference for smooth women that has evolved over thousands, if not millions, of years.

If you consider that "natural selection" is the advertisement billboards, which as we know have our best interest in mind.

The exact same (and erroneous) "natural selection" argument could be made to explain why in Africa and Japan women are bleaching their faces, why women in the 18th century used led-poisoned make-up, etc.
The same argument could be used to explain why "artificial intelligence" is whitening the skin of people using a "beautifying filter": it only did it because it was taught to recognize beauty based on pictures showing mostly pale-skinned people.

It is the same argument that could also be use by the way by people who want to forbid same-gender marriage... Good old "natural" selection.

And I maintain that it is twisted, because at the root of it all is the fantasy of a submissive child-like doll: no hair = no puberty = influence able and controllable.
One of my sisters was being bullied, included by ourselves, in her teen-years because she had relatively hairy legs. That started with puberty...
You may not see it, or realize it (by definition), but this is what is in store.

Are you arguing that I should advise my teenage niece that she should suffer through painful "beauty routines" for the sole purpose of pleasing men? And that to do so she should basically keep looking like a child as long as she can? And then a boob job to pretend to be an adult and still look like a doll?
Reply
 
# 8 : Thursday 4-5-2017 @ 16:04
 
 
You are making multiple counterpoints that dont make much sense. I find it odd you would disregard natural selection without which women would still be growing beards rather than the odd wispy facial hairs.
Reply
 
# 9 : Thursday 4-5-2017 @ 18:37
 
 
Someone said :
You are making multiple counterpoints that dont make much sense. I find it odd you would disregard natural selection without which women would still be growing beards rather than the odd wispy facial hairs.

i did not think you were seriously referring to biological natural selection, I though you were suggesting social pressure has led to the desire to erase any pilosity from women's body, apart from their hair.

Natural selection has not led to women without hair on their pussy or armpit, that I know of... It has just reduce pilosity overall, in line proportionally of how it did for men.
There is no indication that this has been driven by a sexual preference for hairlessness. Climate and other environmental factors probably played a stronger role.

So natural selection has reduced the amount of hair for both men and women, in similar proportions for all we can tell.

It does in no way suggest that the aim of natural selection is eventually the absence of hair. If anything shaved genitals and armpits are more exposed to infections and diseases in general, as hair is still playing a role.
Even in Asia where pilosity is usually naturally scarce, it is most of the time not absent. (And Japan has a very pedophile/hedophile oriented fascination for immature-looking bodies)

Only a social construct is pushing women, even more so than men, to go through that torture. And before someone mentions men shaving their beard, the effort and pain and risks associated with this is much lesser than the shaving of legs, armpits and genitalia which is so widespread. Plus men's beard are shaved by those who want to, and trimmed by those who prefer a fuller bush, without this bringing any collective social judgement on it.
Reply
 
Prev 1Next