[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 83 KB, 479x641, man.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9822247 No.9822247 [Reply] [Original]

Why do women dislike men's body hair, a male secondary sexual characteristic?

>> No.9822262

>>9822247
Why do men dislike women's pubic hair?

>> No.9822271

>>9822247
They don't.
>>9822262
Only plebs do.

>> No.9822273

>>9822247
Being hairless is associated with youth/vitality. Young people tend to have less hair than old people, let's not talk about how weird being sexually attracted to pre-pubescent features is.

>> No.9822284

>>9822247
my wife loves my bodyhair and my bodyhair looks very similiar to that dudes

>> No.9822285

>>9822247
they don't. women love playing with your chest hair (despite publicly claiming they dislike it)

>> No.9822796

>>9822273
>Being hairless is associated with youth/vitality
How come balding is undesirable then

>> No.9822807

>>9822796
That's different than bodyhair.
Plus, do YOU think balding is a sign of vitality and youth? Obviously not, it's a sign of aging.

>> No.9822828

>>9822247
Hairiness is associated with being brown.

>> No.9822830
File: 368 KB, 498x640, 1543535234.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9822830

>> No.9822839

>>9822247
They don't, they love to SAY they do.
Why?
Because it makes them seem modernist and trendy, is doesn't.

>> No.9822842

>>9822247
They do?

>> No.9822845

>>9822247
>woman don't say what they mean
wow i am shocked.

>> No.9822853
File: 335 KB, 792x1200, Sandra 11.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9822853

>>9822247
Are you sure?

>> No.9822856

>>9822247
They don't always. Society's standards of beauty change over time.

>> No.9823121

>>9822853
la creatura..

>> No.9823165

>>9822247
>why do women dislike all things beta?
Because God forbid we repeat your mothers mistake

>> No.9823286

>>9822247
They're secretly lesbians

>> No.9823300

>>9822856
Not to any great degree anon, it's all within pretty strict boundaries. You won't find women without teeth and stumps for legs attractive no matter how much you try.

>> No.9823336

>>9823300
in 20+ years when teeth can be removable without to much of a negative impact if any, and replaced with extended soft padding to not make the lips sink in, do you honestly think any guy is going to trust his dick in a mouth with teeth again?

also, short stacks on the stumps, unless you meant amputee, in which case look into fanny packing.

>>9822247
Ok, lets put it this way, body hair is at best a small added bonus and at worst a dealbreaker for an average woman, no woman is looking at a guy without body hair and saying fuck that unless they have a fetish.

bring in that body hair retains smell and allows sweat to linger longer. there is no real practical benefit to it at all.

>> No.9823417

>>9823336
if you like the way another person smells naturally then there is an added bonus.

>> No.9823424

>>9823417
most people find body odor repulsive and a turn off, at least in a short term 'i want to get laid' sense, long term, its something most people will deal with, much like boy hair itself in the way that only a fetishist sees it as a deal breaker.

>> No.9823477

>>9823424
attractive people actually smell nice, even when they sweat. because their bodies are healthy.

>> No.9823504

>>9823477
yea... no they dont.
Its why people shower every day regardless of how good the look, no one likes the smell.

>> No.9823508
File: 7 KB, 230x219, 1518371755428.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9823508

>>9823477
>attractive people actually smell nice, even when they sweat.
What is ballsweat? What is gooch? What is ass? What are protein farts?

If you are female disregard this.

>> No.9823513
File: 1.96 MB, 1351x1938, apeWhiteBlack.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9823513

>>9822828

>> No.9823518

>>9823508
you smell nice to the opposite sex not to yourself. what would be the goal of fucking yourself?

>> No.9823524
File: 425 KB, 1317x1652, 1518367705001.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9823524

>>9823513

>> No.9823525

>>9823524
But who made the IQ tests?

>> No.9823526

>>9823525
https://www.google.com/

>> No.9823534

>>9823524
>skin = brain!

>> No.9823541
File: 1.21 MB, 3116x1748, 1518118409968.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9823541

>>9823534
Correlation implies similarity. Sorry that you are too stupid to figure that out.

>> No.9823667

>>9823525
Chinamen, obviously

>> No.9825693
File: 138 KB, 741x448, muh iqq.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9825693

>>9823541
Correlation doesn't imply causation. You are implying that Africans do worse off economically because of their skin color when even the most superficial historical analysis suggests that in fact they did just as well as many Asian civilizations before euroniggers came about and fucked everything up. Pic related.

Back to your containment board: >>>/pol/

>> No.9825700

>>9823477
utter delusion

>> No.9825708

>>9823524
>iq
iq is not science, anon. iq is pseudoscience.

>> No.9825767
File: 40 KB, 645x729, 1519167181950.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9825767

>>9825693
You just shoved words into my mouth. I simply provided an argument to play devil's advocate. You've failed miserably to create a counterargument, because your picture is an attempt to garner pity for civilizations that failed to adapt.
>muh area and culture
They were both shit because they failed to keep up.
Guess what the distinct difference in those civilizations were? Race. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you any further. You are simply too stupid to properly argue without inventing information (based on emotion) to support your argument.

>>9825708
IQ is a means to test one's ability to recognize and understand new problems (mainly attempting to use pattern recognition to achieve this), then solve problems in a timely manner. Sorry that you failed to adapt, and subsequently can't keep up with what is being stated. IQ tests were designed as a tool, not a science. Is that too big for your tiny head?

You should both go to reddit, a site much more suited for pathetic brainlets such as yourselves.

>> No.9826236

>>9825767
Why is America doing better than Europe?
America is 56% white and Europe is 95% white.
It seems the less white you are the greater your country is.

>> No.9826247

>>9822273
this

>> No.9826251

>>9826236
>Why is America doing better than Europe?

It isnt.

>America is 56% white and Europe is 95% white.

Most nonwhites in America are latinos, a mix of southern Europeans and native south americans. Lower IQ than northern Europeans but still significantly higher than black people.

>> No.9826256

>>9823300
>stumps for legs
',:^)

>> No.9826262

>>9825767
>You should both go to reddit, a site much more suited for pathetic brainlets such as yourselves.
I agree with them and my IQ puts me above genius level.
You now have to either claim my IQ means nothing, thus dismissing IQ or agree that I'm right, thus dismissing IQ.

>> No.9826303

>>9822247
what kind of gay ass "women" you know?

>> No.9826307
File: 378 KB, 1357x628, Bodyhair_map_according_to_American_Journal_of_Physical_Anthropology_and_other_sources.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9826307

>>9822828
>Hairiness is associated with being brown.
not really have you met scandinavian Men, basedboy?

>> No.9826309

>>9826307
why writing " s o y" turns into "Based" ??

>> No.9826944

Because it's a shibboleth of non-white men.

>> No.9826962

>>9823513
White people BTFO!

Seriously though, I'm tired of this post-2014 4chan bullshit

>> No.9826976

they don't dislike it.
it's just fashion.