why do men get all the breaks?

[BlaqueKatt]

new men's "fashion accessory"-the pot belly (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/fashion/13POTBELLY.html?_r=3&scp=1&sq=hip%20to%20be%20round&st=cse?no_interstitial)

Seems the sitting at a laptop guzzling 500+ calorie lattes has caught up with the hipsters*, and it's being promoted as "fashionable"-yet women still are required to be rail-thin and have a stomach you can balance a wine glass on(flat as a board)-no fair!

*Don't get me wrong, I'm all for people being comfortable in their own skin whatever they look like(and they should be- with over 6 billion people on the planet the only person's opinion that should have any bearing on how you feel about yourself is your own-hence the term "self-esteem" not "worry-what-everyone-else-thinks-of-me-esteem. No one can make you feel bad without your permission/consent)-but not make it a "hip new fashion accessory/trend for men only." I don't like "hipsters", and I don't like "fashion trends"-heck it took me months to find a two-piece swimsuit that came up to my actual waist rather than just above my "personal area" and below my hipbones(how do those even stay up?) pm me if you've been looking for one-they're great, not expensive($20 per piece so $40 total) and have a drawstring waistband for added "security"-

[violetyoshi]

I don't know what to tell you, but I'm sure this will fade away. I doubt anyone will take this fashion advice seriously, and people will go back to trying to appear at least of reasonable weight.

I think this is some sort of failed attempt at trying to mirror the fat acceptance movement, by including men. Either way, it's a fail, anyone with a brain will see that so it's a non-issue as far as I see it.

[guywithashovel]

I saw this article earlier today. I thought it was kind of weird.

Though there have been some societies in which heavy women were considered more attractive. So I guess some places cut women slack there.

[Mindflayer]

Ok, I found the article interesting until this came up:

This makes sense, in a way, but how does one account for the new prevalence of Ralph Kramdens? Have men given in or given up? Are they finished with asserting the privileges that have always accrued to men. Or is the Ralph Kramden Barack Obama’s fault?


I stopped reading after that because it just went into other political figures... and I just don't understand what that has ANYTHING to do with the original focus of the article.

[violetyoshi]

I saw this article earlier today. I thought it was kind of weird.

Though there have been some societies in which heavy women were considered more attractive. So I guess some places cut women slack there.

I saw Oprah talking about one, called Martania. She sang "There's a plaaaaccee fooorr usss!" as a joke, like finally somewhere where plus size women are hot!

[violetyoshi]

Ok, I found the article interesting until this came up:




I stopped reading after that because it just went into other political figures... and I just don't understand what that has ANYTHING to do with the original focus of the article.


That is WTF

[Boozy]

I stopped reading after that because it just went into other political figures... and I just don't understand what that has ANYTHING to do with the original focus of the article.

If you hadn't stopped reading, you would have noticed that the very next paragraph explained the reference:

Hipsters, by nature contrarian, according to Dan Peres, the editor of Details, may be reacting in opposition to a president who is not only, as the press relentlessly reminds us, So Darn Smart, but also hits the gym every morning, has a conspicuously flat belly and, when not rescuing the economy or sparring with Kim Jong-il, shoots hoops.

[Slytovhand]

Riiiggghhhhtttttttttttt..............

So.. not exercising is now a fashion statement...?????

NO, sorry, my not pulling my finger out is not going to be so excused! My gut is my responsibility (well, actually, it's my not taking responsibility, as the case happens to be!)

[Rapscallion]

Trying to see this as a break. Excess weight is bad for you, so...

:p

Rapscallion

[BlaqueKatt]

Trying to see this as a break.

ummm now fashionable to be out of shape for men-but women still held to the "must be thinner than Kate Moss to be considered attractive" standard.

look at the "sex symbols (http://www.amoeba.com/dynamic-images/blog/Job/Marilyn-Monroe-oversized-postcard--.jpg) from the 60 (http://www.rugbyfootball.com/temp/annette.jpg)'s-80's (http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2008/05/16/1210959932_6644.jpg) most of them have graceful curves (http://www.zimbio.com/Carol+Alt/articles/17/Carol+Alt+One+Helluva+Beauty), and quite a few (http://www.rivalfish.com/rivalroom/uploaded_images/1980_SI_Swimsuit_Issue-787524.jpg) have the "dreaded tummy pooch" now look at today's fashion models (http://woodenspears.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/megan-fox-panties.jpg)*-mostly very bony angles and protruding pelvic bones/rib cages-sorry if your pelvic girdle is visible and I can count your ribs you're probably underweight-your skeleton is not supposed to stick out.

*yes I'm aware she's not a "model" but she is considered to be by many males I know to be the current "hottest thing under the sun"(I count 8 ribs and can see her full pelvic girdle (http://neotral.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/skel1.jpg))-I have no idea who current fashion models are as I do not follow fashion at all

[BroomJockey]

It used to be that being fat and pale meant you were rich. After all, it meant you didn't do intensive outdoor labour. Then office jobs came around, where you sat around inside all day, so being fit and tan meant you were rich because you could afford to spend time working out and being outside working on your tan. The standard keeps swinging.

My position on this particular thread? Non-issue. It's just the pendulum swinging again, so suck it up until it swings a bit further for the ladies.

[Rapscallion]

ummm now fashionable to be out of shape for men-but women still held to the "must be thinner than Kate Moss to be considered attractive" standard.

I'm more amused by the way fashion has effectively said that unhealthy is good.

Rapscallion

[DesignFox]

I don't find the gut to be attractive at all. I don't care if you are male or female. Suck it in. :p If you're happy. Great! But the gut will not be earning any swoons from me any time soon. Fashion accessory or not.

Even if guts came in style for women, I'd still be hiding mine! *laugh*

Now I'm thinking about that country song about "rockin' the beer gut..." *snicker*

[MystyGlyttyr]

Wait, that article was SERIOUS?

I saw the headline and just went "Eh, another Weekly World News that Yahoo misaimed" and read it giggling because I thought the the tongue was firmly in the cheek.

Ow.

[Boozy]

I have to admit that I found my husband's paunch adorable, when he had one. (He's working out again, so he's since lost it. And he still looks good to me. I guess I just like my husband in general. :))

I think most men find a slightly voluptuous female figure more attractive than the typical fashion model's body. Super thin women may photograph well, but they look quite gaunt and boyish in real life. Most of the women my male friends drool over have nicely rounded hips and buttocks.

[crazylegs]

ummm now fashionable to be out of shape for men-but women still held to the "must be thinner than Kate Moss to be considered attractive" standard.

look at the "sex symbols (http://www.amoeba.com/dynamic-images/blog/Job/Marilyn-Monroe-oversized-postcard--.jpg) from the 60 (http://www.rugbyfootball.com/temp/annette.jpg)'s-80's (http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2008/05/16/1210959932_6644.jpg) most of them have graceful curves (http://www.zimbio.com/Carol+Alt/articles/17/Carol+Alt+One+Helluva+Beauty), and quite a few (http://www.rivalfish.com/rivalroom/uploaded_images/1980_SI_Swimsuit_Issue-787524.jpg) have the "dreaded tummy pooch" now look at today's fashion models (http://woodenspears.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/megan-fox-panties.jpg)*-mostly very bony angles and protruding pelvic bones/rib cages

What fashionistas believe is fashionable is one thing, look at what men actually look at (I hate to say it, but glamour and porn) and the women still have curves, a chest and flesh on their bones. Porn directors know that the only way to make money is to sell their product, and to do that they need to have what men find attractive (generally speaking of course, there are groups that like either end of the scale, but I am talking about Joe Average here).

It amazes and apalls me that fashion magazines pedal this rubbish about how skinny women need to be when it is so obvious that men don't find it attractive...

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Heheheheheh.

They can say whatever they want to. I'm afraid all I have to say to the writer of that article is "nice try, Skippy."

[BlaqueKatt]

What fashionistas believe is fashionable is one thing, look at what men actually look at

um the "fashion model" link there that I could count at least 8 ribs and easily see her entire pelvic girdle is actress Megan Fox(hence my disclaimer)-I think tons of men "actually look at" her.

The standard keeps swinging.

My position on this particular thread? Non-issue. It's just the pendulum swinging again, so suck it up until it swings a bit further for the ladies.

it swings for men only-heck I get told I'm disgusting for the simple fact that I don't shave my legs-something that only came into fashion oh around 1940 when there was no silk or nylon for hosiery due to it being used for parachutes-it was part of the "war effort"

and don't get me started on the marketing campaign (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/625/who-decided-women-should-shave-their-legs-and-underarms)* that led to shaving underarm hair.

I do like this writer's take on it (http://jamesnewton.blogspot.com/2009/01/women-shave-legs-and-appear-to-be.html)

So, when a women of 20 or 30 or so on, in order to appear more attractive, as our society defines attractiveness, shaves her legs, what age is she attempting to appear to be? She is NOT attempting to appear to be 18. She is not thinking about what age she is attempting to appear to be at all, but she is attempting to appear to be 13 or so.

As shaved legs became the standard of beauty in the USA, men became trained to find them attractive. As a result, men are no longer sexually attracted to the naturally hairy legs of mature women, but instead are attracted to a version of legs that are naturally found on underage girls. This doesn't excuse the actions of molesters, but it is one more small step in the wrong direction.

*yes it was marketing only due to sleeveless dresses coming into fashion-the razor companies saw an untapped market and started sending the message that underarmhair on women was somehow wrong and disgusting-they did the same later with leg hair. Interesting that this is only effective in countries where we are overly obsessed with what other's think.

[Nyoibo]

Not all women shave their legs and armpits, some of them are naturally almost hairless.

[Slytovhand]

BK, how many of those 'supermodels' are actually considered perv-able in comparison to the non-'supermodel' type? The skin and bone lot just don't make it into that club. Which makes perfect sense - if models have lost so much weight that you can see ribs, then they won't have a lot of breast or leg either.. and that's what most guys are looking at (when just perving).

But, in general, there is a theory that women seek to be more attractive to men to win a mate, but men tend not to do so (as much)... stereotyping, but that's what statistics and all are about. (I'm finding it interesting with this idea in my Linguistics... women of Upper-Middle class seem to be more pro-activing in using 'higher' standards of language... to 'better' themselves and move out of their class and into something higher... the men don't seem to care as much..)

[BlaqueKatt]

Not all women shave their legs and armpits, some of them are naturally almost hairless.

and your point is what exactly?

What does that have to do with people calling me "disgusting, Dirty, Dyke, hippie, or nasty" because I don't do something that has nothing to do with hygiene? And for something that hasn't even been done for more than 70 years(hasn't been widespread here for more than 50-60 years and not done at all in other countries).

I've been called all those and worse(by men and women) just for not shaving my legs(I do shave my underarms due to being athletic and bacteria breeds there in the sweat)nothing breeds on my legs-they don't smell bad and you have to be within kicking range to tell I don't shave(very fine hair).

[Cat]

I have Italian blood in me, so you know when I didn't shave....meh...I only shave when I'm gonna see the boy. Yeah, yeah, I should *have* too, but he appreciates it.

[BlaqueKatt]

I have Italian blood in me, so you know when I didn't shave....

I'm 50% Sicilian-first generation "off the boat"-still can barely tell I don't shave unless you're within 6 inches of my legs.

[Flyndaran]

Shaving pits started out as a hygiene issue for the same reasons why we evolved to keep that hair and lose most of the rest: hair holds stink.
Nowadays we are rich in water and can bathe daily. That wasn't always the case.
I find hairy women's bodies really nasty, but only partly because of my innate tastes. My love muffin is one of those woman that are naturally nearly hairless, even her eyebrows are tiny whisps of fluff. I even love her pot belly, because it's hers.

You are allowed to like your body however it looks, and I am allowed to dislike it for purely arbitrary reasons. Not everyone has to find every nice person attractive.

[BlaqueKatt]

Shaving pits started out as a hygiene issue for the same reasons why we evolved to keep that hair and lose most of the rest: hair holds stink.

nope I already linked to why that started-simple marketing and advertising-there was an articl in the journal of american culture written about it-and if that was truly the case why do only women do it when men are more active/sweat/stink more?

in case you missed it (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/625/who-decided-women-should-shave-their-legs-and-underarms)-from The straight dope by Cecil Adams

" Journal of American Culture - "Caucasian Female Body Hair and American Culture." by Christine Hope

The gist of the article is that U.S. women were browbeaten into shaving underarm hair by a sustained marketing assault that began in 1915. The aim of what Hope calls the Great Underarm Campaign was to inform American womanhood of a problem that till then it didn't know it had, namely unsightly underarm hair. A few ads mentioned hygiene as a motive for getting rid of hair, but most appealed strictly to the ancient yearning to be hip. "The Woman of Fashion says the underarm must be as smooth as the face," read a typical pitch.

I find hairy women's bodies really nasty, but only partly because of my innate tastes.

because you've been programmed by advertising to think that way. Remember American women have only been shaving for 60 years or so-it's not biological, it's learned much like intolerance for any other trait. Women in many other countries don't bother as theirs is not a consumer culture that believes it's advertising.

You are allowed to like your body however it looks, and I am allowed to dislike it for purely arbitrary reasons. Not everyone has to find every nice person attractive.

I understand that but why does that give someone the right to call me horrible names?

[Flyndaran]

...
The gist of the article is that U.S. women were browbeaten into shaving underarm hair by a sustained marketing assault that began in 1915. The aim of what Hope calls the Great Underarm Campaign was to inform American womanhood of a problem that till then it didn't know it had, namely unsightly underarm hair. A few ads mentioned hygiene as a motive for getting rid of hair, but most appealed strictly to the ancient yearning to be hip. "The Woman of Fashion says the underarm must be as smooth as the face," read a typical pitch.



because you've been programmed by advertising to think that way. Remember American women have only been shaving for 60 years or so-it's not biological, it's learned much like intolerance for any other trait. Women in many other countries don't bother as theirs is not a consumer culture that believes it's advertising.



I understand that but why does that give someone the right to call me horrible names?

Nothing gives anyone the right to call anyone nasty names period.

Ancient egyptians shaved pits, but I think it was both sexes and they often shaved their heads as well. Sweat and lice going together in olden times, you know.
Browbeaten seems a bit much. Do you call the soap industry's push with ther cleanliness is next to godliness sloagan browbeat everyone into daily baths? Or do you consider it a good thing?
I like many visual features of immaturity, so I doubt if I grew up in a land with hairy women that I wouldn't still prefer hairless women.
Women are naturally less hairy than men. The idea that some may like to exagerate such differences is not freakish or sexist.

[BlaqueKatt]

Browbeaten seems a bit much. Do you call the soap industry's push with ther cleanliness is next to godliness sloagan browbeat everyone into daily baths? Or do you consider it a good thing?

Apples to oranges or if you prefer:
Hygiene to fashion, as it was marketed as "fashionable" if it were for hygiene issues it would not have been sexistly targeted towards women-it would have been equal towards both-but it wasn't. And yes saying women have to shave but men don't is quite blatantly sexist.

Sexism-discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex.

Meaning-"women are not as sexy if they don't shave their legs, while men don't have to."

[Flyndaran]

Apples to oranges or if you prefer:
Hygiene to fashion, as it was marketed as "fashionable" if it were for hygiene issues it would not have been sexistly targeted towards women-it would have been equal towards both-but it wasn't. And yes saying women have to shave but men don't is quite blatantly sexist.

Sexism-discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex.

Meaning-"women are not as sexy if they don't shave their legs, while men don't have to."

It's no more sexist to suggest that women should exaggerate thier feminine features as it is for men. Men are pushed to get muscular etc.
Is biology really sexist? Or is it something that just is?

Men's scent doesn't have as much of an instinctive allure to most women as female scent does to men. Again, biology is suggesting women lose the stink and smell just like themselves while men don't need to do either.

Wanting a woman to look and smell like a woman does not make me sexist. It makes me a hetero male.
I once met a visually gorgeous yound lady. But because she smelled like a child I was instantly turned off.

[joe hx]

I'll just throw this in here:

http://www.shaveeverywhere.com/

It's a marketing campaign to get men to, well, shave everywhere.

[Nyoibo]

and if that was truly the case why do only women do it when men are more active/sweat/stink more?

They don't.



because you've been programmed by advertising to think that way.

I take exception to thatI've not been programmed by anything to think that way, I find body hair unattractive on men as much as I do on women, it's got nothing to do with advertising.


I understand that but why does that give someone the right to call me horrible names?

It doesn't.


http://www.shaveeverywhere.com/


There is actually a type of washing called monk style that entails completely shaveing the body and only using water, it's been around for centuries.

[Flyndaran]

I only periodically shave my face, but I get ingrown hairs everywhere constantly. If I shaved everywhere I would be in near constant agony irritation.
I once had my love muffin shave my back and shoulders. When growing back the hairs are like spikes poking holes in my shirts!
If I didn't have my weird phobia of barbers, I wouldn't even let my love muffin buzz cut my head hair. Yes, I get ingrown hairs there too.

[BlaqueKatt]

They don't.

incorrect men do sweat more than women-from USA today (http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/basics/sweating-cools.htm)

"Men sweat more than women, Kenney* says, because women are better able to regulate the amount of water they're losing. This is particularly important on humid days when sweat doesn't evaporate as readily or cool the body as efficiently.

Men always sweat profusely, Kenney says. "Women are more efficient'' sweaters, he says, especially when it's hot and humid.

*W. Larry Kenney of the Noll Physiological Research Center at Penn State University.

[Fashion Lad!]

First, I have to get something I think about out of my head all the time when I read the title of this thread...

"Men only have 3 things going for them. The Oval Office, same work for better pay and HONOR!" - Jim in According to Jim

Makes me laugh every time I think about it.

Don't think it's so much fashion but laziness. And in order to make them believe that it is OK to be in the shape the are in, they call it fashion. Right now, I'm stuck in a walking boot, I've been stuck in a walking boot, I'm trying to convince people it's the cool thing to be stuck in. ;)

[Flyndaran]

incorrect men do sweat more than women-from USA today (http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/basics/sweating-cools.htm)

"Men sweat more than women, Kenney* says, because women are better able to regulate the amount of water they're losing. This is particularly important on humid days when sweat doesn't evaporate as readily or cool the body as efficiently.

Men always sweat profusely, Kenney says. "Women are more efficient'' sweaters, he says, especially when it's hot and humid.

*W. Larry Kenney of the Noll Physiological Research Center at Penn State University.

Ha! What a wonderfully inaccurate way of looking at things. Men sweat more, because they on average can handle heat better than women, while women with their greater fat deposits can handle cold better. It's simply funny that our comfort zones just happen to be on the ends we can't survive as well as the other sex.

[Gravekeeper]

because you've been programmed by advertising to think that way.

I likewise object to that generalization. If that were even remotely true, based on Hollywood's current standards, I would be attracted solely to sticks with two cantaloupes stapled to them and a blond wig on.

Which I am not.

If anything I'm so desensitized to it that dropping a naked Pamela Anderson in my lap would only illicit a "Please get off, you're heavy." But I prefer shaven female lower appendages. Why? Because they feel nicer. Simple as that. =p Hell, I shave my underarms. Its more comfortable, less icky and it looks nicer. No one wants to look like they have a wookie in a headlock.

Every male model and sex symbol is hairless and oiled up too. Are you programmed to only like men with hairless chests and shaven pits? Well why not, isn't that what advertising is telling you to do? ;p

[DesignFox]

<snip>

Every male model and sex symbol is hairless and oiled up too. Are you programmed to only like men with hairless chests and shaven pits? Well why not, isn't that what advertising is telling you to do? ;p

GK, you've got a point there.

I think the whole female shaving thing has taken hold mostly because a majority of women themselves prefer it.

Maybe it's due to my social programming, but I've always preferred to shave. Stubblies look and feel icky to *me*. If I had finer, less noticable hair it probably wouldn't bother me as much. I mean, in bathing suit weather, it's a royal pain in the ass to keep up with sometimes. I always envied girls who didn't have to shave every day.

In my experience, other than the few here who mentioned that they don't shave, I've only met one woman who doesn't. She has thick dark hair, too. We worked at summer camp together- it sort of surprised me when she had her suit on and nothing was shaved- not her pits, not her legs, not her bikini line...but I never said anything to her about it. I just figure to each their own. Made me do a double take, but other than that...*shrug*

Anyway. I think women hold higher standards for themselves and one another than men do to women. I think if the majority of us just up and stopped shaving most guys probably wouldn't care.

And I know the article mentioned something about making women appear like young girls, but to me, shaving my legs and underarms felt like a "big girl" thing when I was growing up. I tend to associate the hair with young girls because they are not old enough to shave/not old enough for people to care if they do shave. For me it was kind of like, "Women shave their legs...I'm a woman now" I guess. *shrug*

[BlaqueKatt]

Every male model and sex symbol is hairless and oiled up too. Are you programmed to only like men with hairless chests and shaven pits? Well why not, isn't that what advertising is telling you to do?

nope I don't watch tv(except for Hell's Kitchen) or read magazines-so I'm not exposed to it at all. And most actors are not shaven and oiled up-most actresses are.

and my unshaven legs feel no different than my arms-hair is the same length and thickness(if you don't shave the hairs grow out and are more pliable unlike stubble)-so touching my arms would I guess feel "icky" as well, maybe I should start shaving those.

Stubblies look and feel icky to *me*.

Stubble does feel like a cactus-because the hairs are short and not pliable-if you let it grow out it will feel just like your arm hair-does that feel *Icky* to you?


For me it was kind of like, "Women shave their legs...I'm a woman now" I guess. *shrug*

again this is only done in the western countries-not anywhere else.

I was in camp when one of the councilors didn't shave her legs, it actually got all of us girls to not do it for the entire week we were there(girls only week)-it was great for all of us to realize it was something we didn't have to do-actually quite a few of us didn't go back to it ever again. It was kind of like burning your bra in the 60's-a few of us actually burned our razors in a bonfire-as like the bra it was a symbol of oppression. Think about it-it started during the war because nylon and silk were not available for stockings(due to the war)-and once they became available again-men had gotten used to it so to keep men happy we continued doing it.

[DesignFox]

<snip>

and my unshaven legs feel no different than my arms-hair is the same length and thickness(if you don't shave the hairs grow out and are more pliable unlike stubble)-so touching my arms would I guess feel "icky" as well, maybe I should start shaving those.

In my case, the leg hair is darker and thicker than the arm hair. I mean, I don't have man legs, but if I don't shave for a day or two it's noticable.

Arm hair doesn't really bother me. I actually don't really understand how some women choose to shave their arms- and I've met a few who do!

I guess if the woman was exceptionally pale with dark black hairs...I mean, then *maybe* I'd shave my arm hair too...but the women I've known who are like that aren't the ones doing the shaving...so...I dunno how that started.

I have one friend who (I kid you not) had all the hair on her legs, armpits, bikini line and arms permanently removed.

I don't care so much what others do about their own body hair. I just know that I prefer to shave and not just for social reasons.

[AdminAssistant]

I have one friend who (I kid you not) had all the hair on her legs, armpits, bikini line and arms permanently removed.

I would do that in half a heartbeat. No more shaving? No more ingrown hairs? Sweet! :D

I also started shaving because, well, I wanted to be like my big sister. I was only like...12 or something. Nowadays, I don't shave my legs every day or every other day. I rarely ever wear skirts or shorts and it doesn't really bother me either way. But, if I know I'm going to be with a guy, then they're shaved, because I like how it feels. Bikini line and that general area stays very trimmed or shaved because I don't like having the freakin' Amazon between my legs. And pits well....sorry, armpit hair is gross. All I can think of is deodorant clumping to it....ewwww.

[DesignFox]

<snip>
Stubble does feel like a cactus-because the hairs are short and not pliable-if you let it grow out it will feel just like your arm hair-does that feel *Icky* to you?

<snip>

Yes. In the winter or if my SO isn't around, I tend not to shave as often. Even when the hair grows out and gets softer, it just doesn't feel as nice to me. I like the way my legs feel after a shave. :D

And if I went camping like you did, I probably wouldn't bother shaving. I prefer to shave, but I'm not fanatical about it. Out in the woods getting dirty? Yea...not bothering with a razor. ;)

[Boozy]

Stubble does feel like a cactus-because the hairs are short and not pliable-if you let it grow out it will feel just like your arm hair-does that feel *Icky* to you?

You're very lucky that your leg hair is comparable to arm hair. Perhaps if that was true of me I wouldn't shave my legs either, since my arm hair is very fine, blond, and sparse. But most women have far coarser and thicker hair on their legs than on their arms.

I was once unable to shave my legs for a period of about a month. Within two weeks the hair was longer and thicker than my arm hair, and it hadn't stopped growing yet.

Personally, I don't think leg hair on a woman looks gross, but I do think a shaven leg looks sexier. Whenever I go to Quebec (where shaving isn't as common) I think women's legs look blurry, thick, and unshapely.

[the_std]

Even if this whole shaving bit is societal conditioning and I, as a woman, am giving credence to it by following it, I don't care. I prefer the way my bare legs feel, as opposed to when my hair is growing out. Then again, I am a bit alternative. I cannot shave anything. Doing so leaves me in a razor-burned, rashy, dry-skinned mess. I have various skin problems that cause this to be the case. So, instead, I have been waxing for six years now. My hair has become thin, fine and lighter since I've been doing this, and it only requires my attention every three to four weeks. In between times, it's hardly noticeable anymore. And, because I've been doing it for so long, it doesn't hurt at all, it's only tingly. I will admit, when I first started it hurt like a sonuvabitch, it was a major ordeal and I had to do it at least once every two weeks. But now, it was totally worth it.

And why did I put myself through that? My number one reason is actually tactile. Bare skin, devoid of hair, is far more sensitive to the touch. I do enjoy the way it looks, but the way it feels as opposed to when my legs are hairy is just no comparison. I enjoy being able to feel water run down my legs, to feel wind against my skin instead of through my hair, and when we're referring to bikini line/Brazilian areas, forget about it. There really is no comparison.

So I don't mind this bit of societal conditioning. I don't think it's detrimental at all. It's merely a choice.

[Boozy]

I agree that it seems a rather innocuous bit of programming. Even if a woman shaves merely because it is expected, it's not terribly inconvenient or expensive. It takes about ten minutes twice a week, and razors are cheap. There are far more harmful double standards to focus on.

[BlaqueKatt]

So I don't mind this bit of societal conditioning. I don't think it's detrimental at all.

yep all's fine and dandy as long as your not on the receiving end of the horrible name-calling.





I agree that it seems a rather innocuous bit of programming. Even if a woman shaves merely because it is expected, it's not terribly inconvenient or expensive.

yup MRSA infection (http://news.bio-medicine.org/medicine-news-2/Body-shaving-and-turf-burns-spread-infection-in-college-football-team-2009-1/)/[/URL]folliculitis[/URL] and recurrence of genital warts (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6366/is_3_17/ai_n29190357/) are convenient.


Researchers found that 10 percent of the players on a Connecticut college football team had MRSA skin infections, for which two were hospitalized. The athletes who practiced cosmetic body shaving had a 43 percent risk of infection.



From ABC's Nightline (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4393692&page=1):

Her battle started three years ago, when she nicked her leg shaving on New Year's Eve.


I've seen similar in boot camp-due to close contact living conditions we were not allowed to shave our legs after 4 recruits came down with MRSA cellulitis(one ended up with necrotizing fascitis)-all from shaving for cosmetic reasons.


Trust me-in my current job I've handled substances contaminated with live E-coli H:0157, Salmonella Typhi(typhoid fever), Listeria, and occasionally Botulism(level II biohazzard), nothing terrifies me more than MRSA.

[Flyndaran]

yep all's fine and dandy as long as your not on the receiving end of the horrible name-calling.

....
I think we all agree that name calling is horrible but will happen regardless of "reasons".
If women shaving legs and pits is bad, then men shaving faces is worse. The face is a much more sensitive and infection prone area than legs and pits.

[the_std]

Oh no, a few instances of some terrible disease and horrible name-calling. Like what happens/can happen for nearly any reason in the world.

Just because someone calls you names about it doesn't mean it's detrimental to society. If you experienced true discrimination based upon it, you might have a leg to stand on, because we're talking about society as a whole, here. AND there are many more likely ways to get horrible diseases than shaving your legs. Those instances mentioned are specific situations that are unlikely to occur to the average woman who shaves her legs. It's hardly indicative of society in general.

[Gravekeeper]

nope I don't watch tv(except for Hell's Kitchen) or read magazines-so I'm not exposed to it at all. And most actors are not shaven and oiled up-most actresses are.


Sorry, but the only time a hairy guy chest EVER appears in a TV show or movie is when its for comedic effect. Otherwise they'll always be baby smooth. Hell if you want to get into an argument this silly, a male model is going to be shaving more than a female model as he has to cover the majority of his upper body, face and armpits.





again this is only done in the western countries-not anywhere else.

<snip>


Wrong. Horribly wrong, actually. North America, Britain, Scotland, Ireland, Australia, India, Japan ( heck some women even shave their faces there ), Korea, China, even some parts of the Middle East.

Pretending this is a freakish Western World custom based entirely on advertising to the mindless sheep is a ridiculous argument to be bluntly honest. If you want to blame someone, blame Betty Grable. Blame increasingly more revealing clothing. Heck, that's why it's called a bikini wax to begin with after all.

I mean it sucks that you've been called names over it, but that doesn't merit this personal crusade against you seem to have going on. Is it so hard to accept that a lot of women ( and men ) simply prefer the look and feel of keeping x or y shaved, waxed or trimmed? That its not some massive advertising conspiracy?

I don't even read Fratching all that much and this is the second time I've seen you go off on this argument using the same questionable references. ><

[BlaqueKatt]

Those instances mentioned are specific situations that are unlikely to occur to the average woman who shaves her legs. It's hardly indicative of society in general.

And Hiv infection is relatively rare(though MRSA deaths are higher*), studies have shown that circumcision prevents it in some cases-but everyone still uses condoms and says circumcision is bad-even in countries where the government is advocating it to try and quell the spread.

30% of the population is colonized by staph of some form-CA-MRSA is on the rise as staph can live on a surface for up to two weeks.

* (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21739364/)An estimated 90,000 people in the United States fall ill each year from methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA. It is not clear how many die from the infection; one estimate put it at more than 18,000, which would be slightly higher than U.S. deaths from AIDS.


I don't even read Fratching all that much and this is the second time I've seen you go off on this argument using the same questionable references.

interesting considering I just searched for them-and I was not aware, CBS, ABC, And NBC were "questionable"-especially as the football team story was originally posted on the CDC's site-guess they're questionable as well.....

[AdminAssistant]

From what I've read, it seems that MRSA is most common when you have large groups of people in a small place - prisoners and atheletes being at highest risk. Since I am neither of those, I'll keep on shaving - safely, carefully, with blades that are frequently changed.

[Gravekeeper]

interesting considering I just searched for them-and I was not aware, CBS, ABC, And NBC were "questionable"-especially as the football team story was originally posted on the CDC's site-guess they're questionable as well.....

I'm referring to the singular article "Caucasian Female Body Hair and American Culture" that you like to link or is always the basis for every link. Though I applaud you for skimming my entire post for a strawman to defeat.

Regardless, this whole argument is silly. People have been removing hair from various places with various tools ( and horrific chemicals ) since the dawn of time. Likewise, beauty trends change from era to era as society advances. Thats just the way it is. Trying to tell us we don't really think that, we're just programmed by advertising is silly and kind of insulting.

Like I said, it sucks that you've been called names over this. Shaving or not shaving is your choice alone. But waging a crusade on the rest of society over it is silly. Rather than trying to prove society is "wrong" somehow, why don't you go tell the people who called you names to go fuck themselves. -.-

[Flyndaran]

When presented with mirrors, some female chimps will pluck unruly hairs from thier chins. Yes, male chimps are hairier in the face than females.