User comes to TrollX to let women know that it's the societal norm to shave their legs (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
77 ups - 0 downs = 77 votes
253 comments submitted at 10:36:17 on Jul 14, 2014 by your_mom_is_availabl
User comes to TrollX to let women know that it's the societal norm to shave their legs (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
77 ups - 0 downs = 77 votes
253 comments submitted at 10:36:17 on Jul 14, 2014 by your_mom_is_availabl
> Also, you do know that biologically speaking, it's more sanitary to have pubic hair, right? The only advantage scientifically to being completely bare is that you won't contract crabs. There's a reason why women naturally have hair covering their genitals - it helps keep bacteria out.
Huh, TIL. Seems obvious when I think about it
yeah dude, shouldn't really shave anything for another reason too, small cuts in damp dark areas normally covered all day in layers of clothes is a good way to get an infection
the best thing I ever learned about making shaving not a fucking nightmare is to spend about an hour afterwards having yourself a naked al bundy sit
Irritated or broken skin also makes you liable to acquire a disease. Near your genitals, that means STIs.
ITT: folks with compromised immune systems in disease-ridden environments.
I shave most of my pubic hair, all my SOs over the years have shaved most of their pubic hair. STIs? nope.
I very likely won't go down on a hairy woman. I may even turn down sex if the armpits, legs, and between the legs are a total jungle, though the issue never came up, only one woman that I've had sex with didn't shave, and she had so little hair that it wasn't noticeable.
Very informative. Thanks. Next time my hair gets a little long I'll remember you, chemotherapy001, and how you wouldn't want to have sex with me.
don't worry about it, there are plenty guys who don't care.
Yes I'm aware, I was trying to point out that delineating your preferences here is stupid and pointless.
cuz my preferences are totally not the most common...
The point is that your preferences don't matter to anybody except you. That's what this whole thread is about. You post here like someone should listen when you talk, because you don't realize that your opinions about this are uninvited. Same reason we're making fun of that other dude.
nobody forces you to listen, but you seem to care enough about my preferences to keep replying.
and most men (who can afford to have standards) have similar preferences :)
More Comments - Click Here
Ah, cool, you're lucky, therefore skin's literal purpose as an organ isn't real!
huh?
How exactly do you think skin works? Have you ever even realized that it has an immune system function?
But seriously, your entire point is like me claiming "Promiscuity doesn't put you at greater risk of STIs! I slept around for years and never got a single STI!"
almost. though it's good to try avoid sleeping with people who might have STIs at least within a day after shaving, and also to try not to inflict wounds while shaving.
That would be why my girlfriend waxes...
thank her/god/whateverdiety she does, too.
Waxing is just as bad for leaving microtears and abrasions that can get infected. The best thing is just to trim and move on. No chance for nasty as fuck infections and it keeps everything neat and tidy.
Huh, neat.
She's waxed everything since she was like 13 she said, though. Hair's super easy to pull out and it comes in super thin now. She prefers it to shaving and it lasts longer...
Each to their own, I say. There are risks asociated with pubic hair removal, but they are quite small and what people deem as an acceptable level of risk is entirely their own decision.
I used wax to but ended up with an abcess from an infected folicle. My god it was the most painful thing I've ever experienced. Had to get it lanced at the docs and have a rather funky scar from the whole ordeal. Now I just save that sort of thing for the legs.
Dang! That sounds terribad.
It's not like I require her to wax herself or something. I trim my areas. I couldn't imagine wanting to do a blowjob to a bunch of sweaty, matted hair, just like how I wouldn't wanna go down on her unless she had it pretty trimmed.
Yeah, too bad it's one of those made up 'just-so' stories about evolutionary purpose. Anyone can imagine 'obvious' reasons for why we have a certain thing or not.
Last I heard the one being bandied about for why we have pubic hair was that it acts as a sign of sexual maturity to potential mates. There are a million of these 'makes sense' type explanations that are just completely useless speculation.
Even if it were true, it's a bit of a naturalistic fallacy to say that this means we shouldn't remove the hair.
You're the one who said "evolutionary". She was speaking biologically.
Biologically, it's true that pubic hair helps filter out bacteria and acts as a protective buffer around the genitals. These are measurable abilities and not a matter of guessing at purpose.
It is possible to weigh the costs and advantages of removing hair without committing a fallacy. "We shouldn't remove our pubic hair because nature intended for us to have it" would be a naturalistic fallacy. "We shouldn't remove our pubic hair because of skin irritation, risk of ingrown hairs, infections and cuts and the fact that there is no known hygienic advantage to it" is simply sound advice.
>You're the one who said "evolutionary". She was speaking biologically. Biologically, it's true that pubic hair helps filter out bacteria and acts as a protective buffer around the genitals. These are measurable abilities and not a matter of guessing at purpose.
No. She clearly and specifically states that the reason women have hair covering their genitals is that it keeps out bacteria. The only meaning to be taken from that is that we evolved pubic hair for the purpose she describes. It may or may not have an ancillary benefit in that it keeps away bacteria, but that doesn't speak to the evolutionary pressures that created the trait -- those could be entirely unrelated.
>It is possible to weigh the costs and advantages of removing hair without committing a fallacy.
Sure, but that's not what was happening.
>"We shouldn't remove our pubic hair because of skin irritation, risk of ingrown hairs, infections and cuts and the fact that there is no known hygienic advantage to it" is simply sound advice.
Not really sound advice so much as simple opinion. Some people find it more hygienic to remove hair and others don't. I don't find your line of reasoning for not removing it to be very convincing but hey, I don't care if you want to remove your hair or not. It's likely of no real consequence either way.
I think we can all agree this was time well spent
I'm typing this while shaving my legs.
Good idea. I heard from some guy on the Internet that it would be unhygienic not to.
did someone light up the pedant symbol because Fun-At-Parties Man is here
[deleted]
I mean yes "reason" wasn't the right word there but fortunately we're all people who are able to understand context clues
[deleted]
Looks like Fun-at-Parties Man's Sidekick, The Pointless Squabbler, has joined the fray
So long as we're reveling in the reasonable doubt, I might as well point out that she could just as easily be referring to the reason women have historically chosen not to shave their hair. Either way you remain as the only person talking about evolution.
Hygiene isn't a matter of opinion. Either a practice helps maintain your health or it doesn't, and "health" can be defined and measured.
You may believe that the health consequences of cutting your pubic hair are outweighed by the social or sexual benefits, and that would be a perfectly reasonable belief. But believing that cutting your pubic hair is healthier, or more "hygienic" than not cutting your pubic hair is factually wrong for a list of reasons that I touched on before.
EDIT:Changed a word to mean what I meant.
> Some people find it more hygienic to remove hair and others don't.
What people "find" is kind of irrelevant, surely? It's either more hygienic or it isn't. Hygiene isn't subjective.
[deleted]
I think you might be mixing up hygiene and cleanliness. Hygiene is a medical thing; cleanliness is far more abstract.
I don't think they're necessarily saying that evolution has some design or "purpose", just that pubic hair can yield benefits that may have at one point led to more fitness in those who had pubic hair over those who did not due to resistance to bacteria, much like how eyebrows prevent sweat from entering the eye is not a "guided" thing, but they do perform that function.
Well I'm not saying that it doesn't have certain useful functions, but when someone says we have some trait for a 'reason' then it heavily implies that it was evolved to be that way.
"naturalistic fallacy"
giggle
I don't think anyone's saying body hair of any kind shouldn't be removed, just that ideas about it being "hygienic" to remove body hair are shit.
>just that ideas about it being "hygienic" to remove body hair are shit.
I don't think it's unhygienic to have body hair per se, but shorter or no hair is way easier to clean and keep clean.
My gynecologist told me that women shaving their pubic hair leads to a major increase in vulvar abscesses during the spring and summer. Google that if you've got a strong stomach but it's definitely NSFW and probably NSFL for a lot of people. They are serious business and all it takes is a slight cut.
Also the most painful thing I've ever experienced and I've had appendicitis and dry socket, plus a lot of stitches in my lifetime. Usually a doctor will say something like, "You're going to feel a slight burning sensation" and then it hurts quite a bit. For the incision and drainage of my abscess, the doctor and the nurse both told me multiple times, "This is going to be extremely painful" and "Just remember to keep breathing, deep breaths." I seriously thought I was going to pass out. And when they were done there was just an ungodly amount of blood, all over the doctor, all over the floor, the pad that was beneath my hips was soaked in it and it still spilled over onto the bed.
No more shaving pubic hair for me. Fuck that.
Those abscesses are nooot fun either.
Well, actually they are, when you drain them. But otherwise, they're ouchy as hell. :c
Well, there goes my breakfast.
Never have I ever been so glad that I trim and don't shave.
T-t-t-thanks for that imagery. I'm going to go revisit my coffee and eggs now.
I don't know, the risk is still incredibly low. It's not that hard to avoid cuts when shaving, unless you use crappy equipment or technique. I shave my face every day and I can't remember the last time I cut myself (if I ever even have cut myself). Then on top of that, what's the likelyhood of any one cut getting infected if you treat it properly? Bear in mind that a small rate can double from the perspective of the doctor without it turning into a significant risk. A 100% increase on odds of one in a million is still not something to worry about.
Besides, I wouldn't shave my pubic area anyway. There are better methods of hair removal available.
It's fun that you're completely making up statistics and probabilities with no actual information. I think I'll trust my gynecologist over your gut feelings.
> I shave my face every day and I can't remember the last time I cut myself (if I ever even have cut myself).
And again, I'm 30 and had never had a problem before. I didn't even realize I'd cut myself.
Also public hair is generally curly and ingrown hair a more likely to happen versus beard hair....
>It's fun that you're completely making up statistics and probabilities with no actual information. I think I'll trust my gynecologist over your gut feelings.
I already explained how your gynaecologist can be correct while you still have nothing to worry about.
'The rate of x has doubled/increased greatly' does not imply 'I should be afraid of x' or 'x is prevalent'. Would you like a primer in basic statistics?
LOL, cute. You're still making up "One in a million" odds. Definitely much higher than that. My gynecologist sees 10-15 cases a week during the spring and summer in a city with a population under 400,000 total. Assuming about half of those are female, and spring and summer is about half the year, that's 325/200,000 annually from one gynecologist. That's 1 in 615 and doesn't take into account all of the other gynecologists in the city (there are 8 at her clinic alone) or the fact that not anywhere close to the entire population of female citizens is going to groom their pubic hair (since population includes everyone from infants to the elderly).
So yeah, definitely seems worth it to avoid the likelihood of an extremely painful infection.
[deleted]
More Comments - Click Here
Try shaving your balls for a month and get back to us.
[deleted]
I kinda don't believe you. Taking an epilator to any genital region is just asking for pain and blood.
Not really. If you have access to soap and fresh water, cleaning yourself regularly is easy no matter your body hair state. It's not like we're dogs who have inches-long hair that gets matted in our weeks between grooming or anything. Removing body hair, however, irritates and sometimes breaks the skin, which increases your risk of catching infections. Especially STIs, in your pubic area.
>Not really. If you have access to soap and fresh water, cleaning yourself regularly is easy no matter your body hair state.
Nah, bare skin is a simple lather and rinse. Hair is lather, massage into roots, let sit for absorption, and then rinse. Ask a bald man how long he takes in the shower.
>Removing body hair, however, irritates and sometimes breaks the skin, which increases your risk of catching infections. Especially STIs, in your pubic area.
Maybe if you really suck at it. I've not broken nor irritated my skin in almost a decade of daily hair removal. There's hardly an increased risk of STIs unless you slice yourself open and go rub your cuts on someone immediately. That's ridiculous.
Speaking of ridiculous I've got to start reading usernames before I reply. Don't worry though, I've made sure it won't happen again.
Wow, is there like a secret Reddit war over shaving? Are you and /u/SpermJackalope on either sides of this tragic conflict?
Not shaving offends my genital feels. I mean, it's not like there's a non-zero chance of me having sex with people across the planet, but the idea that someone will not include my genital feels in their grooming habits personally offends me.
^^/s
>Wow, is there like a secret Reddit war over shaving?
Yes. Only we don't fight them on the beaches because they're too ashamed to go out in swimwear.
I go to the beach in a string bikini after not shaving for years just to make dudes like you all uncomfortable and irrationally angry.
you're the best kind of person
I dunno about uncomfortable and angry. Maybe you'd get about ten seconds of bemusement that the unkempt cat lady decided to take a trip to the beach, but that's my highest offer.
More Comments - Click Here
Ooooo you're so special...
You really showed up society on THAT
Gooo you. yaaaay. making such a difference...
/lolfeminists
More Comments - Click Here
>I've not broken nor irritated my skin in almost a decade of daily hair removal.
I hadn't either until a few months ago. I'm 30. It happens. As I just said in another comment, the tiniest nick can introduce infection. I didn't even realize I had cut myself.
>Hair is lather, massage into roots, let sit for absorption, and then rinse.
No one's trying to condition their pubic hair. Wtf? I don't know anyone who washes their body that way - and I know some men who have copious body hair. It's still only like an inch long - you don't have to massage, it's not that long!
>There's hardly an increased risk of STIs unless you slice yourself open and go rub your cuts on someone immediately.
No, if you do things like irritate the skin (which is usually from micro-tearing from shaving) your skin is compromised. It increases your risk of catching something from a partner. Ingrown hairs also reduce your skin's resistance to infections.
But oh wow, you called me hairy. Clearly I am defeated! ;_;
wow 5790 downvotes, that's a shit ton of downvotes.
I just want you to know that all of them were given in strict accordance with reddiquette.
Yes, I'm sure you downvoted all of those 5000+ comments "because they are not contributing to the community dialogue or discussion".
What can I say, I feel a great duty to this community.
>reddiquette
That's like six downvotes a day haha
Well it CAN be hygienic...
I mean, it's obviously slightly easier to clean skin then it is skin and hair.
That's being really damn nitpicky though.
TIL almost all men are just less hygienic.
I break that norm. I like my shaft to be as aerodynamic as possible.
Are you trying to be stupid?
I am.
How isn't that a valid statement?
If you're going to claim it CAN be more hygienic for women then why CAN'T it be also for men?
If you aren't capable/willing to spend the small amount of extra effort cleaning the hair/surrounding area... then shaving is more hygienic... hence the "it can be more hygienic".
If you however are capable... then it's not an issue and you actually aren't less hygienic for being not shaved.
So your argument is there is no argument. Got it.
I mean you pointed something out, just because it can be possible. Then made a dumbass response to someone when they joked about how stupid your argument was. Because it's not an argument. It's a circle. It goes round but not up.
I take it you've never taken a college science class before.
I'm gonna jump in and defend you. Made-up stories about how "natural" things are is really kind of gross. I've heard the same argument on both sides of the aisle, that men "naturally" prefer women with less hair, or that "naturally" having hair is better, and both are pretty bullshitty.
Leg shaving was introduced less than 100 years ago in response to the WWI trend towards womens' dresses becoming shorter and more revealing swimsuits.
Honestly, we should all just become competitive swimmers so we have a reason to get rid of all hair, and then this will never be a source of drama again.
women removed hair in cultures at least 2000 years ago. before that there aren't that many written documents about female grooming, it may have been going on for millennia.
First of all, had you actually cited to the source the discusses "ancient" female shaving*, you would note that it gives the example of ancient Egypt, Greece, and the Roman Empire. For Caucasian cultures, it had never been a practice until Gillette introduced the "women's safety razor" to the US.
One region at one time period is totally irrelevant to a "naturalist" argument, and can we get back to the fact that "naturalist" arguments are bullshit in the first place? Taking a running shit is natural but I don't see you selling your toilet to buy assless chaps and Nikes.
*Victoria Sherrow's Encyclopedia of Hair
TIL Rome and Greece are not Caucasian.
so basically the cultures with extensive written records from that time.
But you're right. there's no need for biology justifications, body hair is just unattractive because it is. Same way almond eyes are attractive and double chins aren't.
Oh okay, you don't actually believe what you're saying. You're just trolling.
you probably misunderstood something, because there is no contradiction here.