Motion: THB that women should be allowed to be more natural-looking
Role: Minister (govt.)
Date: Aug 1st, 2013
I have a very clear-cut vision of what kind of ”vegetation” or bodily hair would make the female of the species nice-looking, beautiful or acceptable (without regard to mental faculties or social considerations). In the following speech, I’m going to sum it up so that you get the drift. Namely, I’m going to go through the thicket of of pubic, leg and armpit hair. They all fashion what’s it like to be a woman — in ads, jokes and movies around the world. So, without further ado, let’s plunge deeper into Hair, that thing that caused a revolution in the period from the Sixties to the Seventies.
First off, armpit hair. The coming Movember movement is going to champion armpit hair, but I am no fan. Armpit hair is awful. The look of it is bad on both men and women. It should go, and for this simple reason. It reminds men of 70s and 80s Iron Curtain (it is not known what was going on behind the curtain) athletes, who used heavy doping and testosterone injections (especially on women) to achieve better scores in muscle-reliant genres such as shot put, javelin and discus-throwing. All of those Eastern bloc women left their armpit hair unshaven, possibly to intimidate their rivals. Their ghosts keep intimi-dating young boys even today. Armpit hair is a reminder of a false body image, somewhere halfway between masculinity and feminity, on the way to a sex-change operation.
Secondly, leg hair could be harmful, but actually it is usually not. Namely, that type of hair is often light in two senses of the word — light in colour and light in thickness. One barely notices leg hair on people, unless that hair gets wet or is trapped inside a pantyhose. Leg hair is a touch or a nod to the wildness in our nature, and therefore it is provisional to either leave it or remove it. I would not ditch a girl with leg hair, if she was otherwise as fit as a fiddle and as sharp as a knife. I’d feel like a dupe thereafter, otherwise.
Finally, there is the question of pubic hair…. the tricky one. Actually, it’s not tricky at all. A big bush is today frowned upon, while a clean shaven p**sy is the norm in pornography and increasingly between the sheets at home all over the country and the globe. I do not understand Why. A clean shaven **ssy reminds us of children, as that kind of vagina is the way girl children are ”equipped”. The average person is absolutely horrified about paedophiles and would not tolerate one in the neighbourhood; yet, these same people want the ”pedo experience” in their own bedroom. A grown-up woman, an adult lady, on the other hand, should have something more legal-looking, and that thing is — a bush (maybe trimmed). Keep it real down under. Have a neatly trimmed ”runway” or whatever it’s called. That is cool. But even a more unkempt ”airport” would not disgust or offend me, even one of a 3rd-world style.
My recipe for a good pelage is thus: no hair (pits) <> some hair (legs) <> all hair (pubes). I don’t see why women should be subjected to nihilism and not have their degree of liberty when it comes to shaving off their torsoes. After all, they have inherited half of their genes from their hirsute Father….
Puheen kesto: 5 min 39 sek
Arvio: * * *. Puheen aihe on vähän rasittava, mutta siihen nähden, että edellä on mennyt jo yksi, asiaa eri kantilta katsova pääministeri-puhuja, tämä toinen voi palauttaa keskustelun raikkaasti takaisin perusteisiin ja maan pinnalle. Osittainhan kyse on makuasiasta, vaan senkin voi perustella (hyvin tai huonosti).