I was going through my heap of magazines today, trying to reduce the clutter (for the nonce) in my work area and indeed, the entire living room. I came across this quote from an article in the July 2003 edition of Esquire.
What conclusions can I draw from a woman who steadfastly refuses to get a bikini wax?
I’ts unreasonable to expect any woman to maintain a trim caterpillar-sized patch at all times–the upkeep is tough, painful, and expensive, and most jobs don’t allow you to write it off. However, it is reasonable to expect her to keep her crotch from looking like Benji, and if she isn’t doing that much, then you’ve got a problem on your hands, and in the back of your throat. First, you need to rule out some things: Is she foreign? No? Is she Robin Williams? No? Then it’s possible that the woman in question is a hippie and you’ve chosen to ignore the warning signs: rock-crystal deodorant, hemp butter. Sound familiar? If this is the case, let me offer my deepest sympathy. The situation is hopeless, but I hope you have fun at Burning Man. Or she could be a rebel by nature, which can mean only one thing: trouble. Still, she might take issue with waxing specifically, in which case you may want to gently remind Grizzly Adams that there are many other ways to remove hair.
Now I have a question for Stacey Grenrock Woods, the author of the article: What conclusions can I draw from a woman who propagates–on her own gender no less–uptight, narrow-minded, masochistic esthetics towards something as natural as pubic hair?
here’s a fun question to ponder: what do you think the chances are that the author of the article is *actually* a woman? hmmmm… we can save the rest of this discussion for later/in person.
70s bush is awful, awful stuff. Hooray for razors! (Wax, eh, who cares about going into that much detail?)
One of my favorite IRC quotes, from a girl: “I went down on an unshaved chick before. That’s when i decided i wasn’t gay”
One word (or two, depends): FURBURGER
Wow — comments with the power to both annoy and depress me.
Well when I wrote the entry I looked up Stacey Grenrock Woods and apparently she is/was also a writer/performer for the Daily Show. I believe she’s the gender she says she is.
yeah, I’m gonna have to second Yvonne’s anger/depression comment. I mean really. WTF.
alls i can say is that the entry+comments are deserving of a very long conversation. i have no further comments at this time.
Wow, passive-aggresive much, people? I’d love to hear the benefits of putting your open mouth on a patch of sweaty groin-hair rather that just handwringing and “oh my, how uncouth” type comments.
Actually, Puck, your comment is entirely self-defeating, being that many girls who have gone down on a guy have to do that all the time.
well I think Toren already summed it up nicely by calling such sentiments “uptight, narrow-minded, masochistic esthetics towards something as natural as pubic hair.” I would also add that the whole thing has tinges of misogyny.
I don’t think untrimmed pubic hair is unsexy. I would be happy to go down on a girl or boy who had the 70s bush going on. I’ve trimmed. I’ve also not trimmed. I don’t really think it makes a difference.
also, Puck, do you shave or trim?
Yeah to what Marlo said. I would also go down on 70s bush. And hippy bush, too.
In addition, you asked for benefits: how about being physically intimate with someone that you (presumably) like/love? how about pleasing your partner? I think these are more important than unproductive whinging about pubic hair length. Besides, people of all trimming habits have had to pick someone else’s hair from between their teeth (pardon the graphic image).
The issue isn’t really about whether the bush is bald, trimmed, or au naturel: it’s that people have the right to do what they like with their own pubic hair. (I think this statement should be self-evident, but since we’re even discussing this, I guess it’s not.) Any of the hair on my body could be at any length at any time, and it’s really not anyone else’s business what I choose to do with it. So it is with your pubic hair, or anyone else’s.
Re: Girls going down on guys: The part that requires the attention isn’t surrounded by hair, and I don’t see it as reasonable to expect anything hair-covered to have to go in someone’s mouth. We’re not talking about the soft fine hair on, say, someone’s arm here, we’re talking about long, curly, thick hair that’s been in a hot, sweaty and smelly groin all day.
Marlo: Of course I do, and when people ask me “Should I shave my balls?” I say “YES YOU SHOULD!” Why wouldn’t you? I did on a lark and haven’t let it grow back since. It’s cleaner, friendlier to “visitors” and doesn’t collect the groin-stank that a big patch of fur down there does.
And this isn’t about forcing people to shave their genitals. Nobody is proposing that. However, it certainly isn’t unreasonable to expect someone you’re going to be intimate with to do it, much like it’s not unreasonable to expect them to keep the rest of themselves in a relatively clean, stink-free fashion. I’ve had several girlfriends who didn’t do this try at my request and none of them have gone back since.
Don’t knock it till you try it, you dirty hippies. 🙂
I think it best for all parties involved to go for a run, sit down, then open the front of their undergarnment, and allow it to slap down against their body. When this happens, take a long, deep breath. Take in what you’re experiencing, from your pelvic region. Maybe try it again. Allow the odour of your natural, beautiful form to overtake your olfactory senses, and do it again. Here’s news – crotches aren’t the most sanitary of places, shaved or otherwise. Neither are they the most pleasing to the nose. While it’s true that skin is more sensitive, ergo, more easily-pleasable when the hair has been freshly shorn, it’s also true that to shave on a bi-daily, if not daily, basis does take time and effort. The issue of shaving your crotch isn’t some kind of political-power choice that people should march down Main to try and advance; it’s a personal choice, both on the level of hygiene and sexual preference. And if your partner/s take issue with it, why not talk to them about it? If you prefer to floss while down under, then all the power to you. If you’re the type that would rather have an empty airstrip all to yourself, then good on you. But honestly, is it worth the mud-slinging?
RevGored:
Its a personal choice, both on the level of hygiene and sexual preference
This is the part that is worth marching for. The article is It presumes that pubic hair on women “should” look a certain way. But, as you say, pubic upkeep is a personal choice. Is somoene justified in telling you that you “should” style your hair (on your head that is) in a certain way so as to be pleasing to them? No.
Puck:
Actually, pubic upkeep is important to me, so I’ve tried it – I’ve tried it all. But the point is that it’s important to me, and it has nothing to do with whether Esquire says my pubic hair looks good or not. It’s really none of Esquire’s business. I do it for my own reasons. I certainly don’t expect my partner to look a certain way for me, nor would I be happy if they expected me to look a certain way for them.
well I think Toren already summed it up nicely by calling such sentiments uptight, narrow-minded, masochistic esthetics towards something as natural as pubic hair.
When’s the last time Toren went down on anyone? When’s the last time he’s experienced 70s furburger? Easy enough statement to make if you’re not dealing with jungle bush on a daily basis.
Pubic hair isn’t a political statement (unless you walk around pantless or skirtless often.) So, out of respect your partner, trim or shave.
“vanmandan:” WTF!?! Come a little closer and insult Toren again, and I’ll introduce your face to the Crowbar of Justice, motherfucker!
I’m joking if you are.
Insult? All I’m saying is that it’s easy enough to talk about the natural beauty of pubic hair if you’ve no experience going down on 70s jungle bush. His statement has more weight given the amount of experience he has with the trimmed and not-so-trimmed.
I’ve been with jungle bush. Not a pleasant oral experience. My preference is for shaved along the tongue runway.
The point seems to be lost on some of you. It is not for any one person to say what is reasonable or unreasonable for how women in general groom themselves, down there or anywhere, and to slam a woman (or anyone else for that matter) by how much hair they have is at best crass & unfair and at worst bigoted & animose. It is no less hygenic to keep a full patch of pubic hair than to keep a full beard or head of hair. If you are in a relationship where everyone is happy with how they keep their p-hair, awesome. If not, then you’ve got to work it out or find someone who better suits your ideal of a sexy crotch. Either way – it’s a personal matter, and your ideals should not be dictated to others as if it were canon.
And, I’m all for a woman doing what best pleases her. But if jungle is her thing, then she’s likely not getting as much oral as she might want, especially if I have to bring a machete with me on every trip into her labial jungle.
wow, leave a thread alone for a couple of days, and it gets all out of hand.
Puck: Passive-aggressive? I think not. I mean really — “Furburger!” is hardly a legitimate “argument” worth responding to. Neither is the attempt to legitimize your opinion-masquerading-as-fact with corroboration of someone from the gender-in-question. My reaction was in response to the alarming tone behind those comments. Who the fuck cares about uncouth? The comments were aggressive and disrespectful.
Sex is a two-way street, and as the good Reverend and Janet and others have mentioned, everyone is going to have their preferences — for themselves and for their partners. But what makes you believe that your preferences are paramount?
Making demands of someone else’s body — and especially to do it in such a disrespectful way — is never cool.
Also, vanmandan — you may be “all for a woman doing what best pleases her” but pretty much every single one of your previous statements completely contradicts that position. Don’t try to soften the blow for our sakes — the depressing damage has already been done.
My comment that “a woman can do what best pleases her” doesn’t mean that I’m going to be happily giving oral to women with jungle bush. It’s a free world. Hopefully she can find a man (or woman) who loves thick pubic foliage.
Between girlfriends with furburger and those with shaved/trimmed pussies, I’ll certainly be going down on the girlfriends with the least amount of pubic hair much more often.
Your opinion seems to be that love should conquer anyone’s distaste for thick bush. It won’t. Just like love didn’t conquer my distaste for yellow and red peppers.
It’s quid-pro-quo. If a woman doesn’t shave, she’s not getting oral love from me. If that’s not part of the equation, I don’t care one way or another about it. But the Esquire article is quite obviously talking about women that men are interested in an intimate relationship with, and as soon as that enters the equation, it becomes relevent to the discussion and is an important aspect of the appeal of the woman overall. No, not the most important, not by far.
I’m sure there are women who won’t kiss men with big scratchy beards, I’m not going to start freaking out and call them man-haters for publicly expressing that opinion.
Also, getting back to the original article, it’s answering the question about what you can conclude from women who steadfastly refuse to bikini wax. Well, I wouldn’t ask anyone to put themselves through that, but if you’re steadfastly refusing to shave down there, something is up. And I think it is a reasonable request (from someone who gets to go “down there”, at least, and the article is talking about such relationships) and refusing such a reasonable request should raise an eyebrow.
Honestly, I find this discussion absolutely entertaining. It’s hilarious that the general opinion here is that it’s bad to express an opinion about pubic shaving, but it’s simply wonderful to shake your head and go “tsk, tsk” at those who do. One opinion = good, another = OMG YOU HATE WIMMENS.
I *love* women. I love all sorts of women. I’ve experienced all sorts of women. And 70s bush is gross. But hey, you want to be gross, it’s your choice.
I should follow anghold’s lead on this one, but I ain’t a-gonna!
Are you reading a different set of comments? When I say that sex is a two-way street, I mean that talking about preferences and making compromises is part of that. I can fully respect that a man or woman may have negative feelings towards body hair, but for goodness sake, at least recognize that it’s YOUR problem as well, and that not everyone does feel the same as you do about body hair. And I am adamant about being respectful: there is absolutely no justification for shaming your partner about their body by telling them that they are “gross”.
Also — when someone says that they are “all for” something, that typically doesn’t include making snide and/or rude and/or insulting remarks to the contrary. “Hey, I’m all for women not shaving, if that makes you happy. FURBURGER.”
there is absolutely no justification for shaming your partner about their body by telling them that they are gross”.
I would never tell a partner that their jungle bush was gross. Nor would I use the term “jungle bush” with them. But I would (and have) requested that their excess pubic hair was bothersome and if they wouldn’t mind shaving or trimming. I haven’t had a girlfriend deny such a request. Not have I experienced any offense taken at the request. And after trimming (or shaving) they kept it up of their own accord without complaint; perhaps because they found they liked it better in the end, perhaps they liked that Mr. Tongue came a strolling on by more often.
The terms “furburger” and “pubic foliage” and “jungle bush” and “tongue runway” amuse me.
dearest puck,
how beautiful for you to have “experienced all sorts of women”. your conversations with them must have been really touching… maybe something along the lines of: “yeah, i’m the man of this relationship, if you want me to go down on you, you’d better shave-it-up!”
i mean, who puts a “shaving rule” on this kind of stuff? and way to go with the: shave your pussy, or i’m not going down on you! why don’t you advocate for anti-abotionist groups as well? since you’re already into telling women what to do with their vulvas! i have a feeling that for you, it would just be the next step.
here are some facts for you: pubic hair is natural. people are born with it. it serves a purpose, protecting and keeping the vagina safe and clean. shaving causes ingrown hair, and is very itchy for most people… when you get red bumps from it, it kinda kills the mood. many women have commented that shaving their pubic hair makes them feel like a little girl, and that it hurts to have their partner’s rub against them. this means that the other person probably feels like they are having sex with a little girl (gross) and that they are hurting their partner in a not-so-super way. it’s true that women used to have their hair shaved before giving birth… USED to. things (and many people) are slightly more enlightened now.
some women like to leave things the way they are. some like a bit of trimming, others waxing, others shaving… yes, it’s true some even like to not bother with any hair down-there at all. the point, which may need to be spelled out for you, is that it should be up to the women. whether she decides to have some pubic hair fun, or go natural.
if she talks to her partner about it and suggestions come up that she wants to try, then hooray for her. but it should be her choice. not that of some punk that wouldn’t be able to find her house in the forest, even with a map.
think about what you’re saying… in one sentence you’re saying you love all sorts of women, in the next, you’re saying that women are gross. you do know that you’re regurgitating western ideologies perpetrated by people wanting to make a profit off the insecurities that they have created, right? that the magazines that this shit comes from are churning a profit from their advertisers who happen to be the very companies that sell things like razors?
oh, and p.s. i have also gone down on people in many different stages of hair growth, and i haven’t had a troubles. and i haven’t had any complaints either.
Oh, that anti-abortionist comment was a wonderful little straw-man attack. Congratulations, you lose at debating!
I *love* the “natural” argument. Do you cut your fingernails? Do you cut your hair? I know for a fact that Toren shaves his face.
Do you lovers of “the natural” live out in a forest hunting your own food and getting hunted by wolves in return?
Do you take medicines to stop natural diseases you catch?
Toren, is your art created on cave walls or leaves with dyed animal blood?
Are you somehow posting on this blog with some heretofore unknown “natural” way of accessing the Internet?
If you’re relying on your pubic hair for “protection”, why are you wearing underwear and pants?
And please don’t extend my “70s bush is gross” comment to mean that “women with 70s bush are gross”. It’s just making everyone here look like overly sensitive politically correct handwringers and really isn’t helping at all.
I’m glad that your unshaven pubic area has created no complaints. That’s great for you. However, from the shock and awe that I’m seeing from my comments of personal preference, my guess is that everyone is Far Too Polite to bring it up if it bothers them because they’ll get their heads bitten off by the easily offended.
vanmandan,
seriously, show some respect, “The terms furburger and pubic foliage and jungle bush and tongue runway amuse me. ” but you’d never say them to your partner’s face?
what the f? so either it’s cool to be anti-woman (in the comfort of your own home and when no one will challenge you) or you DO know that your terms are offensive and that those terms are misogynistic and you’re hiding your true self from any potential bitch that happens to cross your path. let’s call it like is, if women are just furburgers and jungle bush to you, why bother to call them women? partner suggests equality, and in case you haven’t noticed from the people (other than puck) those terms don’t encourage that. at all.
you have again missed the point. here it is… read. don’t skim.
it is up to the woman. as much as she cannot tell you what to do with your body, you cannot tell her. which is what you’re trying to do.
How did this turn into a conversation about hating women? It’s really a grooming issue. Some people can’t handle people with dirt under their fingernails….we all have our own tolerance levels. I’d also like to argue some of the points made against shaving…..
Pubic hair keeps things cleaner – What is your evidence for this? I’ve found the opposite to be true. Hair tended to trap lint and sweat and all kinds of gross things. Perhaps it kept us clean and safe when we were running around in the jungle naked, but in the age of underwear I’ve found it’s much easier to keep that area clean now that I trim.
It makes you look like a little girl – I guess this is true if you shave a lot or shave it completely off. But shaving a little at the sides and trimming the rest to a manageable length doesn’t look pre-pubescent at all.
It hurts or is itchy – The first time I shaved it got itchy, but after a week of upkeep that went away. Now I actually find it to be less itchy than when I had all those little curlies. Everyone’s skin is different, but if you had problems you might have been shaving against the grain, or didn’t keep it up long enough (one or two weeks) before that goes away.
It’s close minded – I think not trying it at all is close minded, which is what the article was talking about.
It’s about women’s rights you anti-abortionist girl hater – What the hell is that all about? What the article should have mentioned is that if he wants his partner to try it, he should try it himself! Men should trim or shave as well! It makes activities in that area much more pleasant, and also reduces that nasty lint issue. Plus the abortion remark was one step from proving Godwin’s Law.
It’s basically the same issue as whether or not to shave your legs and pits, which I also do. (Puck, by the way, trims his armpit and chest hair as well as the more personal area, so don’t try to play the hypocrite card). It’s grooming. If you don’t find hairy legs gross, good for you! I don’t think that makes you a superior person.
I shave. Certainly I do. My shaving habits are neither here nor there.
What I decidedly do NOT do is advise the public that women’s hair is ugly or gross. I do not advise that a woman who chooses not to shave her pubic hair – or any other hair for that matter – is being unreasonable or problematic or troublesome or even a rebel. If I did that I would be, as I implied, an insular lout.
And, while I’m here, Urs has an excellent point about shaving pubic hair leading to rashes and infection. Better a little discomfort metered with a fantastic amount of pleasure than metered with pain and illness.
Also if I can be a bit sciencey for a moment, one of the main evolutionary reasons for pubic hair’s existence is to capture pheromones. The more the merrier.
Also if I can be a bit sciencey for a moment, one of the main evolutionary reasons for pubic hairs existence is to capture pheromones. The more the merrier.
We stopped sniffing each other’s butts a few thousands years ago. And we rarely fuck based on ovulation cycles. Thus whether pubes capture pheromones or not seems moot.
show some respect, The terms furburger and pubic foliage and jungle bush and tongue runway amuse me. but youd never say them to your partners face?
I actually learned the term “furburger” from my partner. She very much dislikes jungle bushes. But I guess as a woman, her opinion doesn’t really matter. What really matters is some good ‘ol PC man-bashing.
Shaving pubic hair leading to rashes and infection.
I’d like to see the medical evidence of this? I would think simply cleaning your genitals regularly would lead to fewer rashes and infection.
a woman who chooses not to shave her pubic hair – or any other hair for that matter – is being unreasonable or problematic or troublesome or even a rebel.
Never said that. I said that it’s unappealing to the partner going down on her. The same would go for jungle bush men and the women going down on them.
And to whoever brought up the pedophile response, you need to learn how to debate effectively.
vanmandan –
Think about why exactly you wouldn’t use those terms with your girlfriend.
And then think about this: regardless of whether or not you say the words, I guarantee you that she gets what you actually mean, loud and clear.
For the record, I do not use the term “hate” lightly — particularly not “woman-hater” — and I have not used it here.
I know you never said that. I didn’t mean to suggest you did. The author of the article did.
And sure, I’ll go so far as to give you some “expert” evidence about the rashes and infection, for you to do with as you will.
http://www.prematuree.com/qa/qa.php3?qa_id=129
another
http://www.teenwire.com/ask/2003/as_20030314p527_shave.asp
…for starters. Look up folliculitis on google I’m sure you’ll find more.
Of course there are ways to minimize or negate these problems if you feel you must shave, and they are here: http://www.the-clitoris.com/f_html/shave_t.htm
And then think about this: regardless of whether or not you say the words, I guarantee you that she gets what you actually mean, loud and clear.
I have used those terms in front of girlfriends before. And what they “get” is that I don’t like jungle bush. There’s no hidden agenda, nor does it connote a hatred of women.
Most recently I was telling my girlfriend about this VERY thread over the telephone and reading to her my responses to it (as well as the many other responses from the Easily Offended crowd). She found the broohaha all quite hilarious. It probably has more to do with how uptight the individual is, and how defensive they are about their pubic grooming habits.
If you prefer the au naturel look, good on you. I just doubt you’re getting as much oral stimulation as you could be if you were to shave or trim.
VDM: Um, okay. This is the second time you’ve misquoted YOURSELF. Please read carefully.
1) A scant 3 hours ago when you said, “Nor would I use the term “jungle bush”” with a partner, I assumed you weren’t lying;
2) For the last time, I wasn’t implying that you are a woman-hater. The implication is that you don’t just prefer less pubic hair, but that you find it “gross”. Surely you see the difference. It communicates a different message, especially with one who doesn’t happen to agree with you;
3) Why why why would you assume anything about my preferences? I based my argument on the very fact that people have different opinions.
4) Let me get this straight: we are all unilaterally defensive and uptight whereas you and your girlfriend are not? LUCKY!!!
Yes, Janet, that last one was for you ;o)
Not really misquoting myself. When I’d use the term would depend on context. If a girlfriend had jungle bush, I wouldn’t say “Umm, what would you say to trimming your jungle bush?” Instead I’d probably say: “Would you be adverse to trimming your pubic region? It would make it easier orally.”
But after she had trimmed it, and liked it, I’d likely use one of those terms jokingly. For instance, my current girlfriend shaves, has shaved completely long before I met her. We use those terms occasionally in joking ways. Like I said, she introduced me to the term “furburger”.
The implication is that you dont just prefer less pubic hair, but that you find it gross”.
It is. That is my opinion. Especially after a day of being out and about. You pretty much have to shower to get all that stank out of the bush. Same goes for me. I wouldn’t expect anyone to teabag my sweaty nutsack. I’d shower first.
we are all unilaterally defensive and uptight
Not all. Just a few of you. 😉
Toren, not one of those links you’ve given mention anything but temporary problems, neither do they recommend not shaving. One even goes to point out they’re just shaving in the wrong direction. OH NO, THE SKY IS FALLING.
Well sure.
1. Did I say permanent?
2. Did I say I don’t recommend shaving?
3. Did I say the sky was falling?
4. Did I said that someone who doesn’t shave is not necessarily being unreasonable?
Toren, not one of those links youve given mention anything but temporary problems, neither do they recommend not shaving. One even goes to point out theyre just shaving in the wrong direction. OH NO, THE SKY IS FALLING.
Oh, he’s just playing The Politically Correct Man, this week. I preferred it when he was taking steaming dumps in the middle of his bedroom. 😉
Did I said that someone who doesnt shave is not necessarily being unreasonable?
Never said it was unreasonable for a woman not to shave or trim. But is it unreasonable that I don’t like going down on pubic foliage? The following isn’t worksafe, so click at your own risk. Would it be unreasonable of me to refuse fellatio on this: http://www.lickmewhereipee.com/archive/gooneygoogoo.html
And with that comment – any lingering doubt about whether vanmandan is dogbreath aka cinephile aka Michael Heacock is now gone in my mind. And since it’s my blog, let the banning commence.
I don’t know if I’m already too late to be responding to this, but here goes.
1. Natural vs. Not
Puck, for someone who seems to value the art of debate so highly, surely you recognize that what you’ve done is taken Toren’s/Ursula’s “Pubic hair is natural”, added “Natural is better in all circumstances” and therefore “Everyone should do/use only those things that are totally natural. Here are some absurd examples.” This line of logic is abstruse, and neither Toren nor Ursula would argue it. Here’s some further reading.
2. Personal Preference
I didn’t say this earlier because it’s totally not relevant, but I wax. And when I do, I wax most if not all of it. So this “My personal preference is being vilified here and that’s your problem” is bullshit. Even though I go through a more painful and more thorough grooming procedure than it appears that both of you do, Im still defending jungle bush why do you suppose that is? How many more times must it be reiterated? Yvonne talks about compromise. Toren talks about working it out. You and your girlfriend seem to have found a pubic happy ground. That is wonderful. Surely you can conceive of the possibility that, just like you, two people with superhair down there might be happy with their decisions to groom as they please (maybe not at all).
3. This isn’t about “wimmen”
Note the excerpt doesn’t read, “What conclusions can I draw from a person’s lack of pubic upkeep?” It (the whole article in addition to the headline, for those who were thinking of getting more ridiculously nitpicky) immediately identifies women as the subject and draws conclusions about her character (Obstinate! Willful! Hippy scum!) should she not adhere to a particular aesthetic. When mens magazines talk about what women should be doing with their pubic hair, it is a gender issue.
A little background into Esquire magazine: Esquire is published by Hearst Corp., the corporation responsible for other lovely and very useful magazines like Cosmopolitan, Good Housekeeping, Popular Mechanics hardly non-gendered reading. Also, take a look at senior management here. Of 11 positions listed on this website, 10 are males. This is meant to indicate if nothing else at the very, very top of the food chain, there are 10 male opinions to counteract every one female opinion. OBVIOUSLY, this doesnt mean that all males are going to think one thing and the lone female will think another. The point is that if gender affects ones opinions and values at all and in this company, I think it might just (gender of the target markets for Good Housekeeping and Popular Mechanics are are a clue) half of the population is getting one vote out of 11. Yet Cosmo is one of the best-selling womens magazines in the world. So in short: Cosmo tells millions of women around the world what they should be doing. Cosmos editorial board reports to a group of 10 men and one woman. You draw your own conclusions.
If this issue really wasnt about women, youd find equal prejudice. Senior management would have equal representation from both sexes and in the September 2003 issue of Cosmo there would be an article written by John Black postulating that men who refused to keep it clean in the facial hair area were obstinate at best and a Hasidic Jew or a long-lost member of ZZ Top, at worst. Because, as we know, men arent entitled to keep their facial hair however they like.
4. Its closeminded not to try
Here are a few definitions of closemindedness for you:
a. Dictionary.com/Your Dictionary.com: Intolerant of the beliefs and opinions of others; stubbornly unreceptive to new ideas.
b. Encarta: http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861687793/closed-minded.html
c. WordNet: (not ready to receive to new ideas)
d. Canadian OED (offline): not receptive to new or different ideas; prejudiced.
Its not closeminded not to try, its closeminded to think that people should think about an issue the way you do. When you add value judgements to an opinion, your tone gets dogmatic. For instance:
I think using calculators is easier than doing math on paper. I do math on paper because I think its a better mental exercise. People can use calculators or do math on paper, but I think those who use calculators are cheaters. The last sentence is a value judgement. The last sentence expresses the speakers intolerance of those who use calculators. Ridiculous example? Why yes it is! Its the logic behind it that is at issue here.
As far as I can tell, Toren, Yvonne, Ursula, Marlo and I have expressly stated that it doesnt matter in which state of growth a womans pubic hair its up to them, and they shouldnt be judged for it. Puck, VMD, Mel, the most tolerant thing that you have been saying seems to be Women/Other women, do whatever you like, I prefer this. The woman in my life should not/I would not have otherwise, as the alternative is (choose one:) gross/less clean/stanky.
The conflict lies in the latter part of the argument. Assigning positive or negative attributes to a particular choice may bolster or even be the reason for your opinion, however, you cannot expect the world to share your justifications. Pubic bush is not inherently gross/stanky but it is natural; you are born with it (remember that game: fact vs. opinion?). The point is do you whatever you like with your own pubic hair. Toren and Ursula were only trying to provide reasons that people might think differently from you.
You and your partner have every right to discuss, compromise, take a hardline approach (hair vs. no hair at all): it will be up to you to figure it out. But dont assume that the reasons that make you think the way you do are ubiquitous. Dont believe for a minute that your decision to do so or not in Mels words make you a superior person, or make your decision superior across the board and superior to that of others. Youre not gross/monstrous/a pedophile for waxing/trimming/shaving or preferring waxed/trimmed/shaved pubic hair, so why is it so hard to understand that if two people decide to grow their pubic hair for all time, theyre not gross/stanky for it. The point is: Its really none of your business, and dont be judgin.
Also, for the record, VMD: you didnt say that it was unreasonable for a woman not to shave or trim for their partners, Puck did.
I don’t know if I’m already too late to be responding to this, but here goes.
1. Natural vs. Not
Puck, for someone who seems to value the art of debate so highly, surely you recognize that what you’ve done is taken Toren’s/Ursula’s “Pubic hair is natural”, added “Natural is better in all circumstances” and therefore “Everyone should do/use only those things that are totally natural. Here are some absurd examples.” This line of logic is abstruse, and neither Toren nor Ursula would argue it. Here’s some further reading.
2. Personal Preference
I didn’t say this earlier because it’s totally not relevant, but I wax. And when I do, I wax most if not all of it. So this “My personal preference is being vilified here and that’s your problem” is bullshit. Even though I go through a more painful and more thorough grooming procedure than it appears that both of you do, I’m still defending “jungle bush” why do you suppose that is? How many more times must it be reiterated? Yvonne talks about compromise. Toren talks about ‘working it out’. You and your girlfriend seem to have found a pubic happy ground. That is wonderful. Surely you can conceive of the possibility that, just like you, two people with superhair down there might be happy with their decisions to groom as they please (maybe not at all).
3. This isn’t about “wimmen”
Note the excerpt doesn’t read, “What conclusions can I draw from a person’s lack of pubic upkeep?” It (the whole article in addition to the headline, for those who were thinking of getting more ridiculously nitpicky) immediately identifies women as the subject and draws conclusions about her character (“Obstinate!” “Willful!” “Hippy scum!”) should she not adhere to a particular aesthetic. When men’s magazines talk about what women should be doing with their pubic hair, it is a gender issue.
A little background into Esquire magazine: Esquire is published by Hearst Corp., the corporation responsible for other lovely and very useful magazines like Cosmopolitan, Good Housekeeping, Popular Mechanics hardly non-gendered reading. Also, take a look at senior management here. Of 11 positions listed on this website, 10 are males. This is meant to indicate if nothing else at the very, very top of the food chain, there are 10 male opinions to counteract every one female opinion. OBVIOUSLY, this doesnt mean that all males are going to think one thing and the lone female will think another. The point is that if gender affects one’s opinions and values at all and in this company, I think it might just (gender of the target markets for Good Housekeeping and Popular Mechanics are are a clue) half of the population is getting one vote out of 11. Yet Cosmo is one of the best-selling women’s magazines in the world. So in short: Cosmo tells millions of women around the world what they should be doing. Cosmo’s editorial board reports to a group of 10 men and one woman. You draw your own conclusions.
If this issue really wasn’t about women, you’d find equal prejudice. Senior management would have equal representation from both sexes and in the September 2003 issue of Cosmo there would be an article written by John Black postulating that men who refused to keep it clean in the facial hair area were obstinate at best and a Hasidic Jew or a long-lost member of ZZ Top, at worst. Because, as we know, men arent entitled to keep their facial hair however they like.
4. It’s closeminded not to try
Here are a few definitions of closemindedness for you:
a. Dictionary.com/Your Dictionary.com: Intolerant of the beliefs and opinions of others; stubbornly unreceptive to new ideas.
b. Encarta: closed to new ideas or opinions: rigidly and obstinately averse to the consideration of new ideas or other peoples arguments
c. WordNet: (not ready to receive to new ideas)
d. Canadian OED (offline): not receptive to new or different ideas; prejudiced.
It’s not closeminded not to try, it’s closeminded to think that people should think about an issue the way you do. When you add value judgements to an opinion, your tone gets dogmatic. For instance:
“I think using calculators is easier than doing math on paper. I do math on paper because I think it’s a better mental exercise. People can use calculators or do math on paper, but I think those who use calculators are cheaters.” The last sentence is a value judgement. The last sentence expresses the speakers intolerance of those who use calculators. Ridiculous example? Why yes it is! It’s the logic behind it that is at issue here.
As far as I can tell, Toren, Yvonne, Ursula, Marlo and I have expressly stated that it doesn’t matter in which state of growth a woman’s pubic hair it’s up to them, and they shouldn’t be judged for it. Puck, VMD, Mel, the most tolerant thing that you have been saying seems to be “Women/Other women, do whatever you like, I prefer this. The woman in my life should not/I would not have otherwise, as the alternative is (choose one:) gross/less clean/stanky.”
The conflict lies in the latter part of the argument. Assigning positive or negative attributes to a particular choice may bolster or even be the reason for your opinion, however, you cannot expect the world to share your justifications. Pubic bush is not inherently “gross/stanky” but it is natural; you are born with it (remember that game: fact vs. opinion?). If someone argues that pubic hair should never be trimmed because it’s sacred to them, and they say you’re blasphemous for doing it – they’re being just as dogmatic.
The point is do you whatever you like with your own pubic hair. Just don’t presume that your opinion in paramount, as Yvonne has already stated. Toren and Ursula were only trying to provide reasons that people might think differently from you.
You and your partner have every right to discuss, compromise, take a hardline approach (hair vs. no hair at all): it will be up to you to figure it out. But the reasons that make you think the way you do are not ubiquitous. Don’t believe for a minute that your decision to do so or not in Mel’s words make you a superior person, or make your decision superior across the board and superior to that of others. You’re not gross/monstrous/a pedophile for waxing/trimming/shaving or preferring waxed/trimmed/shaved pubic hair, so why is it so hard to understand that if two people decide to grow their pubic hair for all time, they’re not gross/stanky for it. The point is: It’s really none of your – or OUR – business who does what with their pubic hair, it’s theirs alone, so don’t be judgin’.
Also, for the record, VMD: you didn’t say that it was unreasonable for a woman not to shave or trim for their partners, Puck did.
I say use small, tactical nuclear weapons on your pubic regions. 1 to 2 kilotons should be enough. They can be delivered by short range ballistic missle or by stealth aircraft. Chemical or biological weapons wouldn’t pack enough puch to do the job. Fallout could be a problem within the first few weeks but by careful deployment of conventional forces armed with NBC (nuclear, biological and chemical ) gear, casualties can be kept to a minimum. Weather in your pubic region could also be a factor in fallout patterns.
Is there a problem that nuclear weapons can’t solve???
i don’t think puck was expecting/forcing others to share his opinions… other than his prospective partners, that is.
remember… these are comments on a weblog, opinions. that’s all. same with anything you read in a magazine or newspaper. it’s all spun by certain people. if you are understand this then you can read any of these things with the proper size grain of salt. sure it’s dogmatic. but what’s the point in getting upset about a silly little paragraph in a silly magazine? they are catering to their audience. maybe (probably) they aren’t writing it for people like you(intelligent/independent). and if people want to decide whether they should shave or not based on a magazine, then who am(are) I(you) to stop them?
what about the conext in the magazine? is it possible that it’s meant to be a humourous/sarcastic article? I found it pretty funny when I read it. but then I’m hard to offend.
cas.
The purpose of the really long post wasn’t so much to chastise anyone specifically for expecting others to adopt their opinions. It’s more about understanding the reasons that someone could possibly come to a different understanding of an issue than you would, and not immediately drawing conclusions about their behavioural or attitudinal choices along the way.
As for the context, I absolutely agree. The article is meant to be entertaining and funny, for those who share the author’s opinion. But sarcastic? I am not so sure. Sarcasm requires a degree of self-awareness, a proviso (implicit or otherwise) that flags the audience to be aware that what is being said on the surface is different than the message it’s supposed to convey. I believe Grenrock Woods really does think that women who don’t trim their pubic hair should.
I also think it’s interesting that in another time and place, women could easily have been pegged as sluts for doing anything to their pubic hair at all. Can you imagine? “What conclusions can I draw from a woman who steadfastly continues to prune her pit of sexual, temptuous evils?” Witch! Burn her!
heh. women just can’t win. one century it’s condemned, the next it’s expected.
I think it is absolutely gross and a big turn off. There is nothing nicer than a nice “coiffed” twat. Better for licking. A real turn on and gets the big lad to rise for the occasion