Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Fashion and Beauty
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 12-25-2016, 08:50 AM
 
10,341 posts, read 5,843,183 times
Reputation: 17884

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChessieMom View Post
You neglected to post the rest of the information from that article. What you posted was misleading, because this follows:

"The 62 percent bald figure is not quite accurate, though. The survey actually found that 62 percent of women have ever removed all their pubic hair, not that they “prefer to go bare,” in the Times’ parlance, all the time. Nearly 34.6 percent of the women surveyed had removed all their pubic hair five or fewer times; that likely means they’ve tried it but prefer not to go bare. Less than 21 percent of study participants said they’d gone bald 11 times or more—this is more likely the population that wants a completely bare vulva for life."
I wasn't trying to be misleading, just pasted the first 2 paragraphs from the article.. some info to answer the poster who asked. Did you think I had an agenda? Weird...
This topic doesn't call for judgement.

 
Old 12-25-2016, 12:07 PM
 
Location: New England
1,054 posts, read 1,406,441 times
Reputation: 1830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hedgehog_Mom View Post
... Basically, we went bald as a backlash to the full 70's look and now our kids are having their own backlash to the baldness.
Can someone explain this "70's look" thing? I don't think it was different from the 60's look or the 50's look or any other era's look, back to the time when we were apes in the trees and hairy all over. Yet it often seems as if people think pubic hair was invented in the 1970s! If today's young people are giving up the "millennium look" (I just made that up) then it's either a reaction to their parents and a return to their grandparents, or it's just logic asserting itself--why do something that's painful/expensive/troubleseome/unhealthy for which there is absolutely no need?
 
Old 12-25-2016, 12:27 PM
 
732 posts, read 1,042,786 times
Reputation: 2738
Mod cut. Just invest in a good pair of scissors or clippers and trim it every once in awhile. I have no idea why the ladies go through the shaving, waxing, lasering, sugaring, etc. to get rid of something very natural. Nature put it there for a reason.

Last edited by PJSaturn; 12-28-2016 at 02:54 PM.. Reason: Offensive language.
 
Old 12-25-2016, 12:50 PM
 
Location: A safe distance from San Francisco
12,350 posts, read 9,675,074 times
Reputation: 13891
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amontillado View Post
Can someone explain this "70's look" thing? I don't think it was different from the 60's look or the 50's look or any other era's look, back to the time when we were apes in the trees and hairy all over. Yet it often seems as if people think pubic hair was invented in the 1970s! If today's young people are giving up the "millennium look" (I just made that up) then it's either a reaction to their parents and a return to their grandparents, or it's just logic asserting itself--why do something that's painful/expensive/troubleseome/unhealthy for which there is absolutely no need?
Absolutely no need and absolutely no benefit. It's nothing but negatives - not the least of which is a huge detriment to a woman's overall appearance/attractiveness. A completely shaven head would be much easier and would do much less damage to a woman's appeal. Seriously. But that would be crazy, right?

Of course, but not as crazy as shaving "netherly".
 
Old 12-25-2016, 01:10 PM
 
17,504 posts, read 38,989,711 times
Reputation: 24196
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
Absolutely no need and absolutely no benefit. It's nothing but negatives - not the least of which is a huge detriment to a woman's overall appearance/attractiveness. A completely shaven head would be much easier and would do much less damage to a woman's appeal. Seriously. But that would be crazy, right?

Of course, but not as crazy as shaving "netherly".
Personally, I have never gotten the appeal or reason for removing the netherly hair, and never have done so myself. The most I ever do is just trim down, and in the summer pluck the "strays" out of the bikini line. The hair is there to protect from bacterial infections. I personally do not like the look of "totally bare" on either men or women, but that's just me.
 
Old 12-25-2016, 01:16 PM
 
Location: A safe distance from San Francisco
12,350 posts, read 9,675,074 times
Reputation: 13891
Quote:
Originally Posted by gypsychic View Post
Personally, I have never gotten the appeal or reason for removing the netherly hair, and never have done so myself. The most I ever do is just trim down, and in the summer pluck the "strays" out of the bikini line. The hair is there to protect from bacterial infections. I personally do not like the look of "totally bare" on either men or women, but that's just me.
Thank you....thank you....thank you.

I have more to say, but I'd better leave it at that.
 
Old 12-25-2016, 01:27 PM
 
10,341 posts, read 5,843,183 times
Reputation: 17884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amontillado View Post
Can someone explain this "70's look" thing? I don't think it was different from the 60's look or the 50's look or any other era's look, back to the time when we were apes in the trees and hairy all over. Yet it often seems as if people think pubic hair was invented in the 1970s! If today's young people are giving up the "millennium look" (I just made that up) then it's either a reaction to their parents and a return to their grandparents, or it's just logic asserting itself--why do something that's painful/expensive/troubleseome/unhealthy for which there is absolutely no need?
Maybe the 70s is the furthest back they remember.
From--Today I Found Out / Feed Your Brain dot com:
"Shaving one’s pubic region is nothing new in history, from the Ancient Egyptians to modern day times the trend has come and gone and then come again. For instance, in the 15th century it was commonplace for women particularly to shave pubic hair for hygienic reasons, particularly as a defense against lice. Now imagine doing that with little more than a really sharp knife…

While the practice of shaving one’s private bits has been around for ages, the 19th century British took it to another level. It was common at this time to cut off some of your pubic hair and give it to a lover as a gift. Men would even affix this hair to their hats. When not displaying it in such ways, keeping a collection of it from one’s various lovers was a thing. For instance, King George IV kept his collection of women’s pubes from his various mistresses in a snuff box. St. Andrews University in Scotland currently possess this snuffbox filled with pubic hair."


While we can say: "Leave it alone, it keeps the dirt out!" What then is the explanation for shaving armpits and legs? Are they going to get infected now? Most of us opt for pants to shield against dirt.

I have to assume people who shave do so because they don't like the look of the hair, it's that simple. They don't like it.
 
Old 12-25-2016, 08:49 PM
 
Location: Western MN
1,000 posts, read 1,001,074 times
Reputation: 1810
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan Alaska View Post
a short word about Neet or any hair removal cream.

Your fingernails are made of keratin which is HAIR, wear gloves unless you want your nails to melt/soften/peel.
Thanks for the heads up.
 
Old 12-25-2016, 11:03 PM
 
1,429 posts, read 2,413,373 times
Reputation: 1975
Quote:
Originally Posted by RbccL View Post
It's not a weird question, people just don't talk about it much

"A study, published in JAMA Dermatology this week, surveyed a nationally representative sample of 3,316 women, 84 percent of whom reported engaging in some form of pubic hair removal by scissor, razor, wax, tweezer, depilatory cream, laser, or electrolysis.

But The Times focuses its analysis on the segment of women who choose pubic baldness. “Sixty-two percent … opted for complete removal of their pubic hair,” Jan Hoffman writes. An overwhelming majority of the country’s women, completely hairless under their underwear."
Thank you so much for the information and the sources. You rock!
 
Old 12-26-2016, 05:50 AM
 
5,198 posts, read 5,264,151 times
Reputation: 13249
Hair does not protect against bacteria lol.

Silly oomment.

Hair does hold odor.

Perhaps none of you sweat down there, but if i don't remove the hair, well, it smells better when I do.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:39 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top