Leg hair debate

Post questions or suggestions here.
Elizabeth Isabelle
Posts: 3771
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Elizabeth Isabelle »

Laird wrote:it's not that I would find you repulsive as a whole, just parts of your look. But it's a relatively minor issue and I'd actually prefer it if I wasn't thus repulsed - in most regards I'm all for what's natural.
Okay, let me try to help. Looking at your picture and trying to find fault with your appearance, if I were into being judgmental about superficial stuff, I might find the thickness of your mustache to be repulsive; but I cannot because I love you. Does that help?
User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by DHodges »

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:Elizabeth wrote in her gossipy post above that her unshaven legs wouldn’t be a problem for you, as she “knew that David was more mature than that, so with him, it was not a problem.” I think she has hit the nail on the head there, for your above statement shows that you have absolutely no desire to discriminate – which is a natural state for “mature” people, and the dead.
I have no desire to discriminate when it comes to leg hair; I am no connoisseur, and don't wish to be one.
Am I missing your point entirely?
brokenhead
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:51 am
Location: Boise

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by brokenhead »

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:Elizabeth, boiled down, your thinking and actions are the complete opposite of what this forum stands for. Your thoughts are a dime a dozen, and found repeated a trillion times on other sites, and in all walks of life. My using your thoughts as examples of the herd mentality, actually makes them truly useful - for they become signposts for what to avoid if your wish is to become human.
Everybody's thoughts are a dime a dozen, Sue. You sound so... so gossipy.
User avatar
Shardrol
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:08 pm
Location: New York, USA

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Shardrol »

It's interesting how far people will go in attempting to rationalize their feelings about something as seemingly trivial as body hair. We don't want to believe our preferences are actually in a large part programmed by the world of entertainment & advertising, we want to think we made them up ourselves. But these pseudo-logical rationalizations don't actually make much sense. If that smooth-as-silk feeling were all that leg-shaving was about, how come more women don't shave their heads so as to enjoy even more of that silky feeling? If the most sexually attractive women are those who look the most different from men, why do so many personal ads from men specify that they want a woman who is toned & fit? Hairy women & soft women are out of fashion in mainstream American culture these days, & we have a way of spreading our culture to the world. Not too long ago European women didn't shave their legs & the look of swirling hair under transparent hosiery was considered quite erotic. Muscles on a woman were not considered attractive - in fact they often made people wonder if she was a lesbian. Now it's shaved legs & toned muscles that are preferred but it won't always be so. Anyone who is willing to honestly look at why they like what they like will find that there's a strong underlying urge to be 'normal' & not step too far outside of, well, the herd.
User avatar
Alex Jacob
Posts: 1671
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:10 am
Location: Meta-Rabbit Hole

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Alex Jacob »

(Twang of a sitar from the mountain peaks, the smell of temple incense).

First, an apology. I left. I left you all. I thought I could forego my responsibility to you, that which God gave to me: to cure you, to relieve you of your pain, to grab yu by the scruff of your pre-literate necks and drag you to Zion.

But I can't!

And now I see just how much you need me, indeed how you cannot do without me. And so, I am back.

Sue, my prayers are with you. Soon---like so many here---you will begin to feel a nearly indescribable effervescence welling up from your second chakra. Om, hari Om! There is no need to join ANY cults, just stay where you are, the cult's come to you...

Selah!
Ni ange, ni bête
User avatar
Nick
Posts: 1677
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 8:39 pm
Location: Detroit, Michigan

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Nick »

Shardrol wrote:We don't want to believe our preferences are actually in a large part programmed by the world of entertainment & advertising, we want to think we made them up ourselves.
Whether or not what we find attractive in the opposite sex is programed into our minds sub-consciously by culture or instinctively by Nature ultimately doesn't matter because it's all based on an illusion from the get go. Quinn made this point quite nicely when he aksed people what they would think if people were sexually attracted to trees and went around trying to engage in sexual acts with them. It's just as insane to become sexually attracted to a tree as it is to become sexually attracted to another human.
Laird
Posts: 954
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:22 am

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Laird »

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:Okay, let me try to help. Looking at your picture and trying to find fault with your appearance, if I were into being judgmental about superficial stuff, I might find the thickness of your mustache to be repulsive; but I cannot because I love you. Does that help?
Sort of but not really. I've seen hairy legs on a woman whom I love before and I still found them (the legs) repulsive, it's just that loving their owner helped to mitigate the amount that I might unwittingly transfer that disgust to her person.
User avatar
Shahrazad
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:03 pm

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Shahrazad »

Eliza,
And that a couple of hours of smooth as silk (for the first shave anyway, as the upper thigh on some of us will have perpetually raised bumps from shaving after that unless the hair is grown back out or plucked) is worth the time, expense, pollution to the planet, and sacrifice of whatever else we might be doing with our time instead of shaving our legs?
IMO, you are completely off with this post. My legs are as soft as silk all the time, and to keep them that way I only have to devote at the very most one minute per leg every two or three days. I do this while I shower, so instead of taking two minutes to shower, it takes me four on the days I shave. [ My brother takes two hours to shower and he doesn't shave his legs. ] A 50 cent razor (and cheaper if I bothered to search for bargains) will last me three months. I suppose I could be spending $2 a year on shaving. And you are implying it's not worth it?

I have never shaved my thighs (except the part right next to the crotch), since they feel smooth without having to shave (the hairs there are very thin and far between), but I suppose if my thighs were very hairy I would shave them too.

-
User avatar
Shahrazad
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:03 pm

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Shahrazad »

Shardrol,
It's interesting how far people will go in attempting to rationalize their feelings about something as seemingly trivial as body hair. We don't want to believe our preferences are actually in a large part programmed by the world of entertainment & advertising, we want to think we made them up ourselves. But these pseudo-logical rationalizations don't actually make much sense.
Anyone who is willing to honestly look at why they like what they like will find that there's a strong underlying urge to be 'normal' & not step too far outside of, well, the herd.


Really? If I wanted to be normal, I would take the time and effort to wear make up, as that is totally expected of women. I don't do it because it takes a lot of effort, but maybe mostly because I hate the way oil feels on my face. High heels look pretty and are used by normal women, but I never use them because they are very uncomfortable and make me tired. I never wear designer clothes, even though that is in style. In fact, I could care less what is in style, as I will wear what I want to wear and not what anyone else does. However, that does not mean that if the clothing style I like to wear suddenly becomes in style, I'm going to stop wearing it. That would be just as stupid.

I grew up in a culture where drinking alcohol is glamorized, and not drinking is seen as uncool. There was a lot of pressure to drink at parties, even when I was just a teen. I had my first drink at 28 or 29. I didn't drink before because I didn't like the taste of alcohol. I break social paradigms all the time.

Finally, if I was really shaving to be like everybody else, I would only have to do it three times a year, since that is about how often I go to the beach. The rest of the time I wear long pants, so nobody would ever know if my legs have hair or not. It is very obvious to me I do it to please myself.

You guys simply assume that just because a person is not a sage they have to go along with herd behavior. Bull shit.

Let me ask you a question. Do you take the time to bathe? If so, why? Because you're expected to smell clean?

-
User avatar
Shardrol
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:08 pm
Location: New York, USA

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Shardrol »

Shahrazad

I didn't mean to imply that all people went along with all aspects of fashion all the time. But most of us don't step so far out of line that we cause ourselves to become objects of too much negative attention. As Elizabeth mentioned, one generally doesn't want to appear repulsive - except for the few who do & the even fewer who genuinely don't care.

Have you ever tried pushing the envelope in the direction of looking (or smelling) truly socially unacceptable or repulsive? It's an interesting experience. I didn't do it because I didn't care, though. For me it was an act of inchoate aggression against society (I was very young).

I don't doubt that you enjoy your silky legs whether anyone sees them or not. I don't actually think there's anything wrong with enjoying how one looks or feels. The reason I singled you out is because you said that all women should shave their legs, which sounds much more like the voice of social conditioning than personal appreciation for silkiness. But now you've changed your tune. So be it.
User avatar
Shahrazad
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:03 pm

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Shahrazad »

Shardrol,
Have you ever tried pushing the envelope in the direction of looking (or smelling) truly socially unacceptable or repulsive? It's an interesting experience.
No, I don't remember ever going that far. I don't like being seen as repulsive. But who does?
The reason I singled you out is because you said that all women should shave their legs, which sounds much more like the voice of social conditioning than personal appreciation for silkiness.
Yes, and I feel I deserved that singling out. I was only half serious about that comment. It is my opinion that women should shave, because I don't know any women that don't care at all how repulsive they appear to the world.
User avatar
Carl G
Posts: 2659
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Carl G »

Shahrazad wrote: It is my opinion that women should shave, because I don't know any women that don't care at all how repulsive they appear to the world.
There you go, appearing to be speaking from social conditioning, again -- your term "the world" being a vast generalization. In some countries, among some age groups, and for some individuals I'm sure a hairy woman is not regarded as repulsive.
Good Citizen Carl
User avatar
Shahrazad
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:03 pm

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Shahrazad »

There you go, appearing to be speaking from social conditioning, again -- your term "the world" being a vast generalization.
Fair enough. The reason I say the world is that most (maybe all) men I know do not like hairy legs. But you're right, I haven't been exposed to all world cultures.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Dan Rowden »

User avatar
Shahrazad
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:03 pm

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Shahrazad »

Is that a monkey?
Elizabeth Isabelle
Posts: 3771
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Elizabeth Isabelle »

Dan Rowden wrote:Hairy can be sexy, surely
Dan, you look fine. Attraction of substance is between minds, so if the attraction is true, then the furriness of the body just means all the more hair for the partner to run her fingers through.
User avatar
Ryan Rudolph
Posts: 2490
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Ryan Rudolph »

The women who buy into the western ideal of beauty are usually intellectually handicapped, and their decisions are based on how other women behave. In essence, their decision to shave their legs, pierce their ears, wear tight clothing, and dye their hair blonde is a step backwards for the independence of women. It is taking a step back into the animal realms, and deriving excitement from being viewed as a sexual object by men. The best that these women can hope for is to be an obedient sex machine for an upper-class wealthy business man, and most of these types of women wouldn’t want it any other way anyway.
Boyan
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 6:56 am

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Boyan »

What about men? Do you think men should shave their legs? How would you feel about a man with his legs shaved?
brokenhead
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:51 am
Location: Boise

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by brokenhead »

Shahrazad wrote:Really? If I wanted to be normal, I would take the time and effort to wear make up, as that is totally expected of women. I don't do it because it takes a lot of effort, but maybe mostly because I hate the way oil feels on my face. High heels look pretty and are used by normal women, but I never use them because they are very uncomfortable and make me tired. I never wear designer clothes, even though that is in style. In fact, I could care less what is in style, as I will wear what I want to wear and not what anyone else does. However, that does not mean that if the clothing style I like to wear suddenly becomes in style, I'm going to stop wearing it. That would be just as stupid.
And I'm sure you look just fine, S. What a refreshing post the above is.

When I was in college, my feminist/marxist girlfriends convinced me to look at makeup not as a male, but in an objective way. The average woman, with no artistic training or talent, is expected to apply pigment to her own face and wear it in public every day. If she doesn't, she feels "naked," like there was some essential grooming she has neglected. Who benefits from this social norm? Answer: the multinational cosmetic companies, largely run by men. American women don't realize the short history of makeup and fashion in the United States. It is strictly a Twentieth Century phenomenon, as two world wars broke America out of its provincial, isolationist coccoon. The wartime fashion for women was work clothes, as they filled the factory jobs vacated by men in the service. After the war, European clothing designers knew they had a huge new market, as early TV helped bring home images of the land Americans had "saved."

My wish would be that makeup would just go away. It's inordinately time-consuming and expensive, and it achieves nothing. It is clearly not essential to grooming, or else men would have to do it too. It announces for its wearer : "My real face is not good enough to be seen in public." Even the word makeup implies a pre-existing deficiency of some sort.

I have never seen an otherwise well-groomed woman who looks better, IMHO, with makeup than without. In the business world, I've often wondered how women expect to be taken as seriously as men if they spend an hour a day applying makeup. If a man were to come to the office wearing rouge and lipstick, he would be laughed out of a job.

Even worse, makeup has the opposite psychological effect on women. Most women don't ever get to feel pretty without it.

But it's here to stay, one more distraction for society to waste time and money on. And let's face it, if a woman has not been blessed with looks, makeup will not make up for it. And if she has, then it's gilding the lily.
brokenhead
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:51 am
Location: Boise

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by brokenhead »

Shahrazad wrote:Is that a monkey?
Hey, Shah - it looks like a monstrous chia-pet!
User avatar
Ryan Rudolph
Posts: 2490
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Ryan Rudolph »

Boyan,
What about men? Do you think men should shave their legs? How would you feel about a man with his legs shaved?
The same way I feel when I see adult gay men marching down the streets, holding hands, and proud of their sexuality, I basically think sexuality is absurd, and it is one of the major causes of most forms of attachment, confusion, loneliness and inward yearning/longing in the world. Much of humanities self-esteem is build upon sexuality, which is delusional because it is only a biological urge and nothing more.

Basically, I think it is ridiculous for either sex to attempt to look more desirable for sexual reasons. And women may say that they are doing it for themselves, but this basically translates into, “I’m doing it to please men”. Ideally, shaving hair from ones body should be done before surgery or for hygiene reasons.

To want other people to desire you is feminine in its very nature, and can only breed conflict, confusion, and emotional attachment. The problem is that sex is intimately tied to the emotions, and so as long as humanity believes that sex with one person is special, sacred, and represents some sort of loving relationship then they will continue to live a life of attachment, confusion, loneliness and inward yearning/longing. Basically, sex is no more sacred, special or loving than eating a chocolate chip cookie is, Actually, its much worse psychologically for most people.
brokenhead
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:51 am
Location: Boise

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by brokenhead »

The problem is that sex is intimately tied to the emotions, and so as long as humanity believes that sex with one person is special, sacred, and represents some sort of loving relationship then they will continue to live a life of attachment, confusion, loneliness and inward yearning/longing. Basically, sex is no more sacred, special or loving than eating a chocolate chip cookie is, Actually, its probably much worse psychologically for most people.
Sex is certainly not something sacred. But a respectful attitude towards it and procreation are probably psychologically beneficial, both to the individual and the community. Not all chocolate chip cookies are created equal.
User avatar
Ryan Rudolph
Posts: 2490
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Ryan Rudolph »

Brokenhead,
Sex is certainly not something sacred. But a respectful attitude towards it and procreation are probably psychologically beneficial, both to the individual and the community. Not all chocolate chip cookies are created equal.
Yes, at this stage of our evolution, man-woman sexual procreation is the only crude way to propagate the species. However, I’m hopeful that as biotechnology evolves, technology will play more of a role in engineering the species into something much greater than our present feeble state.

Furthermore, I’ve only met a handful of women that were worthy of receiving sperm, and that is only if the offspring turned out to be a male. And even if the offspring is a male, it could turn out fairly unconscious, and what a waste of energy that would be.

Also, I don't trust my own genetics, as I attribute much of my intelligence to the fact that I was born left-handed, as my brother, father, grand-grand parents are all fairly dull and mediocre, so I don't trust my own sperm, so this is why I don't have a respectful attitude towards procreation because it is definitely tricky business, and a gamble at best given the current method of reproduction.
Elizabeth Isabelle
Posts: 3771
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Elizabeth Isabelle »

With bold added, Ryan Rudolph wrote:I’ve only met a handful of women that were worthy of receiving sperm, and that is only if the offspring turned out to be a male. And even if the offspring is a male, it could turn out fairly unconscious, and what a waste of energy that would be.

Also, I don't trust my own genetics
Ryan, I agree that you are currently unfit to reproduce.
User avatar
Ryan Rudolph
Posts: 2490
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Leg hair debate

Post by Ryan Rudolph »

Elizabeth,
Ryan, I agree that you are currently unfit to reproduce.
Unfortunately you are too smug and callous to understand my point, which is this – Most humans (over 90%) are grossly inadequate as far as enlightenment is concerned. Less than 10% can achieve a significant degree of consciousness, and even those gifted ones are still quite imperfect compared to what is possible.

Reproduction should not be something that is celebrated and proactively encouraged by all because what is the point in devoting all ones time and effort into raising a mediocre child that will be incapable of thinking rationally? It is a tragedy for both the parent and child, and a waste of the planet’s finite resources.
Locked