Hi! Welcome to my message board! Use it to contact me or others or to post questions and share ideas and experiences. The topic should always be related to nudism / naturism. Feel free to respond to posts from others in a respectful way if you have something helpful or meaningful to contribute. Let's keep it light, lively, and most of all, fun! Thanks!
This is one of "those topics" that I actually tend to avoid - due to the fact that it typically devolves into fetishization and cringe. But something happened this weekend that caused me to think about this topic in a more "philosophical" manner.
Specifically...my wife decided to go "full Brazilian" for the first time; and it got me thinking...
When I first started frequenting nude beaches here in the US (in the mid-90's), I started noticing that some people were completely hairless; which I initially attributed to "certain types of people." When I started attending resorts and clubs, there were a lot less people "grooming" beyond a mere trim.
One of the first nudists my then-wife and I befriended was what some might call an "old school nudist." And she was fundamentally opposed to the idea of removing all trace of pubic hair. Her arguments was that it made no sense for adults to adopt a "pre-pubescent appearance"; and that for women, the absence of pubic hair brought too much attention to the genitals. It struck me as a bit intolerant; but since no one we knew at that time went "smooth", it didn't really concern us anyway.
And then we became "regulars" at a resort. To this day, I'm not sure why my wife made that decision; since our female nudist friends and acquaintances retained most of their mane. Undoubtably, she must have seen someone who had not. And so, after being accustomed and comfortable with social nudity, she made the decision to "lop it all off." She would be, at the time, one of the few women to do so at our resort; and certainly, she hadn't done it for attention. I think that she quite simply seen it on someone else, found it to be an "attractive look", and decided to disregard our old friend's judgement and embrace it for herself.
Fast forward to now and my (current) wife's decision. The reason it was surprising is because she'd decided from the beginning that "being smooth" was not going to be a part of her nudist experience. In spite of the fact that the vast majority of the people at our nudist resort - and our nudist acquaintances - are nearly or completely "bald." As a matter of fact, at our last nudist social outing, she was actually the only person in the room with visible pubes. Did that spur the decision to join the ranks of "smoothies?"
Trends are an interesting thing. As a young bloke growing up in France, I saw topfreedom "take off"; from a few random tourists on the beach - to nearly all women. To the point where women that did not go topless were the "odd ones." Like my HS sweetheart. She initially felt that going topless was "undignified." But all her friends went topless; which I'm sure created some level of "peer pressure" for her. She not only ended up embracing topfreedom; but actually became an advocate for it. The last time we connected a few years ago, she still went topless at the beach. 25 years later!
At some point, this smooth trend started out with a few people. Now, at least at the venues I attend, it has become the norm. As if presenting oneself as a nudist now involves having little to no pubic hair. I don't think there's anything wrong with it (as I have adopted it myself); and the added sensation of "complete nudity" brought on by the lack of "pubic coverage" is certainly meaningful to a lot of nudists. But the issue is that going bald for the sake of "keeping up with the smooth Joneses" or "fitting in", if it doesn't feel natural, can create a paradox by taking away from the "freedom" of being socially nude. If you're doing something just because "everyone else is doing it": where is the freedom in that?
Just a thought...
And a few more random thoughts:
Many years ago, I had hair on my head, some growing on my body (face, arms, legs, chest and eventually the pubic area. Now the head hair is mostly (naturally) gone and shaved for uniformity about once a month. The facial hair persists and is shaved daily. The body hair persists as does the pubic hair. But if I shaved the pubic hair, would that leave a 'void' in the body hair, like an uprooted tree in a field? Would, or should, I also contemplate shaving all the body hair to match the smoothness? My solution so far is to leave well alone, and 'suffer' the inconvenience of having to towel that small pubic area dry after a swim.
I used to have a flattop, but since I retired, I let my hair grow down past my shoulders. I could grow a beard but not a mustache, working at McDonald's. I don't like a mustache but now retired, I do have a beard. I never considered pubic shaving -- always liked combing that bit of hair. In fact, for a spell, I trimmed Linda's triangle to look something like a flame, but she got tired of my attention to an item which really didn't contribute to our connection.
Regarding public pubic hair, most of our naked time around here is private except for one couple who join only occasionally, so here I am wondering which way to take this conversation. Naturism involves acceptance.
Hair comes and goes.