Disgusting armpit hair on woman

oakleafsfree · 10-05-2012 1:01pm

your just typeing willy nilly...definately not confident around females. why do the male of the species get bullish and sullen when threatened by a female of that type. or any type and seek to criticise to their own self idealisation of woman. when really you never truly encountered a hairy fairy of any body part from a her.. you v had total no idea that she even had a hairy back!!! and yet you sound a wee bit whiney? being a man comes with experience, not whineing..cos your other half half hasnt trimmed her hairy knuckles ..and helpful hint. you sound like a winging boy...learn to talk to them...charm , wit and a brilliant sense of social skills...well hun....u l have them eating out of your hands..honestly...even the ones with hairy knuckles... because your a total gentleman.

kowloon · 10-05-2012 1:04pm

Shenshen wrote: »

Can I ask you something? Are you male, and if so, do you shave your privates?
One of the biggest complaints I would have whenever going out with anyone would be sweaty, smelly, hairy balls. No woman likes to get pubic hair into her mouth.Yet keeping this area "natural" seems to be perfectly natural for a lot of people.
So why get in a huff about someone's underarm hair?

We never asked you to like it. The important thing is that you carry out your duty as a woman and respect the balls. I like to call them fleshy power orbs.

Neck down alopecia for everyone.

Iwasfrozen · 10-05-2012 1:09pm

oakleafsfree wrote: »

your just typeing willy nilly...definately not confident around females. why do the male of the species get bullish and sullen when threatened by a female of that type. or any type and seek to criticise to their own self idealisation of woman. when really you never truly encountered a hairy fairy of any body part from a her.. you v had total no idea that she even had a hairy back!!! and yet you sound a wee bit whiney? being a man comes with experience, not whineing..cos your other half half hasnt trimmed her hairy knuckles ..and helpful hint. you sound like a winging boy...learn to talk to them...charm , wit and a brilliant sense of social skills...well hun....u l have them eating out of your hands..honestly...even the ones with hairy knuckles... because your a total gentleman.

Your style of writing isn't very clear but honestly I don't what your problem is. Male preference for unhairy females is nothing new. Hell the fact women are less hairy then men tell's us men have preferred less hairy women from pre-history. It's pretty much hard wired into us now.

smithcity · 10-05-2012 1:12pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Hell the fact women are less hairy then men tell's us men have preferred less hairy women from pre-history. It's pretty much hard wired into us now.

Not too sure about that, I think it changes every few decades. When I was a young lad it wasn't unusual to see hairy pits on the ladies.

TeddyTedson · 10-05-2012 1:12pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

oakleafsfree wrote: »

your just typeing willy nilly...definately not confident around females. why do the male of the species get bullish and sullen when threatened by a female of that type. or any type and seek to criticise to their own self idealisation of woman. when really you never truly encountered a hairy fairy of any body part from a her.. you v had total no idea that she even had a hairy back!!! and yet you sound a wee bit whiney? being a man comes with experience, not whineing..cos your other half half hasnt trimmed her hairy knuckles ..and helpful hint. you sound like a winging boy...learn to talk to them...charm , wit and a brilliant sense of social skills...well hun....u l have them eating out of your hands..honestly...even the ones with hairy knuckles... because your a total gentleman.

Your style of writing isn't very clear but honestly I don't what your problem is. Male preference for unhairy females is nothing new. Hell the fact women are less hairy then men tell's us men have preferred less hairy women from pre-history. It's pretty much hard wired into us now.

That's a troll. Id say it's a bloke tbh.

Abi · 10-05-2012 1:15pm

TeddyTedson wrote: »

That's a troll. Id say it's a bloke tbh.

You actually read it? You've more patience than I Teddy.

Logical Fallacy · 10-05-2012 1:17pm

smash wrote: »

squeamish has nothing to do with it. I think how a women takes care of herself says a lot. I would consider grooming to be big deal to be honest.

I'd say it's more that you find women who groom in a way that suits your tastes. Nothing against you personally, but we are all like that.

Personally I like a woman who takes care of herself, while for a lot of people this would mean make up and the like I am not a fan of it. But I do like a physically active woman who takes care of her body as I find both the act and the end result to be sexy.

old hippy · 10-05-2012 1:17pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Your style of writing isn't very clear but honestly I don't what your problem is. Male preference for unhairy females is nothing new. Hell the fact women are less hairy then men tell's us men have preferred less hairy women from pre-history. It's pretty much hard wired into us now.

Have you ever heard of the neanderthals? I'm sure Richard E Leakey, David Attenborough, Alice Roberts et al would disagree with you...

Iwasfrozen · 10-05-2012 1:19pm

smithcity wrote: »

Not too sure about that, I think it changes every few decades. When I was a young lad it wasn't unusual to see hairy pits on the ladies.

The reason women are less hairy is because their less hairy ancestors where more likely to mate. This changed their genetic make up. This pattern is the same in every country and every culture as well. Women are less hairy then men even naturally.

old hippy wrote:

Have you ever heard of the neanderthals? I'm sure Richard E Leakey, David Attenborough, Alice Roberts et al would disagree with you...

We aren't neanderthals though. And anyway I'm talking about the end result of evolution pointing to the start of that evolutionary process is pointless.

Logical Fallacy · 10-05-2012 1:20pm

kylith wrote: »

True, but the only two reasons I can think of for women deciding to shave are
1) To look younger. What females don't have leg, underarm, or pubic hair? Pre-pubescent females.
2) Porn. It's much easier to get close ups in porn without all that hair in the way. Somehow this became normalised in society, probably because porn is now young men's first introduction to naked women, and because of that they don't think hair looks right.

Well, there is a third. Any woman I have been with who enjoyed a nice hairless vagina felt that it resulted in a greater level of sensation and sensitivity during certain sexual acts.

the purple tin · 10-05-2012 1:22pm

Is this the student from Dublin who wrote the article in the newspaper?

B0jangles · 10-05-2012 1:22pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The reason women are less hairy is because their less hairy ancestors where more likely to mate. This changed their genetic make up. This pattern is the same in every country and every culture as well. Women are less hairy then men even naturally.

The inarguable, unbeatable BIOTRUTHS have arrived!

Logical Fallacy · 10-05-2012 1:24pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The reason women are less hairy is because their less hairy ancestors where more likely to mate. This changed their genetic make up. This pattern is the same in every country and every culture as well. Women are less hairy then men even naturally.

Not really, women are less hairy because there is a direct correlation between the advent of secondary sex characteristics and testosterone.

saa · 10-05-2012 1:26pm

nts, I don't think women should be hairless but everything should be trimmed and at an appropriate lenght but that is my personal preferance trimmed but not bald - leave tiny white hairs alone unless they're under your lip and getting long, trimmed fingernails, keeping the end of the hair on your head trimmed and neat, armpit trimmed (Edit shaved would be a more appropriate description) but obviously stubble or very short hair is acceptable as the skin there is so delicate, leg hair can be shaved with an electric yoke and only smooth on special occaisions or done once a week if you please but the idea that a woman is completely hairless all the time is frankly ridiculous.

smithcity · 10-05-2012 1:29pm

old hippy wrote: »

Have you ever heard of the neanderthals? I'm sure Richard E Leakey, David Attenborough, Alice Roberts et al would disagree with you...

Homo Sapiens aren't descended from Neanderthals, they were a separate species of human that coexisted with modern humans for a short period. We shared a common ancestor but that's all.

Iwasfrozen · 10-05-2012 1:31pm

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Not really, women are less hairy because there is a direct correlation between the advent of secondary sex characteristics and testosterone.

Exactly, the lack of hair was a trait that made a woman more likely to mate. This ment her genes were more likely to pass onto the next generation of women. So each generation of women where genetically predispositioned to be slightly less then the previous. The desire for lack of hair was either not present or much lower in the female populace so we are left with a direct correlation between sex and body hair or as you phrase it testosterone and body hair.

kowloon · 10-05-2012 1:32pm

And in the corner as I read this:

Make of it what you will.

smithcity · 10-05-2012 1:33pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Exactly, the lack of hair was a trait that made a woman more likely to mate. This ment her genes were more likely to pass onto the next generation of women. So each generation of women where genetically predispositioned to be slightly less then the previous. The desire for lack of hair was either not present or much lower in the female populace so we are left with a direct correlation between sex and body hair or as you phrase it testosterone and body hair.

Are you suggesting that humans have evolved that significantly since the 70's/80's when more hair was common?

Logical Fallacy · 10-05-2012 1:34pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Exactly, the lack of hair was a trait that made a woman more likely to mate. This ment her genes were more likely to pass onto the next generation of women. So each generation of women where genetically predispositioned to be slightly less then the previous. The desire for lack of hair was either not present or much lower in the female populace so we are left with a direct correlation between sex and body hair or as you phrase it testosterone and body hair.

I don't think you quite understand what I am saying. I also think you are applying a modern culture male preference to ancient, possible pre Homo-sapiens mating rituals/preferences.

I am unsure if I would be willing to commit to the idea that less body hair was an important decision in early human mating but would love to see any links you have on the matter.

KittyeeTrix · 10-05-2012 1:37pm

I could care less about the evolution and nature of womens hairy bodies versus mens hairy bodies..

I'll leave that to the ^^^^^"intelligents" above to trash out for the next few hours!!:rolleyes:

Personally, I didn't like the look of yer wans pits. Ain't no right nor wrong here. I thought they looked rank be that cos I'm conditioned to think/feel/react that way or whatever. I know they're not dirty or any of that nonsense that others may say but at the same time, to me, they didn't look right!!!

smash · 10-05-2012 1:37pm

Fizzlesque wrote: »

You wouldn't go out with me, because occasionally I'm not permanently 'groomed' - and I wouldn't go out with you (even on those occasions I am 'groomed') because your rigid views on 'what women should do' could possibly run deeper, and into scary territory eventually. Hope that makes sense - almost lunchtime and I'm starving, mightn't have expressed that as well as I could do.

Wow hold on there. A personal preference for women to shave body hair is not a view on 'what women should do', it's a view on what I like personally and what I find attractive. I've said before that it's each to their own.

And as for "could possibly run deeper, and into scary territory eventually", well it's not really a fair comment.

Iwasfrozen · 10-05-2012 1:38pm

smithcity wrote: »

Are you suggesting that humans have evolved that significantly since the 70's/80's when more hair was common?

No I'm suggesting it's been a preferred trait since pre history.

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

I don't think you quite understand what I am saying. I also think you are applying a modern culture male preference to ancient, possible pre Homo-sapiens mating rituals/preferences.

I am unsure if I would be willing to commit to the idea that less body hair was an important decision in early human mating but would love to see any links you have on the matter.

Yes I am. "Modern culture" as you call it, I'd prefare "human sexual behaviour" has it's origins in our evolutionary and biological make up. That much is an inescapable fact.

I sure do indeed. I know I know it's wikipedia, but they do reference what they say.

Wibbs · 10-05-2012 1:40pm

old hippy wrote: »

Have you ever heard of the neanderthals? I'm sure Richard E Leakey, David Attenborough, Alice Roberts et al would disagree with you...

Well we don't know if Neandertals were less or more hairy than us. The common perception is they were, but there's no evidence either way. Though they probably were as a cold adaptation. In any event as a hominid we are very much the odd ones out among our cousins who went before. So what went before is no great indication as to why we have certain features and they didn't. We have flat faces, chins and look more like juveniles than they did and likely less hair. All these were sexually selected for. The people with smaller brow ridges and bigger chins had more kids than those who didn't.

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Not really, women are less hairy because there is a direct correlation between the advent of secondary sex characteristics and testosterone.

Yes but Iwasfrozen does still have a point. Women are less hairy on average than men. It seems to have been sexually selected for that. Male secondary sexual characteristics include facial hair which outside rare genetic issues women do not. That men choose to shave off that characteristic is an interesting debate in of itself. Look at our nearest relatives, both males and females are equally hairy, yet a female chimp has much less testosterone than a male. Somewhere along the line we lost our body hair(thermoregulation/reduction of body parasites), but women lost significantly more. That was sexually selected for. Other sexual selection were things like permanently full breasts(apes are flat chested unless breast feeding). Add fashion and culture into the mix to highten those selections and you tend to get exaggeration of such features.

smithcity · 10-05-2012 1:40pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

No I'm suggesting it's been a preferred trait since pre history.

Based on what? From what I can tell, cultural preferences in that regard have changed frequently throughout history.

sbsquarepants · 10-05-2012 1:42pm

old hippy wrote: »

Have you ever heard of the neanderthals? I'm sure Richard E Leakey, David Attenborough, Alice Roberts et al would disagree with you...

Drool!
I for one fancy the pants off the good doctor. Though a million spider legs sticking out would probably change my mind!:D

Babybuff · 10-05-2012 1:44pm

I bet aliens have no body hair and they beamed down to earth and mated with the Neanderthals and produced homo sapiens, the semi hairy creature.

smithcity · 10-05-2012 1:46pm

Babybuff wrote: »

I bet aliens have no body hair

Tell that to Chewbacca

Babybuff · 10-05-2012 1:49pm

smithcity wrote: »

Tell that to Chewbacca

some other aliens.

look no hair

Wibbs · 10-05-2012 1:49pm

smithcity wrote: »

Homo Sapiens aren't descended from Neanderthals, they were a separate species of human that coexisted with modern humans for a short period. We shared a common ancestor but that's all.

Wellll..... not quite. More like a subspecies and if you're not an African chap or chapess you likely carry Neandertal DNA in you(If you're east Asian you carry even earlier stuff in your genes). We got jiggy with each other enough for some to survive down to this day.

Based on what? From what I can tell, cultural preferences in that regard have changed frequently throughout history.

Oh agreed 100%. The level of hirsuteness in women(and men) that's considered attractive is culturally biased, however the overall bias is for women to be less hairy than men and both to be less hairy overall. Some cultures just exaggerated that, or not. Ancient egyptian women were plucked within an inch of their lives. I gather they used honey in some way in hair removal. Arab women today are big into hair removal as a cultural thing. Europeans are among the hairiest peoples around today. Asians are less hairy, many of the men can't grow facial hair. Africans are less hairy too.

Iwasfrozen · 10-05-2012 1:50pm

smithcity wrote: »

Based on what? From what I can tell, cultural preferences in that regard have changed frequently throughout history.

Christ this is painful. The fact women are less hairy then men suggests that it is a preferred sexual triat in a woman. Women exhibiting this trait were more likely to mate. It obviously isn't a new development since if it was women would be as hairy as us and they aren't.

Disgusting armpit hair on woman

Comments