Do you trim your "lady garden"?

Oh?

Oh no it's not!

You should Google what I just googled!

That is quite the worst euphemism there is!

Jessm interesting question.
Certainly since the Victorian era, depilated genitals do not seem to be mentioned. But throughout the centuries before, going back to medieval, if nor Greco/roman times it seems to have been the ideal.
Perhaps the Victorians in their prudishness did not talk about but still practiced it

JessM, I agree totally that there is something sinister about the infantilising of women by pretending that they are hairless below the neck. Not all men like hairless women; some are quite knowledgeable about what being an adult human entails and can cope with it!

Yes, she is, Nonu! She's 74.

It would be interesting to know the percentage of women who really are removing their body hair because they think, or have been told, that it's more attractive to men. The vajazzling craze seemed to be more about young women trying to outdo each other in the bizarre decoration stakes!

Is Greer still alive ?

I don't think it is the women that want to look child like. I think the men go for it and the women do it (often) to please the men. Maybe afraid, even, these days that a new partner would be disgusted if they were not fairly well plucked. It must cost some of them a fortune getting waxed all the time.
When men do it these days they are maybe, for once, following female fashion - or possibly do they see depilated men in porn movies? Have not watched any porn movies to check this out. But mens chest depilation fashion led by media methinks? Male film stars in the 20th century were sometimes puny and were allowed to have hairy chests. Male film stars these days must have a 6 pack etc and often have smooth shiny chests to show off their muscles.
Greer, I think, argued that by de-sexualising women they seem less threatening to men and more easy to dominate. But it is 40 years since I read the book!

suzied there is a deal of difference in trimming and totally denuding!

I don't think women remove their hair to appear childlike, after all, some men also remove body hair these days(apparently!) and I am sure they are not trying to regress to childhood, any more than getting head hair cut is trying to regress to infancy. This is an interpretation of behaviour that is not necessarily accurate. I don't like lots of bristly hair under my armpits or in my leg creases etc (don't need to go into detail) I just feel cleaner, neater, more toned etc if I am "trimmed". I , sure most women who remove all body hair aren't trying to look like children , just trying to look more attractive ( in their opinion). If you like hairy bits , fine, but some people don't. What's wrong with that?

I wouldn't dream of "having it all off" so to speak but also wouldn't dream of wearing a swimsuit with spiders legs hanging out of the sides. I have a fantastic little Epilator which only cost around £20 that I use for the bikini bits (although it is quite painful to use until you get used to it) you do stay hair free for quite some time and the hair doesn't grown back bristly like it does if you shave.

I agree JessM that there is something a bit perverted about removing it all in a bid to appear childlike.

Occurred to me this morning that we have not broached the core of this issue. When Germaine Greer wrote The Female Eunuch 40 years ago she argued that our sexist society wanted to infantilise and de-sexualise women in many ways. Some o things have changed in 40 years - women are more free to express their needs etc. But some things have changed for the worse perhaps.
She made the point that pressure to shave armpits and legs was part of this - women were pressured to make their bodies appear more child like.
Shaved genitalia were I think more or less unheard of 40 years ago. (I'm sure some medical members could confirm this?). But they are a development of the same trend - women being made to feel that they are only attractive if their bodies are hairless and child-like.
IMO little girls look beautiful, but the stubbly crotches of grown women (the ones that are not in airbrushed photos) are well ... less so.
But the unspoken question at the heart of this is: Why do men want their women's bodies - to look childlike?

I was being stitched up by the doctor after my second baby and when I made a comment about his needlework the midwife said "His hobby is leatherwork". There was no answer to that really.
I remember the salt baths while I was in hospital. I'm sure the terrible chipped old bath would be viewed with horror today, especially with us all sharing it. Don't think any of us died from childbed fever

yes but my friends know me but most of the forum folk don't and probably never will!

merlot

Yes, but views differ. No one has to contribute to this thread if they are worried about their posts being read by the World Wide Web (if it's really interested).

Greatnan I'm sure that there is a difference for most people but individuals will draw the lines in different places.

Surely there is a difference between what you talk about with your friends in private, and what you are willing to discuss on a forum that can be read by anybody?

Kitty My children were all born in Hongkong and everyone stayed in for a week - it was bliss. Except that with no 3, I was sharing a room with a woman who was given to alternative remedies and I went to have my hot salt bath to find it strewn with tarragon leaves or some such

Who ever had time, energy, inclination etc etc to take two hot salt baths every day when they had just had a baby.

Yes, and I developed an abcess despite them...

I remember that too kitty. My stitcher was a very gentle little Indian Doctor in a lovely silk sari under her white coat. I was a bit befogged from all the gas and air and asked her "Do you do a lot of sewing at home?". Cue laughter all round!

Do you remember being told to take salt baths twice daily to heal the area?

Oh, and I've just remembered the stitches. A (very) junior doctor sitting on a sort of milking stool with a spot light pointed at the 'area'.

We went through lots of minor indignities in 'the old days' during labour. didn't we? Apart from the shaving there was the compulsory enema which I definitely didn't need as having diarrhoea was my first sign!

Still, at least stirrups were not still compulsory!

Hmm I remember my DH doing mine when I had our first baby - never felt the need to repeat the experience