GENIUS FORUMS

If anyone wants to join in on a philosophical debate over women shaving our legs, you are invited.

As background and explanation, a member who used to post here named Scott mentioned kundalini yoga on a thread in GF awhile back, which sparked my interest and I looked into it. I ended up joining a kundalini teacher training program, and one of the things they offed to us was a spiritual name based on numerology. I was curious, so I asked for mine, and that is why I post under the name Satjot Kaur over there. It means "true light of God." I decided that really pretentious looking shot that I took of myself after 3 nights of insomnia when it was being debated here whether we should have our actual faces as our avatars - would be a fitting picture to the name they gave me, so you'll recognize me over there.

I don't have time; I'm doing my nails.

Well, when you're done with your nails, maybe you'll want to do your hair.

Pah, I don't think I'll go anywhere near that discussion, though it's nice to know Sikh martyrs died so men could wear a pile of fabric around their heads with pride.

[edit: my aplogies to the English language for that sentence]

Is this really worth debating?

Probably not here, but elsewhere people still grapple with this sort of nonsense.

There's not a whole lot that can be said about leg hair shaving, except that all women should do it. With men, it depends on how feminine they want to look.

Dan Rowden wrote:Pah, I don't think I'll go anywhere near that discussion, though it's nice to know Sikh martyrs died so men could wear a pile of fabric around their heads with pride.

[edit: my aplogies to the English language for that sentence]

Ah, puns do prevail, don't they?

Shahrazad wrote:There's not a whole lot that can be said about leg hair shaving, except that all women should do it.

Why should we?

Eliz,

(1) Smooth legs look better
(2) Smooth legs feel better

Elizabeth wrote on another site, asking:

Need moral support. I have decided to forego shaving my legs, and that is in keeping with Sikhism, so I ask you to help me feel better about my decision.

Above, Carl G asks:

Is this really worth debating?

Debating leg shaving isn’t really worth one’s time, but added to Elizabeth’s asking for support for her ‘decision’ to do so, does provide a very worthwhile topic of discussion: that being woman’s lack of separate, independent minds.

If Elizabeth had truly made this lifestyle decision, she’d not require support for it. It would be her decision; not group think.

Obviously, no decision was made. Even the idea to not shave her legs came from the religious cult she is presently involved in. When that fact is taken into account, her post is just her showing off - though another poster on that site did find some humour in it.

Sinister wrote:

Plus this topic of “moral support” over the internet is a little lame
-I have heard of people asking for moral support if they desperately want to quite drinking, smoking or some sort of drug addiction
-or if they have been seriously injured or inflicted with a serious illness or disability.
-if they are depressed
-or if they are encountering abuse/harassment
-or if they have lost a loved one due to an untimely event.

I have never, honestly, been asked to give someone ‘moral support’ for shaving the hair off THEIR skin? So I found this post a little humorous.

Dan also popped up over there questioning how it was possible for conscious, rational beings to be subject to any of society’s insanities.

Hair removal is a purely aesthetic concern, a fashion trend. Given that women are more profoundly connected in terms of their overall social identity to such fashions it follows that when they happen they tend to be regarded with considerable seriousness. i.e. where some social memes are concerned, a particular behaviour may be seen as necessary for a female to be perceived as behaving in a womanly fashion (rather than just being fashionable, if you get the difference). These particular trends, whist in reality having no more intellectual or ethical substance than any other trivial aspect of fashion, are powerful social forces, and ones that I find deeply disturbing. I believe women in those western nations (or elsewhere) that still cling to this especially banal meme ought openly defy it, if only to express the fact they are a conscious, rational beings who won't be told by thoughtless herd animals what it means to be a woman.

A person in touch with their own mind would never ask support for a decision they made. Such a conscious, rational being would have already considered the consequences of their proposed actions before acting on them. This means that a decision can’t really be called a ‘decision’ if it is dependent on others backing it. It is only a decision when an individual understands its consequences and is ready to 100% stand independently behind it. Anything less and it’s just more mooing from the herd - the herd being the mind of woman.

.

Well for the broads that will post here about this stuff it will depend upon what ones race and/or hair color is.

If you are blessed with dark hair most would shave (trim) it off.

If you are blessed with dark red, probably the same as above (depending upon the ego factor).

You have dark blonde then still perhaps the above applies.

The only shades left on the color spectrum are light red and the lighter blondes then all bets are off. If they never shave to begin with "most" will have a very fine fuzzy feel and look that they can get away with.



So what do you tell the young girls when it is their decision whether to do that first shave - or remain a virgin from the commercial ravages of the blade/razor?

To be (au naturale) or not to be?

Thinking minds want to know..! maybe that (bleach) blonde bombshell Britney Spears has an intellectual answer for the little girls.

Soap Opera material


Tomas (the tank)
Prince of Jerusalem
16 degree
Scottish Rite Free Mason


.

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:If Elizabeth had truly made this lifestyle decision, she’d not require support for it. It would be her decision; not group think.

You never change/grow, do you Sue? Even though I had to spell out my pun (asking for moral support from a religious website) over there, you chose to deliberately overlook that in another childish attempt to insult me.

Now look at this even more closely - obviously I did not require moral support to do this, as it was done before the post. I'm not just growing my leg hair now, and if you require "evidence" from a trusted observer - ask DHodges. He was down here a couple of months ago, and I was in a bathing suit, on the beach with him and my unshaven legs. David Hodges is an actual mature adult, so he did not mention the leg hair, but I suspect he noticed (he is, after all, quite intelligent and observant).

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:Obviously, no decision was made. Even the idea to not shave her legs came from the religious cult she is presently involved in. When that fact is taken into account, her post is just her showing off

No, actually, this was a decision I came to over the last year - independent of this religion. It was a slow process, and actually I had half-way decided before Kevin's visit - although I did shave my legs once when he was here when I thought he was going to see me in a bathing suit. I judged him to be superficial enough to not want to see my hairy legs, so I shaved them. I knew that David was more mature than that, so with him, it was not a problem.

It is true that I do not want people to look at me as if I'm gross or disgusting, just as I don't want people fawning over me as if I'm physically beautiful. I wish that people would only see each other for our minds, but we must deal with the fact that we have bodies. Strangely enough, the bodies we have affect the minds that many other people have. There are currently very few who can look past the body. The question is what to do about that.

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:A person in touch with their own mind would never ask support for a decision they made.

A leader in touch with their own mind would wisely ask for support in all decisions they make. There will be a herd for a great many more generations, so the wise should ask the herd to support wisdom. The herd is not stupid, so if they are presented with wisdom in a way that is palatable to them, they will prefer it over nonsense.

Eliza,

Just for clarity, my decision to shave my legs has nothing to do with group think. I do it because I don't want to see or feel hair on my legs, not because it's the current paradigm. God knows I have broken enough paradigms in my lifetime, and will continue breaking them as long as I'm alive. [ Now if only I could teach my daughter to do the same. ]

Dan,

From Sue's quote, you said you advocate women not shaving. I have a question for you. Would you sleep with a woman with as much or more leg hair as you? If you say yes, would you enjoy looking at and touching them (the legs)?

I ask you this because I don't believe you'd lie.

-

I'm going to tell you a little story, but let me start with a disclaimer that it is probably not true - at least I can't find any evidence for it in a quick search - and I don't remember where I heard it, and it has a suspicious "just so" feel to it.

Before about World War II, women in America did not shave their legs. It was not a common practice anywhere. But during WWII, a lot of soldiers ended up in Europe.

Because of the war, French prostitutes could not get silk stockings. So they resorted to shaving their legs to simulate the feel of silk. When the men came home from the war, they then encouraged their wives and girlfriends to shave their legs. Meanwhile, the French prostitutes went back to wearing silk stockings. Leg shaving is now far more common in the US than it is in Europe.

As I said, the above story has a "just so" feeling to it, and sounds like it was written by a feminist. Also, from the time frame, maybe it should be WWI rather than WWII.

I don't recall ever encouraging any woman to shave her legs. Leg hair is not bad, although stubble can be pretty rough. I think this is something women get each other to do (with the teasing etc., previously mentioned), not something men actually ask women to do.

However, the men don't really object, either. Perhaps there is something analogous to Chinese foot binding there.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:Now look at this even more closely - obviously I did not require moral support to do this, as it was done before the post. I'm not just growing my leg hair now, and if you require "evidence" from a trusted observer - ask DHodges. He was down here a couple of months ago, and I was in a bathing suit, on the beach with him and my unshaven legs. David Hodges is an actual mature adult, so he did not mention the leg hair, but I suspect he noticed (he is, after all, quite intelligent and observant).

While I do like to think of myself as being intelligent and mature, being observant is really not my strong point. (I know this because more observant people have pointed it out to me on numerous occasions.) In truth, I did not notice. It's just not something I would care about.

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:Debating leg shaving isn’t really worth one’s time, but added to Elizabeth’s asking for support for her ‘decision’ to do so, does provide a very worthwhile topic of discussion: that being woman’s lack of separate, independent minds.

If Elizabeth had truly made this lifestyle decision, she’d not require support for it. It would be her decision; not group think.

Oh, nonsense. There are many reasons why you might want to discuss things with other people. Seems to me that Elizabeth has already made up her mind, and this is a way to get other people to think about this issue, which obviously touches on other issues like the nature of femininity, appearance vs. substance, and so on.

It seems to me there was a thread a while back about "wise men beards." David, I think it was, said there was a matter of values - is staring in the mirror every morning, preening, really something you want to commit yourself to? Seems to me the same applies here - if you make the decision that shaving your legs is a worthwhile activity - that it's a good way to be spending your time - what does that say about you as a person? Similar arguments would obviously apply to wearing makeup.


Speaking of religious cults...
I've been reading recently about the Quakers. One of their ideas is "plain dress." The idea is not to dress traditionally (in a "costume"), but to dress in a simple way that does not call attention to one's self. ("Casting aside worldly fashions and vanity.") However there is the tendency for non-fashionable clothing to stand out. The world being what it is, modest clothing is somewhat unusual.

Sher,

Dan,

From Sue's quote, you said you advocate women not shaving. I have a question for you. Would you sleep with a woman with as much or more leg hair as you? If you say yes, would you enjoy looking at and touching them (the legs)?

I ask you this because I don't believe you'd lie.

Firstly, I don't so much advocate woman not shave their legs as I advocate that women attempt to be conscious. If a woman shaved her legs and consciously knew the reasons she's doing it, I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with that. It's the lack of consciousness in such activities that is the real problem. Now, as to me sleeping with a chick as hairy has me, um, that's a tricky one - I have pretty damn hairy legs so any girl that looked like that might not stimulate such a desire. Nature created subtlety in the feminine form for that purpose. If, hypothetically, I were to sleep with a woman it wouldn't worry me that she didn't shave her legs. Many European women don't and they look just fine. On the other hand, alluding to the story Dave Hodges offered (which seemed reasonable enough to me even if not historically true), and speaking in more general terms, given the psychology of sex revolves around the dimorphic nature of the sexes, any activity that enhances that dimorphism would probably help stimulate sexual desire. The whole leg shaving trend is about increasing that dimorphism, about making women more sexual.

DHodges wrote:

Sue: Debating leg shaving isn’t really worth one’s time, but added to Elizabeth’s asking for support for her ‘decision’ to do so, does provide a very worthwhile topic of discussion: that being woman’s lack of separate, independent minds.

If Elizabeth had truly made this lifestyle decision, she’d not require support for it. It would be her decision; not group think.

Oh, nonsense. There are many reasons why you might want to discuss things with other people. Seems to me that Elizabeth has already made up her mind, and this is a way to get other people to think about this issue, which obviously touches on other issues like the nature of femininity, appearance vs. substance, and so on.

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.

So far, the only discussion that has taken place has been about the nature of the herd – everything else has been people just gossiping. (And the one question from Carl.)

Elizabeth herself has taken no responsibility for anything she wrote on the issue of leg shaving, calling it a “pun”. Do you now wish to begin discussing the “issue”?

Elizabeth wrote:

Elizabeth: Need moral support. I have decided to forego shaving my legs, and that is in keeping with Sikhism, so I ask you to help me feel better about my decision.

Sue: If Elizabeth had truly made this lifestyle decision, she’d not require support for it. It would be her decision; not group think.

You never change/grow, do you Sue? Even though I had to spell out my pun (asking for moral support from a religious website) over there, you chose to deliberately overlook that in another childish attempt to insult me.

Your posts on that other site and your posts here show your need to talk about yourself and your need to be the center of attention. The leg shaving and the cult you are presently playing with were not my point of interest. Your need to wrap up topics in stories about yourself was, for it is clear evidence of the feminine mind. Your post today continues the example by your need to distance yourself from all responsibility by calling your original post a “pun”. Added to that, your belief that my post was out to insult you is another clear example of your need to be the central attraction. There is, of course, nothing unusual about such actions, as woman, having no substance of her own, must be continually buoyed up by others. She literally sucks the substance out of anyone at hand, and wears it as if it was hers all along.

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.

Dan,

Now, as to me sleeping with a chick as hairy has me, um, that's a tricky one - I have pretty damn hairy legs so any girl that looked like that might not stimulate such a desire.

Right -- you may feel like you're in bed with another man.

You suggesting that women may want to try going unshaved would be similar to a woman who likes men that smell nice and clean to suggest that men should not take the trouble of bathing. I'm not comfortable with it.

If, hypothetically, I were to sleep with a woman it wouldn't worry me that she didn't shave her legs.

It wouldn't worry you, but it may not turn you on either.

given the psychology of sex revolves around the dimorphic nature of the sexes, any activity that enhances that dimorphism would probably help stimulate sexual desire. The whole leg shaving trend is about increasing that dimorphism, about making women more sexual.

I agree. But in spite of this, there are times when it has been in style for women to make themselves look more masculine in subtle ways and for men to do the opposite. So the dimorphism strategy is not used as a firm, unflexible rule.

-

My two cents on the subject: I currently find shaved legs (and armpits) far more attractive on a woman than unshaved legs (and armpits). In fact I sometimes find myself feeling as much as revulsion for unshaved legs (or armpits) on a woman. Don't ask me where that comes from - I suspect that it's something to do with sexuality: it's probably similar to the way that I find male homosexual acts revolting. I don't know whether this applies to guys (or indeed women) in general, but I suspect that it does. I don't know whether it's conditioning that I could outgrow through exposure. All I know is that it's currently true for me. And the only reason that I can see for a woman to shave her legs is to present a more attractive appearance for others to look at. But Eliz, in the past you've mentioned that you put on weight to deliberately present a less attractive appearance to guys, so I don't think that this reason applies to you at all. So I say to you: go for it! Recycle that razor! Who the hell wants to waste time and effort on shaving? I know that I don't, which is why I grow my beard out, ignoring like you the likelihood that I'm presenting a less attractive appearance to the majority of women (I don't suppose that men particularly care about other men's beards - I know that I don't except to give respect to monster growth).

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:[W]oman, [implicitly including Elizabeth], having no substance of her own, must be continually buoyed up by others. She literally sucks the substance out of anyone at hand, and wears it as if it was hers all along.

I find Elizabeth to be a woman of much substance. She has a lot to contribute and she does so intelligently. She is an under-recognised member of this community.

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:Elizabeth, boiled down, your thinking and actions are the complete opposite of what this forum stands for.

Granted, Elizabeth is not in complete harmony with everything that the forum stands for, but she does synchronise with it in several important ways: she is idealistic, she values conscious thought, she values wisdom and she values the dialectic approach generally employed around these parts.

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:Your thoughts are a dime a dozen, and found repeated a trillion times on other sites, and in all walks of life.

That they are - by your assertion - common is no argument against their truthfulness.

Sue Hindmarsh wrote: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.

And no doubt to become a man. You're on your way Eliz: take it from me, it's not increasing your consciousness, it's hairy legs that are the first step towards becoming a man! That's what my libido tells me anyway...

Laird,

And the only reason that I can see for a woman to shave her legs is to present a more attractive appearance for others to look at.

You forgot why I do it: so that my legs will feel smooth as silk to me. It's not like I show them to anybody else anyhow.

Shahrazad

So why was it exactly that you said all women should shave their legs? So that their legs will feel smooth as silk to them?

Good point, Shardrol. Those that like the rough feel and hairy look should not shave.

Shardrol wrote:Shahrazad

So why was it exactly that you said all women should shave their legs? So that their legs will feel smooth as silk to them?

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? Guys who shave their faces only get 5 o'clock shadow on a very small portion of their body, which does not take that much time to shave off again if it is important to them. Our leg skin takes up close to half of our body surface area. That's a lot of stubble, not silk.

And Laird, you're not repulsed by female dogs, are you? Not sexually attracted to them, but not repulsed. I'm pleased with you not being sexually attracted to me, but I don't want my friend (or anyone else) to find me repulsive, either. Just call me pooch if it helps you regard me as non-repulsive, okay?

Shahrazad wrote:Those that like the rough feel and hairy look should not shave.

It's not a rough feel. That's the feel of stubble, not hair. It isn't as much fur as a kitten, but it's softer than dog hair.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:And Laird, you're not repulsed by female dogs, are you? Not sexually attracted to them, but not repulsed.

Right. I'd probably be close to repulsed by a hairless female dog.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:I'm pleased with you not being sexually attracted to me, but I don't want my friend (or anyone else) to find me repulsive, either. Just call me pooch if it helps you regard me as non-repulsive, okay?

See, pooch, 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.