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

[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???

[Gnappster]

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

sort of, except in the version i'm referring to, there are a lot more available targets.

[jrock8]

sort of, except in the version i'm referring to, there are a lot more available targets.

yeah... but in your case they're all running away


...and everyone knows it's harder to hit a moving target


...that's why you need to make sure to tie them up

[fellatiofiend18]

in any case, shit, if shaving your pubes can result in less children then Im all for it. why do we need to keep bringing children into the world "by mistake" or just putting them up for adoption.
Anyways, the reason those ppl with a "full bush" back when that was a popular thing had more sex is because the technology wasnt around then, there was nothing else to do... now, instead of actually fucking your smooth and sexy girlfriends pussy, all those guys are sitting here looking at our tits.

[Isaac_Putin]

in any case, shit, if shaving your pubes can result in less children then Im all for it. why do we need to keep bringing children into the world "by mistake" or just putting them up for adoption.
Anyways, the reason those ppl with a "full bush" back when that was a popular thing had more sex is because the technology wasnt around then, there was nothing else to do... now, instead of actually fucking your smooth and sexy girlfriends pussy, all those guys are sitting here looking at our tits.

Scientists believe that the original purpose of pubic hair was to carry pheromones out from the body and attract a mate (probably during "dawn of Man" time and before wearing animal skins).

Anyway, pubic hair is natural. Shaving it off is a recent practice, and you would think that today's men couldn't find their way to the "hole" unless somebody created a carefully groomed landing strip pointed straight toward it. Maybe they should put training wheels on their tongues, too?

[bondiguy]

You must avenge my death, Kimba....uhh I mean Simba.
I sense you have some strong opinions in this area.

Spotted

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

and what a phenomenon it is!

Isaac I disagree... the landing strip is very popular with women in Australia as is the "hollwywood/brazilian" and we are experiencing a growth in birth rates

[Isaac_Putin]

Spotted
and what a phenomenon it is!

Isaac I disagree... the landing strip is very popular with women in Australia as is the "hollwywood/brazilian" and we are experiencing a growth in birth rates

I think Australia should probably be grouped in with the United States and Western Europe. And it doesn't tilt the demographics/statistics very much because it has a population of like 20 million?

[jrock8]

I think Australia should probably be grouped in with the United States and Western Europe.  And it doesn't tilt the demographics/statistics very much because it has a population of like 20 million?

eeew, bondi germs... no thanks...

how about this, we get that chick from lost (ok, and every other hot woman there)... and they can have bobaloo and 3d?

[Gnappster]

Scientists believe that the original purpose of pubic hair was to carry pheromones out from the body and attract a mate (probably during "dawn of Man" time and before wearing animal skins).

Anyway, pubic hair is natural.  Shaving it off is a recent practice, and you would think that today's men couldn't find their way to the "hole" unless somebody created a carefully groomed landing strip pointed straight toward it.  Maybe they should put training wheels on their tongues, too?

it's funny that pubic/arm pit hair's original function is exactly what we want to prevent it from today.
I was thinking about this on the way to work (it's a boring drive).
I know (at least I think I know) that shaving off pubic hair is a recent practice. In fact even trimming it is probably a pretty recent innovation due to a lot of repressed thinking on the subject for the past 1500 years or so, at least in the Western Hemisphere. But what did, say the Romans do. Did they trim? Shave? They were out there sexually. Did Roman women ever have a "chariot strip". What about other cultures? A lot of cultures have practiced some pretty original forms of body modification. It stands to reason that the short n curlies wouldn't have escaped some type of cutting/shaving/who knows. I've never really researched the topic, but it doesn't seem realistic that people have never shaved off their pubes before in history. But looking at what they had to shave with, maybe I could understand why haha.

[Bobaloo]

it's funny that pubic/arm pit hair's original function is exactly what we want to prevent it from today.
I was thinking about this on the way to work (it's a boring drive).
I know (at least I think I know) that shaving off pubic hair is a recent practice. In fact even trimming it is probably a pretty recent innovation due to a lot of repressed thinking on the subject for the past 1500 years or so, at least in the Western Hemisphere. But what did, say the Romans do. Did they trim? Shave? They were out there sexually. Did Roman women ever have a "chariot strip". What about other cultures? A lot of cultures have practiced some pretty original forms of body modification. It stands to reason that the short n curlies wouldn't have escaped some type of cutting/shaving/who knows. I've never really researched the topic, but it doesn't seem realistic that people have never shaved off their pubes before in history. But looking at what they had to shave with, maybe I could understand why haha.

Remember the Flinstones and what Fred had to use to shave?? I think he put a bee or some other insect in the shaver. That would suck having to shave pubes with something like that.

[Gnappster]

Remember the Flinstones and what Fred had to use to shave??  I think he put a bee or some other insect in the shaver.  That would suck having to shave pubes with something like that.

I beleive the bee went in a clamshell.

I was looking for a pic and stumbled upon this disturbing item

Attached image(s)

[Bobaloo]

I beleive the bee went in a clamshell.

I was looking for a pic and stumbled upon this disturbing item 

ah, yes, the prehistoric Bondi and Jork.

Okay. Sorry that was lame. I'm just not feeling very clever today.

[Gnappster]

ah, yes, the prehistoric Bondi and Jork. 

Okay. Sorry that was lame.  I'm just not feeling very clever today.

it's funniest because they aren't here to defend themselves


no that they would refute it I'm sure.

[Bobaloo]

it's funniest because they aren't here to defend themselves
no that they would refute it I'm sure.

It's funny you say that, cuz i was thinking exactly that as I was typing it... both thought actually.

[bondiguy]

I think Australia should probably be grouped in with the United States and Western Europe.  And it doesn't tilt the demographics/statistics very much because it has a population of like 20 million?

Well as much as I dig most of the yanks on the board here we should never be "grouped" with the USA.... EVER! We are a country prodominantly made up from people with a UK Background, mixed in with countless other races and cultures... you should know that having ben here?

ah, yes, the prehistoric Bondi and Jork. 

Okay. Sorry that was lame.  I'm just not feeling very clever today.

I refute those claims

[Isaac_Putin]

Well as much as I dig most of the yanks on the board here we should never be "grouped" with the USA.... EVER! We are a country prodominantly made up from people with a UK Background, mixed in with countless other races and cultures... you should know that having ben here?
I refute those claims

Really, Bondi? What about the ANZUS pact, which formally "Groups" the USA and Australia in a military alliance?

I tend to see a lot of commonalities.

As I recall, the USA and Australia both were settled by UK colonists. Australia is a latecomer to the multiculture thing (except, of course, for aboriginals). The U.S.'s immigration policy, in terms of who it allowed in, and when, is pretty similar to Australia's.

You could probably compare, to a certain extent, the Australians' relationship with aboriginals with the U.S.'s treatment of its own aboriginal population. The U.S. was worse, though.

See Wikipedia's Australia entry for the White Australia Policy, abolished in 1973. I think it still shows when you walk around there. I tended to see more Asians as the majority minority population than Hispanics (U.S. majority minority), though.

When I was there, it looked VERY similar to USA. Same architecture, especially in Sydney. The outdoor touring areas, except for 12 Apostles, were VERY similar to the USA's rugged outdoors areas. Also, desert area is much larger.

The people dressed a little better in the workplace.

Classified as having a Western-style mixed economy.

[Isaac_Putin]

Also,

Both countries experienced rapid development in certain geographic areas due to the discovery of gold (gold rush). In USA, it would be California. In Australia, I think it was Melbourne.

The size of both countries, leaving out Alaska, is very similar, too.

[Gnappster]

Really, Bondi?  What about the ANZUS pact, which formally "Groups" the USA and Australia in a military alliance? 

I tend to see a lot of commonalities.

As I recall, the USA and Australia both were settled by UK colonists.  Australia is a latecomer to the multiculture thing (except, of course, for aboriginals).  The U.S.'s immigration policy, in terms of who it allowed in, and when, is pretty similar to Australia's. 

You could probably compare, to a certain extent, the Australians' relationship with aboriginals with the U.S.'s treatment of its own aboriginal population.  The U.S. was worse, though.

See Wikipedia's Australia entry for the White Australia Policy, abolished in 1973.  I think it still shows when you walk around there.  I tended to see more Asians as the majority minority population than Hispanics (U.S. majority minority), though.

When I was there, it looked VERY similar to USA.  Same architecture, especially in Sydney.  The outdoor touring areas, except for 12 Apostles, were VERY similar to the USA's rugged outdoors areas.  Also, desert area is much larger.

The people dressed a little better in the workplace.

Classified as having a Western-style mixed economy.

Also,

Both countries experienced rapid development in certain geographic areas due to the discovery of gold (gold rush).  In USA, it would be California.  In Australia, I think it was Melbourne.

The size of both countries, leaving out Alaska, is very similar, too.

interesting, I guess when you come down to it, we can all trace our cultural origins back to Rome.

But if you really want to go a step above, into the elite countries, you're looking at places like Canada...

That is all®

*awaits shitstorm*

[bondiguy]

Really, Bondi?  What about the ANZUS pact, which formally "Groups" the USA and Australia in a military alliance? 

I tend to see a lot of commonalities.

As I recall, the USA and Australia both were settled by UK colonists.  Australia is a latecomer to the multiculture thing (except, of course, for aboriginals).  The U.S.'s immigration policy, in terms of who it allowed in, and when, is pretty similar to Australia's. 

You could probably compare, to a certain extent, the Australians' relationship with aboriginals with the U.S.'s treatment of its own aboriginal population.  The U.S. was worse, though.

See Wikipedia's Australia entry for the White Australia Policy, abolished in 1973.  I think it still shows when you walk around there.  I tended to see more Asians as the majority minority population than Hispanics (U.S. majority minority), though.

When I was there, it looked VERY similar to USA.  Same architecture, especially in Sydney.  The outdoor touring areas, except for 12 Apostles, were VERY similar to the USA's rugged outdoors areas.  Also, desert area is much larger.

The people dressed a little better in the workplace.

Classified as having a Western-style mixed economy.

Isaac not a word you have said here is wrong, we are very similar to the US in a lot of ways but we should never be grouped with such a country. Yes we are allies but that is just like saying Spaniards are the same as Australians? We are also allies?

What I meant is that everyday Australians are nothing like everyday Americans. We are a totally different nation with our own ideals and values and we should not be grouped with anyone.

interesting, I guess when you come down to it, we can all trace our cultural origins back to Rome.

But if you really want to go a step above, into the elite countries, you're looking at places like Canada...

That is all®

  *awaits shitstorm*

You are right Gnappy (except for the Canada thing ) let us trace all our steps back and if you are catholic we are all arabic!

I actually thing Canadians are more like Australians than Americans are. From the various Canucks I have met they seem to be a more laid back and relaxed people where Americans tend to be over the top and loud (speaking purely generally here)

[jrock8]

Americans tend to be over the top and loud (speaking purely generally here)

FUCK YOU, YOU KOALA-LOVING, OUTBACK-LIVING, SHRIMP-ON-THE-BARBIE-EATING!!!...





















err, what were we talking about?

[HardDick69]

I prefer to be shaved as well as my g/f. I think we've tried every combo of pubic hair from shaved smooth to full on bush, lightly trim, etc. and shaved always wins.

It really breaks down to personal preference, there's no yes or no answer.

[closeup]

I think listing the similarities countries share; allies, geographic size, etc., isn't a very accurate way to group a bunch of it's citizens into a common group. I think a more accurate way is to think in terms of; style of government, prosperity and a shared sense of history. I think Canada is pretty close to the USA in many ways because of those factors. Mexico, a lot less so. Aussies, even less. I think Americans are sort of arrogant in the sense that when we see a foreign country with a Mcdonalds, Starbucks, Ford, etc,etc, we think the people in those countries are "Americanized". But they aren't. Democratic nations share a lot of the same values, but they are far from homogenized. And that's a good thing. I'd be willing to bet that most Americans think of Canada as little more than a 51st state, ie following the USA lockstep in just about everything political that matters. The same holds true for the U.K. and Australia,but to a lesser degree, because they are further away. Most Americans would be surprised to find out first -hand what the rest of the world thinks of them. But that doesn't make those perceptions accurate, America is the most successful experiment in self-government ever attempted. And that is hard for other countries to understand. We've tossed out kings and queens and dictators and found a better way. It's one of those things that's hard to understand until you experience it, then you can't imagine any other way. Can anyone picture the Queen of the USA? (Anyone who says Hillary Clinton, give yourself a swift kick in the nuts)

[Isaac_Putin]

Bondi, after your last post, I do understand what you are saying.

[bondiguy]

FUCK YOU, YOU KOALA-LOVING, OUTBACK-LIVING, SHRIMP-ON-THE-BARBIE-EATING!!!...
err, what were we talking about? 

exhibit A

I prefer to be shaved as well as my g/f. I think we've tried every combo of pubic hair from shaved smooth to full on bush, lightly trim, etc. and shaved always wins.

It really breaks down to personal preference, there's no yes or no answer.

WOW, an insightful noobie

I think listing the similarities countries share; allies, geographic size, etc., isn't a very accurate way to group a bunch of it's citizens into a common group. I think a more accurate way is to think in terms of; style of government, prosperity and a shared sense of history. I think Canada is pretty close to the USA in many ways because of those factors. Mexico, a lot less so. Aussies, even less. I think Americans are sort of arrogant in the sense that when we see a foreign country with a Mcdonalds, Starbucks, Ford, etc,etc, we think the people in those countries are "Americanized". But they aren't. Democratic nations share a lot of the same values, but they are far from homogenized. And that's a good thing. I'd be willing to bet that most Americans think of Canada as little more than a 51st state, ie following the USA lockstep in just about everything political that matters. The same holds true for the U.K. and Australia,but to a lesser degree, because they are further away. Most Americans would be surprised to find out first -hand what the rest of the world thinks of them. But that doesn't make those perceptions accurate, America is the most successful experiment in self-government ever attempted. And that is hard for other countries to understand. We've tossed out kings and queens and dictators and found a better way. It's one of those things that's hard to understand until you experience it, then you can't imagine any other way. Can anyone picture the Queen of the USA? (Anyone who says Hillary Clinton, give yourself a swift kick in the nuts)

Cloesup, you are beggining to stamp yourself as a very smart man around here, well done! I agree with everything you say. Sadly Americans aren't well liked in many countries outside the US which is a shame because I meet a lot of great people from the states every year.

Australia is becoming less and less like England with each passing decade. Although we are still a part of the Commonwealth and have very close ties to England, I believe once the current Queen passes away or steps down from the thrown we will have a referendum here and we will become a republic nation. For the very fact that we will not have Prince Charles as our King. Also, because most of the people who are fierce monarchists are the elderly and as their numbers dwindle so does their cause...

Bondi, after your last post, I do understand what you are saying.

Cheers.... it is sometimes hard to get a point across with just black and white text? Glad we understand each other

[closeup]

exhibit A
WOW, an insightful noobie
Cloesup, you are beggining to stamp yourself as a very smart man around here, well done! I agree with everything you say. Sadly Americans aren't well liked in many countries outside the US which is a shame because I meet a lot of great people from the states every year.

Australia is becoming less and less like England with each passing decade. Although we are still a part of the Commonwealth and have very close ties to England, I believe once the current Queen passes away or steps down from the thrown we will have a referendum here and we will become a republic nation. For the very fact that we will not have Prince Charles as our King. Also, because most of the people who are fierce monarchists are the elderly and as their numbers dwindle so does their cause...
Cheers.... it is sometimes hard to get a point across with just black and white text? Glad we understand each other

I'm a little confused. Are you saying Prince Charles won't be your king, or the people have to vote to oust him, or vote to keep him. How much of a choice do Australians have in the matter?

[bondiguy]

I'm a little confused. Are you saying Prince Charles won't be your king, or the people have to vote to oust him, or vote to keep him. How much of a choice do Australians have in the matter?

Sorry I may have been a little confusing there, im on medication

About a decade ago we had a referendum here asking whether we wanted to remain a monarchy or become a republic. It was before I was old enough to vote but the pro monarchy government at the time stacked the question in their own favour and it was subsequently endorsed we remain a monarchy.

Now, it is a common belief that once Queen Elizabeth II passes away or steps down from the thrown that Australians will once again be asked via referendum if we wish to become a republic or not, and if so, it is commonly believed that the outcome would be in favour of being a republic nation this time around because NO ONE in Australia wants to be under a King Charles

[jrock8]

Sorry I may have been a little confusing there, im on medication

About a decade ago we had a referendum here asking whether we wanted to remain a monarchy or become a republic. It was before I was old enough to vote but the pro monarchy government at the time stacked the question in their own favour and it was subsequently endorsed we remain a monarchy.

Now, it is a common belief that once Queen Elizabeth II passes away or steps down from the thrown that Australians will once again be asked via referendum if we wish to become a republic or not, and if so, it is commonly believed that the outcome would be in favour of being a republic nation this time around because NO ONE in Australia wants to be under a King Charles

well, except for you...

[bondiguy]

well, except for you... 

[closeup]

Sorry I may have been a little confusing there, im on medication

About a decade ago we had a referendum here asking whether we wanted to remain a monarchy or become a republic. It was before I was old enough to vote but the pro monarchy government at the time stacked the question in their own favour and it was subsequently endorsed we remain a monarchy.

Now, it is a common belief that once Queen Elizabeth II passes away or steps down from the thrown that Australians will once again be asked via referendum if we wish to become a republic or not, and if so, it is commonly believed that the outcome would be in favour of being a republic nation this time around because NO ONE in Australia wants to be under a King Charles

Why? In what way are you "under" Queen Elizebeth II? Does she have any power or control over aussie government or the peoples day- to- day lives? I guess I always assumed she was strictly a figurehead with really nothing more than a ceremonial post, even in England. Can she actually change/make laws? Why do you think Charles would make a bad king?

[bondiguy]

Why? In what way are you "under" Queen Elizebeth II? Does she have any power or control over aussie government or the peoples day- to- day lives? I guess I always assumed she was strictly a figurehead with really nothing more than a ceremonial post, even in England. Can she actually change/make laws? Why do you think Charles would make a bad king?

She is exactly what you have stated, a figure head and little else. She has no power to change or make current laws.

Charles is seen as a joke here in Australia. We are a nation that is already leaning toward becoming a republic and that would just be the last straw so to speak!