Tara has successfully grossed me out. She has an article on the unfortunate consequences of a bikini wax—a massive infection that turned the vulva and perineum into something resembling an over-ripe melon. And the woman who had this problem repeatedly tried to depilate afterwards!
I've never quite gotten the appeal of this practice. Is it to appeal to men with pedophilic tendencies? Or is it more of a desire to look like you've got a mollusc in your crotch? Everybody has their own little kink, so if hairless pubes appeal to two people, I'm not going to worry about it…but it seems to me it ought to be OK for a woman to want to look like a female mammal, and that individuals ought not to feel obligated to follow a very weird and highly artificial standard of beauty to the point where they suffer severe illnesses.
- Log in to post comments
I think that should be "hairless pubis". "Hairless pubes" is a contradiction in terms.
"it ought ought to be OK for a woman to want to look like a female mammal"
Hear, hear!!!!! What PZ said.
(Cal: the "pubis" is a bone, therefore--usually--hairless. It should therefore be "hairless mons pubis.")
Thank you, CCP.
What he said.
Humans are remarkably weird sexual creatures, and sexual desires often follow no logic. I refrain from commenting on others kinks as long as both involved parties are consenting.
Some people like them extra hairy, some people like them hairless. Whatever floats your boat, there isn't a superior opinion.
OK, breaking out the "pedophiliac tendencies" in a discussion of body waxing forces me to point out that most men shave their faces regularly.
Speak for self, hooman!
Doesn't the evolutionary tendency of homo to lose hair indicate that shavers are just impatient with the rate of evolution?
Thanks PZ. I absolutely agree. I don't find the shaved look sexy at all.
In fact, I don't even get the obsession that women have with purging their underarm hair. Does that make me a communist?
First of all, ew.
Second, preferring my mammals furry, I cringe every time I hear an ad on the radio for hair removal services. It's not just women, either; I don't understand the obsession in some gay circles with removing body hair. My roommate (who's not quite as furry as a wookiee, but is certainly close) decided to experiment with Nair once, to look more like the kind of guy he's interested in; he looked like a giant red baby when he was done, between the hairlessness and chemical irritation of his skin. No thanks.
Really, now. Everyone does arbitrary things in the interest of enhancing their social appeal, frequently inspired by social convention. Some people find that surgery, exercise, tattoos, starvation, steroids, piercing, shaving, fashion, self-help programs, fragrances, drugs, alcohol, etc., make them more confident of the way they present themselves to the world. On the scale from healthy to neutral to dangerous, shaving and waxing are pretty close to neutral, despite one or more anecdotes to the contrary.
Let people do their thing, and bring themselves closer to what they want to be. Even if they choose to engage in risky body modification or other unhealthy behavior, that's their business. I'm not going to believe that people have never heard of infection, etc., so no use claiming ignorance. And if someone absorbs unhealthy aspirations from the media or whatever, I'll direct the blame to their own lack of critical thought before I campaign to adjust people's fashion sense and BMI through massive cultural revision.
Not that the original post suggests that, but you know the issue will come up.
Oh, and to Embarrassed (#8): No, of course favoring a natural body doesn't make you a communist!
It makes you a hippy.
I'm going with Robert on this one.
...and it isn't only practiced by women, btw...
Don't look at the picture. Don't look at the picture. Don't look at the picture.
I am under the impression this hairless thing was originally... um... *ahem*
all about the teeth, as it were. It then became a fad.
I've never quite gotten the appeal of this practice. Is it to appeal to men with pedophilic tendencies?
Keeps 'em off the streets.
Pubic waxings seem like an odd thing to apply the naturalistic fallacy to.
You speak as if this is some sort of new thing. Relatively hairless women (and men) are an ancient aesthetic. Frankly, it is rather amazing that people have been shaving long before decent razors were practicable. The desire for smooth skin seems a fairly common one that transcends many cultures and ages. Just look at old drawings, paintings and sculptures.
On Fresh Air, with Terri Gross, veteran pornographer Larry Flint noted how the aesthetics of pubic hair have changed 180 degrees from the 70's, when more was "better." The trend may well be cylical. Columnist Dan Savage notes that heterosexual men commonly shave and contends that the practice originated in the gay community. Notably, the gay community has an appreciation for smooth men and furry men in different extremes. The practice of men shaving is common enough that Panasonic markets the Body Groomer as a shaver specifically for the genitals using cheeky animated Flash ads depicting before and after Kiwi fruits.
I hardly think that this trend is one that you can pin strictly as being new, nor exclusive to women, and I hardly think one tragic example constitutes a trend any more than that photo of an attempted fence climber who slipped and punctured his face with a fence spike is an indication of a rash of tragic fence climbing. Anecdotes are not sufficient evidence to claim a significant trend.
Also, check the history of glabrousness. Ancient egyptians removed pubic hair for numerous reasons. It's also part of muslim tradition.
There's a picture?? I didn't see one.
It's bad, but my guess is that this has more to do with the fact that she's 20. Ten or 15 years from now she'll be embarrassed as hell about this. Probably she is embarassed as hell about it now.
I doubt it has anything to do with fetishes though. A lot of women do this so they don't look like they're hiding a cat in their bikini bottoms. Frankly, I don't blame them.
By all accounts Julius Caesar was one for plucking all of his body hair. I imagine that the pain had something to do with his wanting to conquer the world.
My wife speculated that the development of the grappling techniques in Brazilian jiu jitsu went hand in hand, as it were, with the development of Brazilian waxing.
Comfort, feeling/looking sexy, something special for partner, current trends, better/more oral... all reasons that have come up in discussions with some of my female friends as to why they trim. The last is my main reason I prefer hairless, not closet pedo tendencies. In fact, the pedo thing is very non critical thinking, not typical for PZ, as is the anti mollusk statement. A bearded clam is one thing, but what guy wouldn't like to have a bigger mussel.
What??? I thought vagina dentata was just a myth--oh, er, never mind...
I'll bring over my comment from Tara's blog:
I've shaved my labia for years for one reason only: naked labia = extra sensitivity and pleasure during sex. My husband asked me to try a full Brazilian just once because he would wanted to see me absolutely exposed, and because he found that my hair got in the way during oral sex.
So I got my legs sugared once in a salon before I tried the Brazilian, and that definitely hurt. (I sugar my legs now at home and find that with the patchy, cyclic regrowth, it barely smarts at all.)
Two weeks after that first exposure to sugaring, I got my first Brazilian. (Note: I don't have diabetes, and the spa seemed to follow reasonably hygienic procedures.)
Believe it or not, getting the hair stripped from my labia and environs was not painful at all. On a scale of 1 to 10, it barely registered as a 2-3. However, the front thatch of hair on the mons, especially the area just above the labial cleft, hurt like a mofo, probably because the growth was denser or because the hair was more deeply or firmly rooted But I felt better pretty soon and yes, it was definitely sensual.
It was odd to look in the mirror afterwards, though, as I was embarrassed to see my own cleft. I didn't think I looked pre-pubescent, but just obviously, overtly sexual. Men are used to seeing their genitalia out in the open, but most women have them shrouded with hair once they're adults.
I might go back for what some people call the Mommy Brazilian (stripped labia, untouched mons) just because it is much more effective and easier than shaving, and not painful at all. But I'll have to be really, really motivated to get my mons stripped again. I'm glad I tried it once, but I don't feel compelled to do it again.
I've always assumed that it's just the natural progression from the very same neotenous tendancies which cause women to not have hair over most of the rest of their bodies. I've heard the burdened-with-outrage comparisons to pedophelia, and certainly there's some truth to this, but no more so than there is truth to the fact that we prefer beardless women to bearded women is essentially pedophelic im nature.
This is an arc we've been on, as a species, for as long as we've been a species.
OT
Well, I hate to get too far off topic but should we be greatful or not that there is no muscle involved in the later. I'd hate to think about the Nautilus machine at the gym for such a thing--and you just know people never towel the exercise machines off properly.
Anyways, back on topic. Is there really a high inherent risk of massive infection from waxing? I'm afraid to RTFA in case there is a picture. I know that there have been a number of bad infections from pedicure foot baths in my area, though I don't know why PZ hasn't gone off on women for having their toenails expertly groomed: women are mammals, they have nails, get used to it....
I have experimented with shaving and not shaving my armpits; when not shaven, after a while they tend to get very smelly very quickly even with deodorant.
Also for men:
http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/body-care/waxing/363883/
Sack, Crack and Back Wax
I like my men hairy and bearded, and my boyfriend likes his women hairy (but unbeared). Luckily, we found one another.
I agree with the Robster that the visual enjoyment of a bare mons veneris etc has nothing to do with pedo tendancies. As Mary implied, its about the exposure of a fully grown sexual woman.
That being said, au naturale is just fine too, although landing strips are just ridiculous!
oooh... a topic with an "ick/huh?" factor!
Thank you Mary [#23], for the forthright explanation, which I can heartily second. I can only offer this additionally: It's also easier to keep the area clean during menstruation. 'nuff said.
As far as pedophilia, I also immediately thought of guys who shave their beards, too. Are they trying to look like young boys? No. I imagine that most of the reasons men shave their beards are the same (although with maybe a slightly different dynamic) as womens who shave "down there."
"Is there really a high inherent risk of massive infection from waxing?"
Of course there isn't.
And to carry PZ's argument to its logical conclusion, why ought'nt we find women with hairy breasts attractive? Hm?
My girl pointed out that women don't particularly care for what can get trapped in pubic hair. Have you ever cut your head and gotten blood in it? Under a hat? For hours?
Right, then.
oh, and the aptly named "Venus" razor works fine... Not sure I'd feel comfortable with someone waxing my naughty bits.
;-)
What a disappointment. When I first read the topic title I thought we were going to be treated to pictures of hairy dolphins and whales.
You want the real reason for shaving in the ancient world?
Lice! Seriously, the scorched earth policy works pretty well for getting rid of and preventing contamination by the little blighters. In ancient egypt it was the norm for men and women to go hairless, and the rich would wear wigs.
Good call, scote.
Brazilian waxing's certainly not my thing; still, I've heard worse.
I thought my argument was that standards of beauty shouldn't be so narrow that some women feel compelled to risk their health to meet them, not that breasts look better with a pelt.
It itches.
[quote]Or is it more of a desire to look like you've got a mollusc in your crotch?[/quote]
I'm not sure someone who regularly wishes for 6 more arms has room to question the desire of another to more closely resemble an oceanic invertebrate. Rather a case of the pot calling the kettle brushed stainless as I see it.
A little light trimming is usually all that's required to present "the bearded clam" to its best advantage. Anything more than that is overkill, and as you mention, can be unhealthy.
I'd have to second Spaulding's observation that of the many things men and women do for social reasons, shaving and waxing do not seem to rate too highly on the "risk their health" scale. Your concern for women's health should apply equally to leg and underarm shavers, as well as men who shave their faces--not to mention ear, eyebrow and aureola pluckers. Although the skin in pubic region can be more delicate, the principles involved are the same, so the concern seems primarily motivated by your disdain for the particular aesthetic in question rather than the actual magnitude of dangers posed by depilitation.
I've recently been converted to the hairless camp. Let's just say, the transition made me feel like I've been having sex with my clothes on all this time. Much more surface area is exposed and there's more space to ummm...work. I won't go back.
"I thought my argument was that standards of beauty shouldn't be so narrow that some women feel compelled to risk their health to meet them[.]"
Waxing the undercarriage is hardly a health risk. Millions of women do it all the time with nothing but a bit of pain afterwards. It's tempting to turn every unfortunate accident into a grand statement about society's ills.
If the story were about breast augmentation I might buy it.
Pedophilic? Seriously? This seems beneath a science blogger. For me it is a personal preference for hygiene (or the perception of hygiene. Oh, and the 'two people,' comment is way way way off.
PZ, the phrase you're looking for is "I blame the patriarchy."
Personally, I used to shave everything and now I don't shave anything. One too many infected ingrown hairs and one too many hand twitches at exactly the wrong moment cured me of ever wanting to get anything razor-like near there again. (You folks with the depilated pink bits must have awfully straight, well-behaved hair!) Frankly, any improvement in sensation one might have noticed (I can't say I did) is vastly and hugely overwhelmed by stubble (which feels awful and itches something terrible -- those of you who said that underarm hair itches, let it grow in until it gets soft!), the bloody boring time and effort it takes to keep it up (because, let's face it, "girl maintenance" activities are deadly dull), and those omnipresent ingrown hairs. Ow. One of those can ruin your whole afternoon.
Not to mention that if you do use a razor, as opposed to waxing (which I am admittedly way too much of a wimp to do), getting a razor nick under your armpit is misery, _and_ prevents you from using deodorant for days.
On top of that, all this shit costs money! Like I can't find better homes for those dollars I'd be spending on depilating myself -- my body isn't someone else's object, and if they can't deal with my au naturel legs, pits, and pubis, well, they can go scratch...
Why bother, seriously?
The practice of shaving one's whatzit bald or nearly so did not become widespread until about 8 to 10 years ago. I would speculate that today it is more common than not in the under-40 set.
Some won't go 100% and opt to leave a tiny little tuft -- the equivalent of a "soul patch" on a man's chin (I could substitute a word that rhymes with "patch" but will demur). This is apparently a token concession to being post-pubertal.
I don't blame women for shaving hither and yon. I am not a hairy guy, thankfully, but what little hair I do have I don't like and I have been known to eliminate almost all of it. Once I almost sliced my right nipple off in the shower, but have since wised up and learned to use a thumb to provide protective coverage.
"[L]anding strips are just ridiculous!"
It's like getting oral from Hitler.
That female equivalent of the soul patch also happens to be in the area that I found to be the most painful spot to deal with. I'm sure that's just a coincidence. :)
"Why bother, seriously?"
Exactly. The attentions of someone who could attract someone else are sooooooo overrated.
I mean, why even bother showering?
"if they can't deal with my au naturel legs, pits, and pubis, well, they can go scratch..."
You must be beating them off with a stick 24/7. My condolences.
Re: #44
Shaving is nowhere near as good as waxing as far as sensation. Because, yeah, the stubble is like sandpaper. But if you can get those hairs out by the roots, it makes the skin all soft. It's in a totally different ballpark.
I should also note that both men and women get hairier as the progress through middle age, gaining more and fuller body hair. For some, waxing is an attempt to maintain parity. One friend of mine decided to go with what has been described here as a Mommy Brazilian in response to the inconvenience of hair around the anus--a condition more familiar to men than women. So, for her, waxing is not something she does for "narrow standards of beauty" that compel her to meet a social norm.
I think your conclusions were premature and, perhaps, more visceral than factual.
This is obviously a completely reasonable position to hold--though it is easier for some than others given the differences in the amount of body hair that different individuals have. For some, not depilitating makes only a minor aesthetic difference and for others the difference is dramatic--not to say that I'm advocating at this moment for either, only that in a society where smoothness is the more common aesthetic it is "easier" to do without depilitating if you are less hirsute to begin with since you'd still fit the aesthetic fairly well.
I'm male, and I shave my underarms and everything covered up by a pair of boxers. Yes, PZ, it's to appeal to pedophile wimmins.
I suspect that if men grew thick hair on the shafts of their penises, it would be in fashion for them to shave or wax it--at least if they wanted to get oral sex.
Can't stand it for even a few days. I look like I have lice with all the scratching I do. :(
I got one of those razors that has little bars of soap attached to it, and I use gel on top of that, so it's really hard for me to cut myself accidentally.
this may sound crude, but its pretty much the truth about why it appeals to men, or me at least. nobody likes putting their mouth on a big wad of hair.
I will not comment on this thread other than to say that I am glad that shaving one's face is looked upon as "normal". I have the world's ugliest beard. It is scanty, it has bald patches in strange locations, it is asymmetrical, it is multicoloured, it has gone prematurely white - I could go on and on. Why should I inflict this horror on innocent passers-by? Thank the FSM for razors!
Is it really possible that you need as few as two people to have sex?
This case exemplifies the kind that strikes me as poor for drawing a moral. The patient made several poor judgments: waiting so long to seek medical treatment after serious symptoms showed, insulting the area again soon thereafter, and ignoring the issue of several underlying risk factors. Without knowing the individual, it's hard to say how much of that is obsession with some beauty standard, how much refusal to face the reality of the underlying diseases (diabetes, HSV), and how much something else entirely. I agree with PZ that people shouldn't risk health to meet beauty standards. But I find that bites more as social criticism when the example is a common one, rather than a very peculiar case.
The other thing that grates on me about such peculiarity used as example is the distortion of risk assessment that goes along with that. If I point to someone who drowned after falling off a pier fishing, no one thinks that therefore recreational fishing is particularly dangerous. We just recognize that odd things happen: people choke on food in restaurants, get struck by lightening playing golf, suffer anaphylaxis from insect stings at picnics, and catch the flu in movie theatres. Nothing is safe. Not even staying home. Is waxing or shaving one's pubic hair particularly risky? I doubt it. But if enough people do it, some will die from it. That's guaranteed, regardless of what "it" is, and even if one can't predict what the causal connection will be. Does that in any form or fashion then condemn the activity? Or if we object to the activity anyway, is it then fair to say, "look! Someone has died from it!"
Maybe I haven't explained well why this irks me. But it does. And it has nothing to do with glabrousness.
Hear, hear!! (or perhaps, "Hair, hair!"
Must be something in the hair tonight. this was on digg
justin at #56...
If you're putting your mouth on a big wad of hair, you're doing it wrong! The 'target' area for your attentions is that hair-free area in the middle. Personally, I refuse to discriminate towards a woman on this issue, having enjoyed both.
I really wish you'd retract that asinine "pedophilic tendencies" speculation. It's insulting and base, and it sharply detracts from an otherwise noble point.
Pubic hair is one sign among many of pubescence. As such, adolescents have pubic hair, but are not mature. Likewise, no one can honestly confuse an adult woman for a child simply because she is shorn. In short, the presence of pubic hair is neither necessary nor sufficient to establish sexual maturity. If you're at all confused by this, I must remember to steer adolescents well clear of you. (And if it offends that I might suggest you're a danger to children, well, you have my empathy.)
*ahem* Lets just say it gets things out of the way. And hair tickles the nose.
I agree with PZ here. If our creator wanted us to fornicate hairlessly, he'd've designed us as such. Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve (the second Eve having shaved her pubes).
Well, actually he did for some of us...
So, the argument from Biblical naturalism--so wrong on so many levels, so ironic to use at Pharyngula. Of course, if you do buy Genesis (pick one), what makes you think Adam and Eve weren't smooth twinks? After all, they didn't go through puberty having been created as fully formed adults, and why would they have sex organs always? They didn't have kids until they were cast out of Eden.
And of course your argument means that clothes, deodorant, beds, sheets, toothpaste, toilet paper--whatever--are wrong, too.
Perhaps you were kidding???
I don't know about everyone else, but I see PZ's comment as really showing his personality and philosophy.
Christians, or most humans, need to acknowledge that they are mammals. Let's all just get in touch with our mammal.
i only had mine shaved once (as fair balance to my request that my girlfriend do it.) suddenly i had an extra 2 inches!
Er, touch whatever you want. Me, I'm going to leave my cat out of this...
Leviticus 8:14 'The Lord wisheth not to look upon thy apertures and antennae; wished he thus he would not have covered them in the manner of beaver and squirrel tail (respectively).'
This is a very curious Pharyngula post for two reasons: 1) things will be awkward in the halls of the UM-M science faculty, at least for a while, knowing that PZ considers many of his colleagues closet-pedophiles (or wives thereto); 2) PZ's mammal-based argument seems (to me) analogous to the homophobic Adam & (St)eve argument, to which observation I tried in #65 to spoof.
OT
...ahh...sometimes humor can be subtle. Perhaps different kinds of humor should be set in different fonts to identify it? I tend to favor Sarcastica Heavy or Ironic Oblique...
Personally, I hate the shaved look. I like the hair.
I also had a chance to walk a mile in those shoes, and I suspect I'm not alone. I had a vasectomy (two's more than enough, thank you) for which I had to shave.
The shaving is bad enough; the regrowth was awful. It was so darned irritating.
I've been with my wife for over 20 years now, and I'd never dream of asking my wife to do this. I might nightmare it, but never dream it.
And yes, I always thought shaving fulfilled some sort of "I get me a 12 year old every night" sort of sick fantasy.
Do I dare dissent and say that I actually do like the bikini waxes (not shaved! Merely restricted and groomed to a certain area and length)?
That being said I must point out:
1) I would never expect any partner to do anything for me if she didn't want to do it for herself first. Nor would I ever attempt to stop any partner for doing something for herself simply because I either didn't get it or didn't want her too.
2) Lots of men and women do these things for themselves rather than to please their partners, and I think that's exactly how it should be. I shave because I don't like getting food in my beard and I don't like getting in-grown hair folicles and I don't like the way a beard just makes me feel shaggy. (Of course, I hate shaving too so...) I had a girlfriend who likes beards but she had to suffer for coming later in my life than a girlfriend who made me pluck my eyebrows. Never again! And I will never ask any woman to do anything for me.
Also, I "like" it in the "Gee, that's kinda neat sense", not in the "Oh my god, that's so hot! And all women who don't look nasty" sense.
oh, and
3) I'm well aware that *I* would never voluntarily have a bikini wax, and that makes me saying I like them sound like a hypocrite but I'm not. Saying that I like them doesn't implies that I think women should do them, any more then hearing a woman saying she likes smooth chests mean I should get a full body wax.
I must also admit to enjoying the shaved (or waxed) look. As with woozy, I would never request someone to perform it for my benefit, but I do appreciate it when it's presented.
I think that the appeal of it has less to do with the aesthetics of the look, but rather with the effort involved.
To put it another way, the fact that my girlfriend makes the time and effort to groom a part of her body entirely for my benefit is the nice part... the actual result is secondary.
I always find it funny when PZ hoists up his skirts and gets into a full-on Maude Flanders think-of-the-children flounce.
Less hair = more tongue. That's all there is to it. And everyone's happy.
A few points:
Humans are mammals, the "pedophile" speculation is naive and uncalled for, and this woman is an idiot.
Now, possibly TMI but central to my argument: I'm also somewhat skeptical of the sanity of anyone who undertakes a hair-removal treatment that involves pulling it out by the roots. However, so far as shaving goes, both my wife and I prefer her genitals hairless. There are several reasons for this. Since she has difficulty with precise hand movements when she can't really see what she's doing, I wind up being the one operating the razor, which makes for a nice intimate moment, fulfills her stronger-than-usual fondness for feeling "taken care of," and generally does not result in cutting unless the blade is dull (disposable razor blades are good for this, since a fresh blade is much more effective and less likely to nick the genitals in question). She finds the increased sensation and decreased menstrual messiness appealing, particularly since it's comfortable for my tongue to go more or less everywhere, and I certainly have no problem with dilligence in ensuring that no stubble occurs to trouble her. For my part, I rather like the tactile sensation of smoothness and warmness, but the reason I actively prefer her hairless is twofold: first, I've never had a problem with hair catching in teeth, but loose hairs tend to get caught partly under my tongue which is extremely irritating and unpleasant (don't tell me you've never noticed this), and second, the position we usually wind up using for oral sex tends to press my nose lightly against her mound, which, if there's hair there, tends to result in a few of them slipping into my nostril, where the movement of her hips rubs her mound against my nose and in turn the sides of my nostril against the hair, rapidly irritating said nostril and leading to a result which defies tasteful description.
So, no. No one should endanger their health pursuing any standards of beauty, but appreciating the condition of oral sex not leaving the woman's pubic hair full of snot hardly requires or implies "pedophilic tendencies." :/
I would just like to clarify, that clean and smooth, has nothing to do with pedophilic tendencies. I'm only thirty-one and find early twenties disturbing. I just like the way it looks, the way it feels and I really hate picking pubic hair, out of my mouth. Also, I keep my pubes nice and tightly trimmed. My partner and I both do, as she can't shave herself without cutting herself and we can only really get away with me doing it once a week - and that's kind of touchy after the five year old decided to wake up and walk into the bathroom once, while I was shaving her. It may have been coincidence, but he ended up in our bed later, complaining of bad dreams. We just use the mustache guard on the clippers and all is good.
Khan @ 26,
I'd encountered the "back, sack and crack" wax for men on a UK semi-documentary about a beauty salon (probably Channel 4). The memorable phrase of the narrator was that it left the bloke's scrotum looking "like a napalmed hamster".
Never felt the urge to wax after hearing that.
Signed, witnessed and stamped.
"Gee, that's kinda neat"
I presume you have no idea what "gee", when said with a hard "g", means in Hiberno-English.
It's funny because he said "gee".
A long time lurker,and I choose to respond to a "shaving body hair" post...way to go..:-#
Liking the smooth side of things is NOT a sign of Paedophilia, it's convenient for Oral..as in, no irritating hairs in mouth etc. If my wife likes it (and I think she does.. if i am allowed to blow my own trumpet..!!!), then she co-operates in much the same fashion as I shave my face so that I am not like coarse grade sandpaper to kiss.
I came here from Dawkins, BTW, and I love the blog...so now I've broken my silence I hope to post comments more often..if I can keep up with the obviously greater science knowledge of you people..I am just a layman with a love of science in general and a healthy disrespect for organised child brainwashing, sorry, 'religion'.
Be gentle with me. Thankyouverymuch.
Humans may be grossed out, but chimpanzees are probably applauding!
To put it another way, the fact that my girlfriend makes the time and effort to groom a part of her body entirely for my benefit is the nice part...
Actually, I feel the nice part is that she knows herself well enough to know what she wants and that she's willing to talk to me about it that I like.
I honestly think of it as something women do for themselves and I'm grateful when they let me in on the details.
#80 I presume you have no idea what "gee", when said with a hard "g", means in Hiberno-English.
I assume it isn't clarified butter?
Um, isn't "Gee!" the proper response to something like this? I mean, Gee, c'mon.
rather than the actual magnitude of dangers posed by depilitation.
Scote, did you read the article? Did you look at the picture? That was quite a magnitude of dangers, there. And I think the main point wasn't that oh, there was this problem and she got infected, it was that after that she did it again. And ended up in the hospital, again. And then still planned to do it again. That goes beyond "feeling better" or "personal preference". None of those arguments apply if you look at the picture of what happened to her. THAT isn't pleasurable or comfortable for anyone. Sure, you can't generalize from the anecdote of one messed-up person, but that is some evidence of a pretty powerful ingrained social meme for her to continue to think this is something she should be doing, in spite of all evidence to the contrary.
But the stubble shadow is a sign of a grown man - the kind who knows how to shave. ;-)
Really, facial hair has all sorts of problems, so the increased risk for infection from a shave is easier to motivate.
Other hair is mostly an estetical question, and for some a fetish. (There are methods that can amend problems mentioned above. Thankfully the marginal of this comment is too small to get into personal hygiene issues. :-) And signs of preadolescence/old age and sickness comes into it of course.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so one thing I react to is what PZ touches, the idea that a fashion is a standard. I rather like variation and surprises...
Embarassed wrote:
I don't even get the obsession that women have with purging their underarm hair. Does that make me a communist?
No, just French. ;-)
Just kidding--the "natural look" is so common in Europe you stop noticing it after awhile; then you get kind of a reverse culture shock when you come back to the USA.
See, this bothers me. This is tantamount to saying a woman has to shave in order to meet some general baseline of attractiveness. This, if you ask me, is what we don't want.
I don't shave at all, by the way. I suspect my resolve is helped along by the fact that I'm not that hairy to begin with, but mostly I just think that it's important that women should feel like they have that option, so I'm going to stand up for it.
I jus' wanna say how sorry I am the Rev Falwell got called. This the right place to do it, ain't it? They tole me this wuz a condolence book.
Lynet -this thread has been one big exercise in male entitlement and privledge complexes.
Of course he thinks women who don't shave are unhygenic. I'm willing to bet he thinks menstruating women shouldn't be allowed near swimming pools too. Girls are icky, you see.
I prefer the hairless look and feel, and I ain't no dang pedophile. In fact, it actually creeps me out a little when someone brings that trope up, because it makes me question how their sexuality works that that's where they go as soon as the topic comes up.
It's a good way to raise hackles. But seriously, think about it: why would you want someone's pudenda modified to resemble a prepubescent girls? It's just a little weird. (Not that there's anything wrong with being weird--sex is weird to begin with).
Obviously, the risk of waxing is low. I'm not saying you shouldn't do it because you'll get an infection and die; I'm not saying you shouldn't do it for any reason at all. I'm saying there's something screwy when this artificial treatment becomes such an important standard of beauty that this particular women risked agony to do it. I'm all for letting your freak flag fly, expressing yourself as an individual, doing whatever harmless actions turn you on...but this is not a case someone simply being herself. This is a woman pressured to conform to something peculiar and in her case, risky.
That was a different way to start to my morning. Usually, I get my daily dose of atheism and science that is far beyond my comprehension. Today was different though. Today I burst into maniacal laughter in front of several co-workers. Thanks PZ.
I favor the hairless look. I don't want to look like an ape even though my ancestors did at one point.
...which reminds me of Chris Clarke's classic remembrance of a David Crosby song from days of yore:
One morning I woke up
With dream comfort memory despair
You who are on the road, must have
Almost cut my hair
It happened just the other day
And I feel like I've been here before
And twenty years ago I come into this life
I could have said it was in my way.
But I didn't and I wonder why
And you, of the tender years,
Big birds flying across the sky,
Turning into butterflies above our nation.
There goes your "G" rating!
But seriously, think about it: why would you want someone's pudenda modified to resemble a prepubescent girls? It's just a little weird.
If the motivation is to emulate a pre-pubescent girl, then yeah, that's weird, to say the least. But if the motive is to maximize your own sexual pleasure, or to get hair out of the way for oral sex, or to keep the area cleaner, that has nothing to do with emulating a child, just as the average man shaving his beard off daily wants to emulate a young boy. (Me, I'm fine with beards, and I never pressured my husband to get rid of his even when I was sporting the full Rio.)
But yes, that woman has serious issues, even beyond those of the average young woman desperate to conform to fashion. Her poor management of her diabetes was a huge red flag in itself.
(That is, just as the average man who shaves his face daily does NOT want to emulate a young boy.)
Exactly. I think it was clear that the original post wasn't so much about "is shaving good or bad" as much as "what have we come to that a woman doesn't seem to mind getting hepatitis and strep so she can conform to social norms".
So if I prefer my girlfriend to be hairless down below - that makes me a pedophile?
And if I like my girlfriend's small breasts - does that make me a pedophile?
And if I like my girlfriend to put her hair in pigtails and put on her old school uniform with the Hello Kitty panties and call me 'daddy' - does that make me a pedophile?
Your theory is absurd.
I personally prefer the "natural" look. OTOH I used to shave an ex-girlfriend's legs for her, in the bathtub. It often led to other things... So to each his/her own. But as with most things, it should be a matter of personal choice, not coercion or peer pressure. Yes I know, easy for me to say, I'm a lazy man with a beard.
"And if I like my girlfriend to put her hair in pigtails and put on her old school uniform with the Hello Kitty panties and call me 'daddy' - does that make me a pedophile?"
No, but you may have some pedophilic tendancies if you fantasize about a young school girl with Hello Kitty panties.
100+ comments? Is there any doubt that "sex sells" :-)
So why exactly did we homo sapiens keep our hair down there after we lost it almost everywhere else? My guess would be to offer some minimal protection to an exposed and important organ. Although in that case it's weird that the hair grows close to, but not over the organ that needs protecting.
It's occurred to me that if we weren't so used to the distribution of hair on the human body, we would think it extremely weird. That is, if we saw some other primate, or any mammal for that matter, with patches of hair on an otherwise hairless body it would seem as weird as the nose on a proboscis monkey or something.
JJR @86:
the "natural look" is so common in Europe
It really isn't any more, actually. A generation ago, it would have been, at least in northern Europe (Mediterranean people tend to be very fastidious about personal hygiene; northerners have only begun getting better about this in the past few decades). These days depilation (of legs and armpits at minimum) is the rule. When today's grandmothers were young, not shaving meant nothing at all. If their daughters and granddaughters don't shave, though, it is a 'statement', just as it would be in the USA.
Rob @100: I suspect it is just possible that Shaun @98 is being tongue-in-cheek.
Mark - another hypothesis that has a decent amount of support is that we kept hair where it could have the most effect on pheromone distribution. Holds onto the scent and all. That would explain the underarm hair component as well. People do respond pretty strongly to personal pheromones, even if we don't like to think we do.
Sheesh, PZ, were you running under your comment quota or something? I'm having flashbacks to Twisty Faster's occasional "blowjobs are yecchy" threads, for a few reasons, not just that this is an easy way to get a hundred-comment thread in under two hours.
The most telling connection is that in both cases, there's an act, be it blowjobbery or pubic waxing, which is mentioned in the post in less-than-complimentary terms--in Twisty's case, it was the "funk-filled bratwurst" comment; in PZ's, the pedophilia accusation. An example is given of the act being a bad thing--in Twisty's case, I believe it was a woman crying about how she felt she had failed as a human being because she couldn't completely suppress her gag reflex; in PZ's, the infection.
This leads to a series of somewhat titillating posts by people explaining how much they enjoy said act, balanced by people pointing out that they weren't raining on anyone's parade, merely pointing out that there seems to be an awful lot of pressure to perform this particular act (the bratwurst/pedophile remark is glossed over by the blogger acting surprised in the comments that anyone would take it personally), and a few people who are raining on folks' parade, see Renali #89 and (I assume her) accusation that expressing a preference, even with repeated caveats such as "this is just my opinion" and "while I enjoy it, it's not my call to make", is a symptom of Male Entitlement. (Women expressing said preference are, presumably, acting out of false consciousness and don't know what's good for them.)
In much the same way that it's impossible to advocate for egalitarian blowjobs because they're such a symbol of submission that even if you pretend you're not submitting, you still kind of are, it's impossible to advocate for non-creepy Brazilian waxing, because (a) defenses, be they from women or men, are simply expressing Male Entitlement, and (b) any expressions of "but I like it, and I'm not a pedophile" reek of protesting-too-much. It's a tidy sort of catch-22, and it lets a certain segment of posters here get their indignation-wank on.
Of course, all of this serves to obscure the original point that there's clearly something messed-up going on when the subject of the article places this particular social pressure above her own health, because most if not all of the posters here aren't her, and we like talking about ourselves.
When did this place become I Blame The Patriarchy?
Oh, and #92 Rob, you are an ape. You're also a placental mammal, a mammal, a tetrapod, etc., etc. You may be a relatively hairless ape, but you're still an ape.
Any reasonably well-read evolutionist has heard of the juvenile ape hypothesis of human hairlessness (neoteny). It is explained in Dawkins' The Ancestor's Tale and rehashed in Matt Ridley's GENOME. Theorists reasonably explain that youthfulness - phenotypically expressed as hairlessness - is preferred (more attractive) because reproductive success is more likely if the mates are young.
Are women and men(!) removing hair from their bodies to appear younger? The answer is most likely YES, but there's a big difference between suitors preferring younger-looking mates and paedophilia.
PZ's belief that bare pudendas (or is it pudendae?) betray a man's hidden paedophilic tendancies means that he must also conclude that we ALL have paedophilic tendancies for wanting younger looking hairless mates per the neoteny hypothesis.
Personal hygiene? Hmph! I bet those damn southerners don't even go to the sauna twice a week. I think you mean "personal grooming".
Carlie:
"I think it was clear that the original post wasn't so much about "is shaving good or bad" as much as "what have we come to that a woman doesn't seem to mind getting hepatitis and strep so she can conform to social norms"."
That was what I considered to be the point as well.
grendelkhan:
Spare me your sexist accusations. You could try asking me to elaborate instead of deciding for me what my intent was. But, that would make it harder to needlessly bash feminists, wouldn't it.
"see Renali #89 and (I assume her) accusation that expressing a preference, even with repeated caveats such as "this is just my opinion" and "while I enjoy it, it's not my call to make", is a symptom of Male Entitlement. (Women expressing said preference are, presumably, acting out of false consciousness and don't know what's good for them.)"
Incorrect. What I was calling male entitlement were the several comments stating or implying that women who don't conform are unsanitary, unhygenic, and/or not getting male attention because of it. People stating their preferrences with regards to sex, etc, is besides the point and off topic.
I'm sure the lady with the huge ass cyst in her groin said she liked it too. That doesn't make it make any sense.
Actually, the "pubis" in os pubis "bone of the lap" is a genitive. The nominative, "lap", is... pubes. Yes, singular. It works like sedes "seat".
I suppose you understand now why this part of Latin declension has not survived into the Romance languages. :o)
Apparently not all of us can perceive them...
Incidentally, I think pudenda is a neuter plural, "those to be ashamed of".
Renali #108:
Please explain what accusations you think I made, and please explain how they were sexist. Please explain how I'm "bash[ing] feminists".
When you said that "this thread has been one big exercise in male entitlement and privledge complexes", you appeared to be referring to the entire thread. Given that the only comments which implied that said women were unsanitary etc. were #31 (debatably), #48, #56 (shot down by #62), and #66 by the time you posted in #89, either you think that less than five percent of the comments comprise "this thread", or you were referring to the other comments as well.
Hardly. As I pointed out, when the original poster says "are you pedophiles?", it's relatively natural for people to sit up and explain that they are not, in fact, pedophiles. Just like Twisty's post without the "funk-filled bratwurst" wouldn't have gotten half the follow-ups, PZ's post without the "are you pedophiles?" bit wouldn't have either.
I get so tired when some retard implies that guys like hairless pooter because of pedophilic tendencies.... Sheeesh, PZ, you can do better than to broadly stereotype a behavior that way, can't you??
*I* *DON'T* *LIKE* *GETTING* *HAIR* *STUCK* *IN* *MY* *TEETH*
GAH! That's quite a nasty picture over at that link.
I hope that poor deluded monkey regains function of her parts. What a shame.
It's amusing- there is apparently a mystical magical social pressure to dress up, wear make up, ruin your feet in bad shoes, freeze in a skirt, etc, in order to get men's attention/fit in/feel right/etc.
Or something.
If you just stopped doing all that, men would figure out that much of it is not needed, but the constant media barrage that you need to look like a supermodel makes some people seek 'beauty' at even higher costs to themselves.
Sad.
My message would have to be: Girls, guys who don't like you just the way you are need to grow up, and you need to grow up if you can't see that.
I might like my girlfriend's hair better long than short, but it's up to her how to style it. I might like her better in jeans than skirts, but it's up to her how to dress. I might think she looks better in a tube top than a blouse, but what to wear is her choice. And I might like her clam shaved better than I like it woolly or vice-versa, but this, too, is simply her choice.
Those speculating that men who enjoy the shaved vulvar state are, in so doing, living out pedophilic fantasies are fucking idiots. Consider the practical ramifications of a hairless gash vis-a-vis cunnilingus before theorizing about psychopathological factors. Or perhaps some of you have simply never chowed a good box. If this is the case, I recommend trying it.
Personally I find the whole discussion of women and the supposed demands of beauty ridiculous. Are the standards of beauty placed on women sexist? I'd argue no. They're certainly different than those placed on men; I wouldn't claim they aren't. I suppose we could compare money and time spent on personal appearance in men vs. women. But I think that would miss the point. (I also don't think the difference would be that great; most people seem to think all women shop like they're spoiled heiresses and all men shop like they're working class slobs.) Most of what is considered "traditionally masculine" has no greater depth than what's considered "traditionally feminine."
What is sexist is this assumption that anytime a woman does something stupid in the name of beauty it reflects the societal demands placed on all women. God forbid any woman wants to wax her pubic region because she just thinks it looks better that way. (I'll set aside the assumption that trends reflect social pressure at all; an assumption based in bias and not science.) The psychoanalysis I find sexist too. It's about wanting to look young, it's about mens' suppressed pedophilia tendencies, blah blah blah... Aesthetics is a complex thing. The appeal of uninterrupted hairless flesh is probably more basic than anything having to do with the desire for youth. But the truth is we have no idea; and I doubt the answer just happens to appeal so neatly to your biases.
PZ -
It's a good way to raise hackles. But seriously, think about it: why would you want someone's pudenda modified to resemble a prepubescent girls?
People don't generally do it to resemble prepubescent girls. My partner and I both do it (though we usually only trim it quite short) because we like the way sex feels, with minimal hair down there. Believe me, my partner doesn't like me trimmed or shaved, because she's attracted to prepubescent boys or vice versus.
I have to say though, she has gotten far more obsessive about it, since she got pregnant again. Before, it was something that got done once a week, or even every couple. Now it is a near daily ritual. We still try to do it together, once a week or so, but we're a little more sparing about it since the five year old woke up and busted us, while I was shaving mommma.
That's actually another attraction. There is something very exciting, on an emotional level, when you and your partner have enough trust to allow the other to use a razor or clippers on their genitals. I actually find it, physically, more comfortable, to shave or clip myself, but whenever I shave or clip my partner, I am all about her clipping me. Having a rather rocky relationship, I appreciate every bonding we can get.
No, it makes you Japanese :-)
I must agree with some of the ladiesn and germs on here. I prefer my women shaved. Sorry, I don't find hair a big turn on-down there....for a variety of reasons like when I %$#@$@# or she *&%^&!@@ and even with ^&*^&%$ and chocolate syrup-just kidding about the food part.
Several years ago I read the most wonderful essay by Havelock Ellis: "What Makes a Woman Beautiful." He is definitely on the side of body hair, specifically pubic hair. This essay is considered a classic. Ellis was a sexual psychologist and a contemporary of Margaret Sanger. Our bodies have evolved to look and smell enticing to the opposite sex. Why would you mess with the perfect formula?
Is no one here familiar with the theory that the shaved female genital area practice started because the almost universal observation of that practice in porn made it popular among men?
I'm not a big fan of finding hairs in my mouth when eating claims.
Mark P -
Is no one here familiar with the theory that the shaved female genital area practice started because the almost universal observation of that practice in porn made it popular among men?
If you were to say the current trend of it, then yes and I agree that is the case. However, the practice of genital depilation, stretches back millenia, to before there existed reasonable methods for pubic hair removal.
Renali:
First, here is the definition of "sexist" from dictionary.com. If you're going to sling that word around, please browse the following link and explain which comments qualify and why.
Second, the stereotype of feminists as narcissistic, paranoid, reactionaries is vicious, hateful, and demeaning Please stop feeding it.
Come on boys! All this squeamish whining about hair getting in the way of oral sex is enough already! Sex is messy. Grow up. As a woman, I've got enough to do without worrying about THAT area as well. Give us a break. And hair DOES NOT EQUAL "dirty". I am very clean. It's called soap and water. And I wonder if lesbians complain about hair getting in the way of sex as much as these finicky guys do? Any lesbians with input here? I'm curious as to why something so normal is considered "getting in the way" of sex. If pubic hair is getting in the way, then maybe you're not doing it right.
Why would you mess with the perfect formula?
Because human behavior can't easily be reduced to a formula. I would bet that this author was affected by his own biases.
As to the porn and shaving connection making it popular among men, that may play into it, and perhaps the trend was picked up there first, but it raises a question. So what? Some women like it, and for whatever reason, they are fairly enthusiastic about it.
You know every once in awhile we are each of us wrong. PZ I must say you can't get away with the pedophile reference on this one. Nope, Not unless that is you have started to channel Pat Robertson. Equating pedophilia with shaving? You should know better. Or as they say when I come up with something like that. "There is help for you you know"
All in goo humor. No offence intended.
madaha -
All this squeamish whining about hair getting in the way of oral sex is enough already! Sex is messy. Grow up.
I'm not really squeamish about it, I just don't like it. As I have a partner who shares my preference, which makes it very convenient.
And hair DOES NOT EQUAL "dirty". I am very clean. It's called soap and water.
I don't think it's particularly dirty. I'll even deal with the hair if I have to, used to date a lot of hippies. Few of my previous partners shaved anything, except for some who shaved or trimmed only their pubes. Honestly, I am a bit turned on by hairy women, I just don't happen to like pubic hair.
And I wonder if lesbians complain about hair getting in the way of sex as much as these finicky guys do? Any lesbians with input here?
I imagine it's about the same as it is with non-lesbians. I do know that most of the women I know, who play with both girls and boys, shave and refuse to play with girls who don't. Conversely, one of my last roomies (a lesbian) thinks shaving is just gross. To be sure, she keeps it in her bikini line, but that's the extent of it.
I kind of find it amusing that so many people have such strong feelings against depilated pubic regions, it is certainly surprising. I guess that my seeing it as a rather mild form of kink, is just indicative that I'ma lot kinkier than I thought.
I would like to add, that I find the folks who are trying to equate men expressing their sexual desires to their partners, as some sort of misogynistic male privilege attitude, rather disturbing. Any healthy sexual relationship, requires that partners be honest and open about what turns them on. They should also talk about and work out, what they are comfortable with. What they can do and what they won't, to please their partner. To be absolutely certain, this must be a two way street, but to presume that a man shouldn't express his opinion, seems rather repressive to me.
Relationships are all about give and take and compromise. We do things for the person that we love and share our lives with, that make them happy, in turn, they do things for us. Often times, people who have an interest in the same things end up together. I have a partner now, who is very similar to me in sexual tastes and kink. There are a few areas that need to be worked on, but we do our best to please each other and for the most part it works. Really, our biggest problem, is my incompetence at knot tying, a new kink for me.
All that not mentioning one's personal preferences does, is to ensure that they will not be fulfilled. Often enough, the preference might be shared by one's partner, who may just be rather nervous about bringing it up themselves. It can also cause a person to resent their partner, if they feel that they can't mention things that they like. This isn't about male entitlement, this is about both partner's entitlement, to be happy with their sex life.
How much of our sexual behavior is "normal" in the first place? Perhaps pubic hair didn't get in the way for the first hundred thousand years of our species' existence, because men didn't much bother with this silly "trying to pleasure women with their mouth and hands" nonsense; it was a club to the head followed by two minutes of penetration. Who knows?
"And if I like my girlfriend to put her hair in pigtails and put on her old school uniform with the Hello Kitty panties and call me 'daddy' - does that make me a pedophile?"
Yes.
What makes you think societal pressure was the main reason why this woman did this? Isn't it possible that she had some unusual psychological issues? People who repeatedly depilate themselves after getting hospitalized by the complications are not, so far as I know, all that common.
Total pubic depilation is hardly the cultural norm in the Western world. Most Hollywood actresses and even Playboy models have some hair. I don't think hairlessness is enforced by social convention nearly as much as, say, being skinny.
My wife's a freelance model, and the photographers (mostly male) she works with are split about 50/50 on the pubic hair question. (The art photographers usually want lots of it; glamour and fashion photographers usually don't.) So she usually keeps it trimmed but present.
madaha #126: I'll agree that any guy who refuses to perform oral sex on a furry vulva just because it's furry doesn't deserve to be in the same bedroom as the owner of said vulva.
Hey PZ and some commenters, glad you finally got this whole "framing" business figured out.
You could have said "this woman in this article is foolish, and I do not share her common grooming preferences." Instead you went with classics that were closer to "Think of the children," "your personal preferences are oppressive to others", "it's society's fault," "those who disagree with me are perverse deviants," etc...
See how it gets stronger reactions? Imagine if a person were to pair this technique with sound arguments too!
Stronger reactions are more entertaining. Who the hell wants to be surrounded by people that simply nod their head in agreement and don't leave a comment or suggestion? In the words of the wisest cartoon character ever: "Lick my balls, Kyle! Lick my balls."
Gah.. PZ's reaction in this case is *precisely* what pissed me off in a similar case with that clown pop psychologist on TV. In his case it was a wife having a problem with the idea that her daughter might strip *at someone else's house* having learned about nudism from her naturist father. My first thought was, "Why the hell did you marry him, if you think this is a problem?" However, my second reaction was, "What? You think so poorly of your own or other people's children that you as a psychologist **actually** think they would be too stupid to figure out that they are not allowed to strip at someone else's house, just because they could at yours? And for that matter, even if they did, are they so stupid they can't learn to not do it again after the first time?" Of course, his own belief that this was a *problem* and that the mother had a legitimate issue came from both the apparent belief that kids are too stupid the learn any better, which if it had been my kid would have had me punching him in the face, but based "solely" on his personal experience in Europe, where he, "Saw all sorts of people on beaches, fat, old, etc. and found it all so ugly and horrible." I.e., because "he" thought the human body was ugly and horrible when it wasn't a fracking porn star, everyone else should, so it was obviously a bad thing to teach your kid to not think about their own body that way...
Personal biases and what **you** think is going on in the minds of the people doing or liking something is just that *your personal bias*. Its not fact, its not a valid point of contention, and its *not* any more valid a grounds for your professional opinion on the subject as a biologist than it was/is valid for some idiot TV psychologist to use his personal dislikes or discomfort at something as grounds to defend the delusion of one person, while ignoring any argument that might be given by someone else.
In this case PZ, you are simply dead wrong, and your assumption about what it, "looks like", is simplistic. Its not a valid argument for 90% of the people doing it. The ones it is valid for... Well, they are screwed up anyway, but at least they are not screwing actual kids, which they would, assuming your argument holds any water at all. See, that is the problem. In those cases where your argument may be valid, either its stopping people from acting as pedophiles, by giving them a legal means to achieve such a fantasy, or, it wouldn't make a damn difference, since pedophiles go after kids not *only* or *as much* due to how they look as how easy it is for them to trick kids. Adults are complicated. Unless you are Paris Hilton, its unlikely that telling an adult that you lost your puppy will get you laid, let alone let you kidnap them. Just as rape isn't about sex, pedophilia is not 100% about how someone "looks", its about how well they can be controlled, how easy it is to talk to them, how easy it is to get them to do things to you, or let you do those things to them, etc. These are people that almost universally target kids because even the married ones find it *easier* to get a kid into bed with them than an adult. I would say that any visual element is far more likely to be either basic biology, which despite our attempts to do so, hasn't evolved to see 20 year olds that are edging past their highest reproductive peaks as equally interesting as someone just coming "into" that peak, combined with an exaggeration of that natural tendency, which we try to suppress for the social good, in those people that find that even dealing with teens, never mind adults is simply, "Too socially difficult."
In other words, there may be "some" element of what you suggest, but its a purely social not biological element that makes it as drastic as you claim it should be, while those with the real problems go well beyond *any* natural biological drives, and solely due to there own inability to handle the social issues involved with being a 21st century human, that has to talk to a mate, than a monkey that can just bribe someone with a banana to get a blow job from a random female.
So, what, you're supposed to grab the hair in both hands and yank it out of the way before you start? :)
To weigh in with my own unnecessarily graphic information, I depilate the cock and balls because I find the flow of oral sex is kind of messed up when the wife stops to choke on a hair; she does something similar.
I've seen various people ask about paedophilia and pubic hair before, and to be honest, I can only assume the suggestion comes from people who never perform oral sex.
I have read at least one comment some place where some women, who I assume must have had longer than normal hair there, stated that just non-oral sex could be a problem since it was kind of distracting when hair get caught in the mix and the guys pistoning came close to ripping it out. Maybe the problem is that the people who make such comment don't have much sex "at all"? ;)
From what I take by skimming through the comments above, few (if any) actually read the journal briefing. Is anyone else bothered by the toxic shock syndrome causing an HPV-1 flare in the region? I think the journal article has successfully ended any naive had I had of the vulva region of females, and I think I'll be on a diet from "claims" for the next several years until the mental image of a herpes-covered, melon-sized mollusk creature slips.
I think many people agree with this regardless what side of the fence one is on concerning the aspect of being shaved or unshaven.
DuWayne: while you personally may not be squeamish, I was referring to the many, many posts by men going "waa waa, I hate hair in my teeth! icky-poo!", also those many who equated "hairless" with "clean". It was becoming ridiculous, y'all. Frankly, it just sounded like maybe you guys simply don't like oral sex after all. Maybe we girls should paint a smiley face on it and flavor it like watermelon candy, would that help?? lol.
With regards to the idea that the point of this post was "what have we come to that a woman doesn't seem to mind getting hepatitis and strep so she can conform to social norms," I have to say that's a load of bovine fecal waste.
This is a case of *one* person who grossly mismanaged her health and did not seek medical attention promptly when she was in dire need of it. That is the behavior pattern to bemoan here, not the relatively common choice that some people make to depilate some portions of their body.
Actually, painting a bullseye would work better, especially for amateurs who never got the sex talk (I put my penis where?) or whose sex talk conformed to that lame "birds and bees" crap.
#138 and 139: why do you assume having pubic hair means having absurdly LONG pubic hair?? of course, one can see why THAT would get in the way.
Licking and stroking fur is normal mammalian behavior. I'm not going to problematize the occasional hair in my teeth. My partner occasionally trims down there, but there's still plenty of fur, and I like her that way.
As for the pedophilia aspect, the commenters that take issue with PZ's comment seem to be missing a point, one that #106 brings forth. There might be some evolutionary psychology at work here. Perhaps some are subconsciously attracted to paedomorphic traits in potential sexual partners.
My grandfather always ate his melon with salt (not a euphemism - bear with me). To him, that was the only sensible way of doing it; everyone else was doing it wrong, and ought to be corrected. It was kind of an amusing example of a grumpy-old-man-ism.
That sort of arbitrary "what's wrong with the kids today" grumbling can be a fun pastime, but when it's taken too seriously, it's a little sad. And when a trivial gripe or defense is propped up by old PC saws, it helps to turn those angles into trivial cliches. And that's a problem when it diminishes recognition of other, serious issues.
For example, feminism was mentioned in this thread. Is it constructive to haul out the big guns (pun intended) over divergent grooming preferences? Or does it make it easier for people to project the triviality of such an issue conversation onto feminism as a whole, e.g.: "feminism is just fancy talk by women who don't want to shave?"
Save the outrage for issues that warrant it - trivial issues diminish the impact of that outrage. And dammit, don't feel obliged to justify why your mostly harmless preference is superior to that of someone else.
Also, making sex political is unsexy.
I like sex
and oral sex
and extra hair gives me something extra to hold on to!!!!
(on the other hand, less hair gives me more to kiss...)
On this topic, I am firmly agnostic!
The appearance is pleasant. The flavor is pleasant. The mucus membrane irritation is not pleasant. Would you also "squeamish" and contemptuously deride a man who wouldn't let you shove an ounce of black pepper up his nose during sex? After all, spices are natural...
From Saturday Night Live a couple seasons ago:
"According to a recent survey, 70% of women said they were ashamed of their vaginas. From what I've seen, they should be."
Err, *label* squeamish. Hit post too soon.
Beyond that, madaha, if it WOULD actually kill you to debate what people actually say and mean instead of trying to tack on conclusions (like "you just don't like oral sex") you've jumped to based on nothing but your own stupid prejudices, wouldn't it be better to just get it over with?
I think Caledonian put it best, in a different thread: "When you're obsessed with hammers, everything looks like a nail."
It couldn't hurt.
Am I entirely wrong, or does the slightly lurid appeal of the subject seem to attract more commenters? =)
Perhaps they are. But PZ didn't suggest that. He suggested that the large proportion of women who trim their pubic hair do so in order to attract paedophiles. It's the ignorance of the comment that annoyed me. It's clearly a practice PZ knows very little about - for example, it seems not to have occurred to him that most people remove some, but not all their hair: clearing the way for easy sex but retaining a hairy mons pubis for attractiveness - but there was no genuine curiosity about it, no genuine enquiry, just "young people do it, I don't understand it, it's probably some satanic paedophile ritual". I paraphrase. :)
slightly lurid....
I shudder to think what your definition of extremely lurid would be....
I'm not sure that would even be safe for viewing in a locked room (NSVLR)!
Believe me, you do not want to know. But it involves Germans. And a midget.
madala -
Maybe we girls should paint a smiley face on it and flavor it like watermelon candy, would that help?? lol.
Chocolate, gotta be chocolate. Whipped cream too.
Oh, and oddly enough, I am far more enthusiastic about oral sex than I am about intercourse. Not to say that I don't like intercourse, just that I really, really enjoy the oral sex. In the nearly two years my partner and I were separated, I didn't have intercourse once (a serious record for me, I am the definative man whore) but I couldn't go without the some good munching. I had the luck of finding a woman who is generally more interested in girls than boys, who was also trying to avoid any romantic entanglements. As I am pretty reasonable with tongue and toys, it was a perfect match while it lasted. . .
Steve @ 153
While I don't agree with PZ's comment re Paedophilia... I don't think that he was intentionally implying that EVERYONE who depilates does so out of a desire to look more child-like... his next sentence
despite the awkward phrasing [two people] indicates that he understands that couples can and do enjoy it both the look and the sensation....
I think that PZ's main point is in his final sentence...
which is what this poor woman has done -- at the expense of her health, she continues to depilate....
One last thing -- nowhere is there any indication that this is clearly a practice PZ knows very little about nor is there evidence to support your claim that most people remove some [...of...] their hair
If you're going to attempt factual correction, please use facts.
forsen @ 155
Germans! Why is it always Germans!
And Midgets yet....
Now I'll be have another sleepless night (and not the good kind, either!)
Says a man with carefully groomed hair on his face.
Madaha, here's a real live lesbian weighing in. Now, my partner & I are both in our early 40s, so no hair removal here, just nairing the ones that will stick out of our swim suits. i think it's just a fashion thing, in sense that when we first became sexually active, pubic hair removal was not common, so it never occured to us to do it. Now from what I can tell at my very lesbian gym, lots of the younger women are removing theirs, though I don't know if brazilians are popular or if it's mostly a less extensive removal, as it is considered rude to stare at someone's crotch as they come out of the shower.
I would guess that if it had been common to do it when I was younger, I might have developed an expectation that that was how "things" should be in bed, and may do it now.
As for oral, I can't comment - never tried it without the hair so no standard of comparison. The ache of the jaw after going at it for a while is the only issue I'm aware of.
i'd like to present an interesting idea.
that pedophilia is actually one of the driving factors of sexual selection among human beings. what differentiates us from chimpanzees is essentially neotonoy. we are sort of like over-grown baby chimps. hairless, with big heads.
and we sexually select for these characteristics.
though, i think we are bound to see a rebound, due largely to waxing, shaving, etc, as it removes the impact of the actual genetic content.
As for the above comments on how to properly execute oral stimulation of a hirsute pudenda:
As opposed to yanking I would suggest careful use of your oral appendage as well as your oral labia and proboscis as well. When done correctly this will usually avoid hair in the teeth. While there might be some ingestion of hair, all in all I think the gentle touch avoids most problems and will actually heighten the enjoyment.
There. I didn't say anything lewd or fucking obscene. Oops...
Ok, so PZ isn't as bad as Dr. Phil, who actually opted to let his personal prejudices color his assessment of the imaginary problem, in the case I talked about. Its still a case of grumpy old man syndrome and makes some assumptions about what is "normal" that is based on societal norms that are not even consistent across states, let alone countries. What does "looking under age" mean? 16, which is legal in Arizona? 13, which is in Hawaii? Something lower, which it may be in some other countries? Historically, its probably a very low number. Biologically... Not sure. Does anyone know if our cousins the Bonobo engage in some form *before* maturity or not? And what, if they do, would that say about "normal" biologically, instead of socially?
And as many other people here point out, this isn't about the general result of this, its about one stupid lady, who if it wasn't depilation would probably have been infected tattoos, over-tanning, extreme plastic surgery, botox poisoning, or one of any number of other issues. Such people have trouble, perhaps precisely because people make such a stupid fuss over it, and they thus learn to fuss over it themselves, or maybe because they have a real psychological problem, which makes it difficult for them to self support. They literally need other people to tell them who they are, because they do poorly at defining themselves. Its hard to have sympathy for such people, since its not always clear if they can't think, or just don't bother to.
That said, I find it quite absurd how this judgment via appearance effects "all" groups. Example, someone that gets tattoos or piercings is likely to be ostrocized by people that are naturists. Why? Because its adornment, and they are *very* anti-adornment. I think that is just BS and goes way too far, but its strongly enough believed, and this is where the joke comes in, that some resorts that cater *specifically* to adults, and allow stuff in some public areas that most nudist locations wouldn't, i.e. sex, will actually refuse to allow anyone with certain types of tattoos or piercings in. I mean, how much sense does that make? "Come to our resort to get laid, but don't do anything that might draw attention to the bits of you that other people are going to be laying!" Huh?? lol
Its a fine line between saying that you imagine something is odd or uncomfortable to you, and justifying that feeling to other people as anything other than opinion. Pointing out some fool that managed to mess themselves up doing it is usually step two, and its just a slight shift of the foot to cross the line entirely and stop making rational arguments about it, instead of just repeating personal prejudice and opinion. I think its that realization that led me and a number of others to react a bit less than sympathetically with PZ's seeming implications.
Please, no more. My stomach can only take so much!
Please, no more. My stomach can only take so much!
Posted by: X
so much what? hair? you got teeth or lawnmowers? :)
Windy @107:
Personal hygiene? Hmph! I bet those damn southerners don't even go to the sauna twice a week. I think you mean "personal grooming".
No; I meant hygiene, though the grooming part is true as well. Northern Europeans these days are quite clean, but not very long ago many of them would have been content with a weekly bath, with at best a 'whore's wash' or two in between. During my travels in Italy and Spain, I found the people physically much cleaner (and particularly fastidious about the cleanliness of their clothes).
Similarly, Germans of a certain sort like to make fun of the resident Turks -- 'stinking of garlic' etc. -- even though Turks tend to be far more fanatic about washing than that sort of German (I'm thinking 65 years old, votes CDU, reads the Bild-Zeitung, listens to Volksmusik).
I wish you had used these words in the post. The words you did use leave a sense of "Silly wimmins. Why can't they just not do stupid beauty rituals?"
And of course the answer is that when you've been told your entire fucking life that you are sub-par if you don't modify your body, then it ain't that easy to leave off the mods.
Between PZ and his "But seriously, think about it: why would you want someone's pudenda modified to resemble a prepubescent girls?", and Madaha's exaggerations, this thread has been a serious disappointment.
THANK YOU to Mary, Outlier, Robster, Scote, Cathy, and the many others who have shown some sense in the discussion. Without your input, this thread would have been an utter travesty. Thank you for providing some rationality to a discussion that has gone shockingly off-course from what I usually see on Pharyngula.
NEWS FLASH: People depilate for what appear to be a lot of reasons. Comfort, cleanliness, increased sensitivity or sexual pleasure, and yes, in some cases, for fashion, kink, or other reasons. Assuming that it has anything to do with pedophilia is REALLY reaching, and damned insulting to a hell of a lot of people! I don't see you making the same assumptions when people shave their legs, faces, underarms, backs, chests, butts, scrotums, etc. All of these are also 'modifying X to resemble a prepubescent's', aren't they?
Why is it your immediate assumption that pedophila has anything to do with it? Most of all, WHY have you stuck with that idea after you were called on it the first time?
I hate to say it, but it looks to me like you're making assumptions without the data to back yourself up, even in the face of quite a bit of evidence to the contrary. That's not like you, PZ!
Madaha, #141:
DuWayne: while you personally may not be squeamish, I was referring to the many, many posts by men going "waa waa, I hate hair in my teeth! icky-poo!"
Not counting DuWayne, there were no more than 5 posts at most before this reply that even mentioned a dislike of hairs in their mouths, just over 3% of the 140 posts. If you're NOT referring to him, how do you get even 'many', much less, 'many, many'? Of those mentioning a dislike of hairs in their mouths, only a couple at most used even an exclamation point, much less 'waa waa, icky poo!' Perhaps you could comment on what was actually being said instead of what you -think- they said? Yes, it's becoming ridiculous, but it's YOU being ridiculous, not them.
If you weren't counting DuWane in the group you're complaining about, I don't see how you could count more than 2 real complaints at most. DuWayne is one of only 2 that I can see who actually said they *hated* it, the others just mentioned that it could be an irritant or that hairless pubes made for better sex - Both of which are perfectly true, at least for a very large number of people. If DuWayne wasn't the squeamish one, how were the 'many, many' others worse?
BATHING also makes for better sex. Would you consider it ridiculous whining if I said I preferred sexual partners to who bathed, or that I/we would have more/better sex if they did?
Most of the women who have posted to tell us why *they* depilate mentioned comfort or better sex, why is it 'waa waa, icky poo!' for a few males to have the same opinion?
I've had women say that they preferred men to shave their faces before having oral sex with them, or it would irritate them in tender places. Were they being ridiculous for having a preference or for saying anything about it? Did they 'simply not really like oral sex after all'?
Sheesh! One simple personal preference, for some a kink, for others a matter of comfort, and suddenly rationality goes right out the window and the accusations fly. I'm really disappointed in this thread, and at how thin the veneer of rationality can be even for the supposedly educated and openminded among us.
Maybe if I go to bed right now, I can write this whole thread off as a bad dream. It *is* after 9 am already, I really OUGHT to get some sleep sooner or later..
The Lesser of TWO Weevils!
I don't like shaved crotches. I agree with PZ that they pre-adolescent. I think is a matter of personal esthetic taste. The only good argument I have heard so far is that it increases sensitivity. Being a guy, I don't have hair on the surfaces on which I feel the most, so no shaving/waxing is necessary there. One of the arguments for that at first might sound reasonable, which becomes even more ludicrous for that reason, once you think about the facts, is the one about cleanliness. Se what The Straight Dope had to say about the need of washing hands in man after they urinate:
So, do you think removing the hair will have a significant effect on the absence/presence of dangerous bacteria (which, in my opinion, would define the degree of real cleanliness)?
Welcome to the era of coiffed pussies.
As a young man, I became sexually active in college in the 70s. Women weren't shaving anything then. Legs or pits, let alone vulvas. Once it was clear that the hair was part of the deal, I had no prob signing on. Either deal with the pubes or stay a virgin. I went with the pubes. Now, I like the pubes.
Now, genitalia are primped and fussed over like the hair on your head. Fashion statements and superficial judgements continue even after the clothes come off for sex. Seems to me the very opposite of intimacy.
Great point, Otto! I must insist on what I have already posted at Tara's blog: it's in a large part a fashion/herd mentality thing, derived from the porn industry. Coiffed crotches is just one more aspect of the porn cliché of women having sex with full evening make-up and hairdos, stockings, garter and high heels on. So, instead of taking everything off for sex, now you have to dress up for it...
Thanks for acknowledging my point, Ribozyme.
Yeah, I agree, the mainstreaming of porn culture definately is involved with this. I thought I was alone in that thought. The larger problem to me (and I hope you agree) is the devaluation of intimacy. I mean when can we relax and be vulnerable anymore?
I mean we mustn't look uncool in the sack. Should I go with a ducktail or a mullet above my johnson tonight? The mohawk is so 80's (and not in a retro-cool way). Maybe that Flock of Seagulls style. Will mousse chafe?
Yep, Otto, being relaxed, vulnerable and true is the real attraction of sex for me. Now the standards are becoming that you have to prepare and dress up for it, as for any other social (formal) function. I think another important force that has shaped this, besides porn, is the importance of consumism, the supposed joy of spending money in as many things as possible (very well illustrated by Huxley in Brave New World), which you can't if you take everything off and come (pun not really intended) as you are. Not that people haven't tried to make inroads into that matter, with scented massage oils, edible underwear and lubricants, gimmicky condoms and other sex toys. I don't need those accessories, but feel that people should be free to indulge in them if they enjoy them (it worries me that basic sex isn't enough for many people, though). What is really bad is when YOU AREN'T COOL ENOUGH IF YOU DON'T COMPLY WITH THE SEXUAL FASHION OF THE MOMENT, which I think was the motivation for the woman on the article that started this discussion. And fashionable it has become, as anybody can see just from the proportion of commenters that defend genital shaving/waxing almost as some kind of panacea. I bet that if it had been possible to have blogs in the mid 70s, and somebody wrote a negative critique of platform shoes, the responses defending them would have been very similar in number and, maybe, reasoning ("Oh, but they are so great! They make you taller. They anchor you to the ground. etc").
Ribozyme, I remember seeing the Paris Hilton video a couple of years ago, and was struck by how sad it was. Your point about consumerism is quite relevant to me in that sense. They weren't having sex as much as playing with the video camera and trying to imitate obvious porn star moves. Kind of like an adolescent playing air guitar in his basement-- only sacrificing their dignity in the process. I think the viral viewing of the video was for the most part done in that same detached, alienated spirit. A dehumanized, profane sporting event.
Whatever it was, and is, the adornment and objectification of genitalia isn't about sex at all as far as I can see.
Just out of curiosity, PZ, are Ribozyme and otto's posts even coming from different IPs?
Not as I understand it. But hair loss is naturally associated with young age, old age, sickness (and even porn movies). It can also be a fetish, I think. (And the question if the benefits outweigh the risks and work involved must be an individual choice.)
The above associations mostly disappear when hair removal is a common sexual fashion, which it seems to become in a patchy manner with (too) long intervals in between.
Azkyroth: I'm certain that Otto Schmidlap and I have different IPs. I live in México and I'd bet Otto isn't Hispanic. What, you don't like people differing from your opinion? I bet it's worse when they can give good reasons to do so. You can check Tara's blog, where I posted comments before I did here, and you can see that Otto arrived quite a bit later, and that we haven't had any kind of exchange there. In México we have a saying that goes "El león cree que todos son de su condición", which more or less translates as "The lion believes that all other animals act like him" (I'm almost sure that the lion was used as the example only because the word rhymes).
I've seen enough sockpuppets that that many posts of people doing nothing but agreeing with each other on public forums makes me suspicious. I'm glad I was mistaken. :/
AZ, Sorry to give the impression of sock puppetry. I just like Rybozime's point of view. I did try in each response to inject some new thought, and angle to sort of riff off of her (His?) ideas. I can find some points in Ryb's comments to disagree with, but I was kind of hoping our exchange might bring others into the direction we were going. Anyway, you'll notice I didn't take any cheap shots about shaved genitals and paedophilia. Like you, I don't see the connection in any relevant way. Bringing it up repeatedly doesn't really advance the discussion. Hope that counts for something.
Snort. Otto and Ribozyme would make good naturists. They hit the button issue: "Adornment in any form on the body is bad!" I on the other hand don't think its the adornment that is the problem, any more than people wearing black is a problem. Its the click mentality that produces groups that all "have to" do the same thing that is the problem. Same whether you are talking about Goth, piercings, tattoos, etc. Somehow earrings don't produce that reaction. Why? Because they are not considered to be some novel triviality that people *must have* to fit into some group. They are something people just "do". And imho, trying to play the "us vs. them" card with respect to how you "feel" about shaving, piercings, tattoos, or anything that, just makes it possible for people to do the equivalent of going "Goth" to make themselves seem different (together...). lol
Kegehi said:
"Its the click mentality that produces groups that all "have to" do the same thing that is the problem. Same whether you are talking about Goth, piercings, tattoos, etc."
You're on to something there, Keg. Where we differ I think, is in the consequences of such fashion choices. Imho, applying the "click" mentality (thanks for that) to a mass culture of adorning and objectifying genitals with the same indifference as streaked hair or black fingernails has serious consequences. I believe our humanity and dignity as human beings is linked to the intimacy of sex in important ways that hair styles and earings are not. Anyone who confuses those differences and takes their erotic personae so lightly is playing with fire.
Your "Click mentality" phrase is the key to me.
Applying fads and fashion to sex is where my problem is. On a macro level. Like its a sport or something. Whether this couple or that individual person has a nipple ring or likes hairless sex isn't really the point. A valid sincere (legal, of course) fetish is natural, and something to accept and respect. Like straight "normal" sex, It's INTIMATE, and private. When shared, powerful.
otto -
Here's the thing, through fads and fashions, people discover things they like. While my own introduction to it, was through one of the few male lovers I have had, years ago, many of my partners were willing to give it a try, because they knew people who shave, because it is somewhat popular. Some of them did it once, never to try it again. Most of them do it still, whether they have a lover or not.
I dare say that there are fads and fashions, in sex, that I don't get. There are fads that I find rather disturbing. So it goes, obviously one of my fetishes, that happens to be rather envogue at the moment, is disturbing to some of the commenters here. That doesn't mean that fetishes, fads and fashions, are something to be feared. Ultimately, I think this is a very healthy direction for society.
There is something profoundly damaging about sexual repression. Having a variety of kink, that goes in and out of vogue, is a good sign that such repression is seriously breaking down. Hell, the fact that we're in a comment thread that is now 180some comments into a very frank, honest discussion about genital depilation, with very minimal juvenile crap, is a good sign. Certainly it is unfortunate when people take that to an extreme, but people do that all the time, sometimes in far worse ways.
I find it unfortunate when anyone enslaves themselves to fashion, that doesn't mean that fads and fashion are all bad. Many people use fads and fashions, to discover bits and pieces of what will be there own sense of stlye,to find what they are comfy with. Sex is no different. I appreciate porn and trends in porn, because without them, I would have missed out on a lot of kink that I am quite enthusiastic about. That my partner is an enthusiast of many similar fethishes, is not much of an accident. Our compatability in bed and my willingness to explore those we don't share, is why our relationship has survived a lot of trials, including two years apart and we are expecting our second child in December.
I can't think of a single fetish that either of us enjoys, that didn't come from it being a fad, at least in some groups (most of our friends are gays, many of their ideas are just as fun with a male/female couple). We also keep a lot of spice in our lives, by trying new ideas or new variations. Often times, they aren't a lot of fun in and of themeselves, but the excitement of trying something new and strange, leads us to have exciting sex anyways
Personally, I prefer a peach over a nectarine. I think that the current landing-strip fad is odd. Robert Heinlein did say once that a woman who shaves her pubis is more likely to enthusiastically like sex, but nowadays I suspect it just means she thinks it's fashionable. Ugh.
Er, all the time?
I'm pretty much always relaxed and vulnerable when my wife's around. I sleep in front of her, fuss over my skin blemishes in front of her, cry in front of her, go to the bathroom in front of her. We certainly don't have sex to get more relaxed.
The way I see it, sex is a performance art. The intimacy comes from the fact that it's performed for an audience of (usually) one; you're doing everything in your power to gauge your partner's mood and cater to their preferences (pubic hairstyles and gorilla suits included) and adapt to their responses. The vulnerability comes from your admission that you're doing everything you can to please them, which brings your limitations into sharp relief. The joy comes from the fact that your partner forgives you your limitations, or doesn't even see them as such, and is simultaneously performing to the best of their ability for you.
Afterwards, you get to relax.
(I'm all for laid-back, minimal-effort orgasms too, but that's why God gave us primates hands. The arboreal lifestyle thing was just a spandrel.)
But the stubble shadow is a sign of a grown man - the kind who knows how to shave. ;-)
Really, facial hair has all sorts of problems, so the increased risk for infection from a shave is easier to motivate.
Other hair is mostly an estetical question, and for some a fetish. (There are methods that can amend problems mentioned above. Thankfully the marginal of this comment is too small to get into personal hygiene issues. :-) And signs of preadolescence/old age and sickness comes into it of course.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so one thing I react to is what PZ touches, the idea that a fashion is a standard. I rather like variation and surprises...
Actually, the "pubis" in os pubis "bone of the lap" is a genitive. The nominative, "lap", is... pubes. Yes, singular. It works like sedes "seat".
I suppose you understand now why this part of Latin declension has not survived into the Romance languages. :o)
Apparently not all of us can perceive them...
Incidentally, I think pudenda is a neuter plural, "those to be ashamed of".
Not as I understand it. But hair loss is naturally associated with young age, old age, sickness (and even porn movies). It can also be a fetish, I think. (And the question if the benefits outweigh the risks and work involved must be an individual choice.)
The above associations mostly disappear when hair removal is a common sexual fashion, which it seems to become in a patchy manner with (too) long intervals in between.