Body Hair - personal preference?

Welcome to UKHIppy2764@2x.png

UKHippy is a long running online community and of likeminded people exploring all interpretations on what it means to be living an alternative lifestyle -- we welcome discussions on everything related to sustainability, the environment, alternative spirituality, music, festivals, politics and more -- membership of this website is free but supported by the community.

  • Well after shaving my heed for years, I have grown my hair back in, (getting longish now) and I have also grown a beard.
    OH is not keen on the beard but other peoples reaction has been quite good so I`m pleased. (vain I know but hey ho) I like it.


    I like the longer hair, even though it emphasises my "solar panel"

  • Ha Ha :clap: same here, I shaved my nut for years, and at the request of OH never tried to grow a beard.


    Last year I thought i'd grow my hair then have a mohawk but was shoked to find I had gone very thin at the front of me head :( I still went for it though :D then last autumn I decided to grow a beard ....... it came out white :eek: think i'd better leave that one for a few more years yet - like 20 maybe when I should have white hair. :D

  • Ha! That review is class!


    About the body hair - If I'm just me in the house I grow natural everywhere, not unless my pits start to smell. If I socialise then the pits go too, and legs if it's leg bearing weather. The foof gets a proper shave up if I plan a session with the significant other, but usually it's just neatened up. Wouldn't mind getting a proper beard trimmer to do some mad designs in it.

  • My beard is lovely and bushy now.


    Opinions are divided, but I love it,


    Although with my hair being longish, I`m now know either as Grizzly Adams, or Jesus Christ ! hah!

  • My BF has a lovely beard an is generally hairy all over! I kinda persuaded him to keep himself trim a little now tho lol But I like it, its manly.


    I'll shave regular, but at the same time I'm not so bothered if I leave it a few days...depends how busy I am or how warm it is I guess!


    But recently sociological studies have shown the more educated the man, the less concerned he is if his woman has hair on her legs or armpits...interesting huh? Kinda showing how they think for themselves a bit more perhaps...? that they are less conditioned by media perception ( i.e. the lads mag porn barbie girl obsessions) ?.

  • As a guy who actually prefers a woman natural + unshaved I would kind of fit with that study as I've got a degree. I think it's also age related as when I was growing up I regularly saw women with hairy legs+ perhaps to a lesser degree hairy pits (these were less likely to be on show in general) + guess that's why I was attracted to such women. Around the mid 1980's there was a massive decline in women who were openly hairy so that guys under say 30 may have hardly ever seen a woman totally natural so it's no surprise that fewer are attracted to a woman unshaven. Many European women didn't shave back then, but now such women are the exception +are as clean shaven as most women from English speaking nations.


    I remember going to Poland on a birding trip in the 80's + though in Warsaw women seemed to shave, the village I stayed in not far from the Russian border I think every woman I saw from teens to grannies had obviously hairy legs. At the same time I saw lots of Polish students in London looking in a particular shop window aimed at Poles + all the women had hairy legs when over the period of 3 or 4 years there was a dramatic sea change + no more legs were hairy. Today I live in an area with a large Polish community + all seem to shave these days.


    Obviously each to their own + shaved is a valid option as is hairy, but I think it's sad that society has such a negative view of a woman who chooses to accept herbody at its most natural.:hippy:

  • The question of women not removing their body hair was one of the topics on Jeremy Vine's lunch time Radio 2 show today. They had on Emer O' Toole who had Previously been on breakfast TV a few months back. She is a very articulate woman + hasn't shaved at all for a couple of years. Interesting interview.


    If anyone is interested to hear what she says it's on Listen Again on the R2 website- available to listen for 7 days.

  • Nothing sexier than a confidently hairy lady!


    On the other hand, there is nothing less sexy than stubble on a woman.


    I find the debate quite funny and revealing of 'liberated' people, a bit like all the anti-capitalist smokers - especially the Marlboro ones!

  • I find the debate quite funny and revealing of 'liberated' people, a bit like all the anti-capitalist smokers - especially the Marlboro ones!


    It's not really a debate though, just personal preferences. Everyone has preferences, surely there are things that turn everyone off; that doesn't necessarily make them shallow or hypocritical. Jeez, some folk prefer those who don't wash! Sure, it's going au naturel (arguably) but it certainly wouldn't "do it" for me. But to each their own. I haven't seen one post on this thread telling anyone they must shave their pits and/or bits! :D

  • Yes there is, it's a slightly demure shaven one who doesn't look like she needs a wash. :p


    I think that as you used an adjective where I had used an adverb (confidently vs demure) possibly shows that my point was missed.


    I was talking about a woman who has the confidence not to conform to the standards defined by a mass media which is kept afloat by corporations whose product sales are dependent on preying on peoples' insecurity in the name of sacred capitalism.


    Mens' (somewhat hypocritical) demands that women should depilate for some pretty erroneous and spurious reasons only demonstrates that they too have been preyed upon and are complicit in the marketing of 'products'.


    I'll remember the 'It's not really a debate though, just personal preferences' line, though, when I next discuss GMO vs organic, television vs playing in the meadow or Humvee vs bicycle.

  • I was talking about a woman who has the confidence not to conform to the standards defined by a mass media which is kept afloat by corporations whose product sales are dependent on preying on peoples' insecurity in the name of sacred capitalism.

    That's certainly a factor, but it's also a tad simplistic. Humans have been grooming ever since they became self-aware and learned to manipulate tools.


    Quote

    Mens' (somewhat hypocritical) demands that women should depilate for some pretty erroneous and spurious reasons only demonstrates that they too have been preyed upon and are complicit in the marketing of 'products'.

    Again, a little simplistic. While I'm sure it happens, I'm not aware of any men who "demand" that women shave. Many may find smooth legs/armpits/whatever more sensually attractive, but it would be erronoeous to assume that this is simply the result of pressure from marketing. Personally, I find hairy legs unattractive. Your argument would suggest that this is because I've been brainwashed by marketing. However I find make-up and large breasts unattractive, which would seem to suggest that my brain remains unwashed. Clearly, there's more at play that simply "marketing".


    Quote

    I'll remember the 'It's not really a debate though, just personal preferences' line, though, when I next discuss GMO vs organic, television vs playing in the meadow or Humvee vs bicycle.

    An aesthetic preference isn't quite the same as environmental destruction though, is it? ;)

  • That's certainly a factor, but it's also a tad simplistic. Humans have been grooming ever since they became self-aware and learned to manipulate tools.


    Again, a little simplistic. While I'm sure it happens, I'm not aware of any men who "demand" that women shave. Many may find smooth legs/armpits/whatever more sensually attractive, but it would be erronoeous to assume that this is simply the result of pressure from marketing. Personally, I find hairy legs unattractive. Your argument would suggest that this is because I've been brainwashed by marketing. However I find make-up and large breasts unattractive, which would seem to suggest that my brain remains unwashed. Clearly, there's more at play that simply "marketing".


    An aesthetic preference isn't quite the same as environmental destruction though, is it? ;)


    You equate grooming with removing part of the body's natural functioning components?


    You don't think you have been brainwashed? Well, I imagine that is the way it works. Your preferences, whether you like it or not, are a product of your cultural environment. If you don't like big tits, it's probably because somebody to whom you had an attraction did not have big tits - not vice-versa. Or maybe somebody with big tits turned you off for some reason - hey, I'm not going to pry. People don't like hairy legs on women because it is regarded as culturally abnormal. I've noticed that there has also been a change in attitude toward hairy men and that more men are depilating too.


    You don't think that all the 'products' are environmentally damaging? And I believe that there is a very strong argument that our disconnection from our natural selves is fundamental to our ambivalence as a species to the havoc we wreak. I think it is quite hilarious that people prefer the manufactured smells of fashion houses to the natural fragrance of another human being. The arguments about BO are loaded with ignorance and pro-product propaganda and if people ate proper food and did not choke and poison their bodies with toxins, they would not emit such foul odours. And, incidentally, you might find that it is stale sweat - particularly on clothes - which smells bad - using anti-persperant to block sweat glands is such an inspired idea, is it not.


    What I also find interesting is the lengths people will go to justify something which is unnatural, e.g. circumcision, when it has somehow become a cultural norm - simply out of the brainwashing of social conformity helped largely by the media but also by the fear of rejection. Female circumcision is regarded as mutilation and a violation of human rights yet circumcision of male babies is not only acceptable but de rigueur in a nation where exporting freedom and democracy is a patriotic duty.


    And to return to the debate/personal preference thing momentarily, if it ain't a debate, why not just have a poll and do without the thread - it would have saved a lot of pages of posts...


    But it seems to me that one side of the discussion is either motivated by a need to counter an established redneck myth of 'smelly hairy hippies' or to lead the Aquarians into a new age of capitalism.

  • You equate grooming with removing part of the body's natural functioning components?

    Yes. I assume you do too, unless you have nails like claws ;)


    Quote

    You don't think you have been brainwashed?

    No, I don't. Or my tastes would reflect those portrayed as the norm by the media.


    Quote

    Well, I imagine that is the way it works. Your preferences, whether you like it or not, are a product of your cultural environment.

    Exactly. Our tastes and preferences are shaped by a wide variety of factors - they are not simply a product of media brainwashing. Are people who like redheads "brainwashed"?



    Quote

    People don't like hairy legs on women because it is regarded as culturally abnormal. I've noticed that there has also been a change in attitude toward hairy men and that more men are depilating too.

    Dude, that's an extremely large generalisation and somewhat arrogant. You can't presume to know why everyone has a particular aesthetic preference. If it were that simple, everyone would like smooth legs on women. The fact that many of us largely ignore the media and are exposed to different cultural norms yet still form a diverse range of preferences suggests quite clearly that it's nowhere near as simple as you're arguing.


    Quote

    You don't think that all the 'products' are environmentally damaging?

    Straw man argument. ;) But no, I don't think a razor is really up there with GM crops. And it certainly isn't up there with the computer that you're using to compose this argument. ;)


    Quote

    And I believe that there is a very strong argument that our disconnection from our natural selves is fundamental to our ambivalence as a species to the havoc we wreak.

    Agreed.


    Quote

    I think it is quite hilarious that people prefer the manufactured smells of fashion houses to the natural fragrance of another human being.

    Agreed to a point. And yet, I can curl off a pretty nasty brown torpedo, and I'm fairly confident that you won't be sniffing my natural fragrance with reckless enthusiasm. ;)


    Quote

    The arguments about BO are loaded with ignorance and pro-product propaganda and if people ate proper food and did not choke and poison their bodies with toxins, they would not emit such foul odours. And, incidentally, you might find that it is stale sweat - particularly on clothes - which smells bad - using anti-persperant to block sweat glands is such an inspired idea, is it not.

    Again, agreed to a point. But if working in confined quarters, in close proximity to others, natural body odours will soon become overbearing. Fortunately, there are alternatives to chemical antiperspirants. Additionally, humans have enhanced their aroma for millennia in order to make their odour more appealing. We are naturally quite vain, so it's not entirely about marketing and disconnection from nature.


    W

    Quote

    hat I also find interesting is the lengths people will go to justify something which is unnatural

    The problem with this line of argument is that the word "natural" is meaningless. Looked at one way, everything we do is "natural", since we're a product of nature. Or alternatively, nothing we do since crawling out of the trees is "natural". So it's a word that's generally deployed arbitrarily to suit any given argument. What precisely do you mean by "natural"? Should we be abandoning language? Agriculture? The use of tools? Where do you draw the line at what you consider "natural"?


    Quote

    But it seems to me that one side of the discussion is either motivated by a need to counter an established redneck myth of 'smelly hairy hippies' or to lead the Aquarians into a new age of capitalism.

    Or alternatively, maybe some of us don't gravitate towards one extreme or the other, and hold a more nuanced point of view? Just a thought. :)

  • I'll remember the 'It's not really a debate though, just personal preferences' line, though, when I next discuss GMO vs organic, television vs playing in the meadow or Humvee vs bicycle.


    Will you, or are you simply taking the piss? There was me trying to bring a less antagonistic approach to the thread. Myself, I'll try to withhold from making too many assumptions before the outset of that hypothetical discussion.


    The arguments about BO are loaded with ignorance



    Insults and assumptions aside, I really don't believe that if someone never washed - no matter what their diet consisted of - they wouldn't start to get pretty smelly by almost everyone's standards (certain fetishists not withstanding, and I do mean fetishists, not nature lovers ;)).


    What I also find interesting is the lengths people will go to justify something which is unnatural, e.g. circumcision


    That's got nothing to do with the thread. I absolutely wouldn't defend circumcision, but to equate it with female genital mutilation really would be ignorant, since the latter is specifically designed to cause sexual dysfunction, amongst many other reasons. Again, another issue...


    And to return to the debate/personal preference thing momentarily, if it ain't a debate, why not just have a poll and do without the thread - it would have saved a lot of pages of posts...


    Blimey, was I not quick enough in responding? :p You only need to ask me once! :pp Maybe it was worth a discussion I guess, maybe things don't need to be so polarised, or at least not argued in such an insulting way. :S


    But it seems to me that one side of the discussion is either motivated by a need to counter an established redneck myth of 'smelly hairy hippies' or to lead the Aquarians into a new age of capitalism.


    Not sure where that leaves those of us who never shave :hippy2: but don't want to make a bunch of assumptions about those who do, or those who prefer those who do (sorry if that's a bit convoluted; I do that!) Sure, I'm not at all keen on the infantilisation of women/misogynist marketing thing, and there's no way I'm going to start feeling pressured into shaving parts of my body, but I'm not going to accuse every person who likes a bald foofoo of being ignorant of brainwashed.




    Aside: Apologies - I've quoted from just the one post instead of two. I'm not very well at the mo and would struggle to rectify that just now.