As I don't want to take the Atheist thread off a tangent, I am starting another thread.
Not really something I want to discuss at length with strange blokes on the internet, but as it's a socio-cultural issue ...
The subject of pubic hair removal came up. Well, I brought it up, as an example of women in the west undergoing pain in order to conform to the prevailing standard/fashion for little or no hair in the pubic region.
Taylor stated that it's something that women choose to do in order to increase their sensitivity and therefore their pleasure.
I looked into this, as it didn't seem to tally with what I've heard or my own experience (I don't have sex with women, so obviously don't get that part of the picture).
The first article here seems to support that to some extent, although as the author notes, it's difficult to really separate cause and effect.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-pleasures-sex/201203/what-pubic-hair-its-removal-has-do-better-sex
Still, that and another article where one lesbian said "two words - more sensation", surprised me.
Against that, there are these articles arguing for the sexual and health benefits of pubic hair.
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2011/04/war-pubic-hair.html
http://www.thesexmd.com/your-bush-loves-you-back/
I still think, from anecdotal evidence, that hair removal is a mixture of self-grooming for oneself (a bit of trimming and tidying), social convention (the bikini line, for swimming / the beach / gym changing room) and pleasing one's partner (complete or near complete removal, that involves quite a bit of pain).
But there you go, there are conflicting opinions.
All I would argue for is that women are not put under pressure to remove their hair if they're not comfortable doing so, and that young girls aren't given the impression that it's something ugly and shameful.
Not really something I want to discuss at length with strange blokes on the internet, but as it's a socio-cultural issue ...
The subject of pubic hair removal came up. Well, I brought it up, as an example of women in the west undergoing pain in order to conform to the prevailing standard/fashion for little or no hair in the pubic region.
Taylor stated that it's something that women choose to do in order to increase their sensitivity and therefore their pleasure.
I looked into this, as it didn't seem to tally with what I've heard or my own experience (I don't have sex with women, so obviously don't get that part of the picture).
The first article here seems to support that to some extent, although as the author notes, it's difficult to really separate cause and effect.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-pleasures-sex/201203/what-pubic-hair-its-removal-has-do-better-sex
Still, that and another article where one lesbian said "two words - more sensation", surprised me.
Against that, there are these articles arguing for the sexual and health benefits of pubic hair.
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2011/04/war-pubic-hair.html
http://www.thesexmd.com/your-bush-loves-you-back/
I still think, from anecdotal evidence, that hair removal is a mixture of self-grooming for oneself (a bit of trimming and tidying), social convention (the bikini line, for swimming / the beach / gym changing room) and pleasing one's partner (complete or near complete removal, that involves quite a bit of pain).
But there you go, there are conflicting opinions.
All I would argue for is that women are not put under pressure to remove their hair if they're not comfortable doing so, and that young girls aren't given the impression that it's something ugly and shameful.
Comment