[ Outline ] · Standard · Linear+ Why Does A Woman Have To Shave, But A Guy...., Can have a ZZ Top beard (above/below)

[Isaac_Putin]

Can have a ZZ Top beard (above/below):

And precede to abrade the poor woman's inner thigs with his mustache, goatee, Fu Manchu, soul patch, Van Dyke, Payes, etc.?

I remember reading a survey that said one of the single best things a guy could do for a woman before sex was shave his face....

[fellatiofiend18]

Okay, if you think about it a woman has a landing strip which is better with less stuff on it right, sure. Now think about a male lion without a mane, kind of scrawny looking, right? I hope y'all are picking up what I'm putting down  .

ummm wayyyy different... a cock with a ton of hair around it makes it look
SMALLER!!! all that hair just gets in the way
i personally dont like male pubic hair. it should be either trimmed really short or just shaved off. its ugly and it doesnt taste good and lord knows how well you men clean yourselves, that alone scares me.

pubes are UGLY. cant see the Tree despite the Forest! hah. have some courtesy or some mutual respect for a women, get off your lazy ass and shave your damn self


AND THAT IS ALL

[Isaac_Putin]

ummm wayyyy different... a cock with a ton of hair around it makes it look
SMALLER!!! all that hair just gets in the way
i personally dont like male pubic hair. it should be either trimmed really short or just shaved off. its ugly and it doesnt taste good and lord knows how well you men clean yourselves, that alone scares me.

pubes are UGLY. cant see the Tree despite the Forest! hah. have some courtesy or some mutual respect for a women, get off your lazy ass and shave your damn self
AND THAT IS ALL

1. The "landing strip, or less", as a phenomenon, has only been around about 20 years or so.

2. The full bush, however, has been around about 3 million years, depending on whether you believe in evolution or not. Even if you're a creationist, the full bush is about 6,000 years old.

3. During the time of the full bush, the human population grew to about 6 billion.

4. In nations with the "landing strip or less" (U.S. and Western Europe), there are actually relatively low birth rates.

The only logical conclusion - the landing strip is actually a turnoff to most of the world, and leads to less sex and a lower birth rate.

If you endorse Malthusian economic theory, though, that's probably a good thing.

[Gnappster]

1. The "landing strip, or less", as a phenomenon, has only been around about 20 years or so. 

2. The full bush, however, has been around about 3 million years, depending on whether you believe in evolution or not.  Even if you're a creationist, the full bush is about 6,000 years old.

3. During the time of the full bush, the human population grew to about 6 billion.

4. In nations with the "landing strip or less" (U.S. and Western Europe), there are actually relatively low birth rates.

The only logical conclusion - the landing strip is actually a turnoff to most of the world, and leads to less sex and a lower birth rate.

If you endorse Malthusian economic theory, though, that's probably a good thing. 

I thought it was attributed to "pull and shoot" phenomenon.

[Isaac_Putin]

I thought it was attributed to "pull and shoot" phenomenon. 

"Pull and shoot"?? As in confusing the landing strip with a skeet target???