Guest StuCotts Posted July 9, 2009 Posted July 9, 2009 Today optional. Tomorrow mandatory? http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/09/fashion/...amp;ref=fashion Quote
AdamSmith Posted July 9, 2009 Posted July 9, 2009 Today optional. Tomorrow mandatory?http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/09/fashion/...amp;ref=fashion 'Twould be a great pity, in my estimate. I love the smooth twink look as much as anyone, but shaved pubes and pits turn me right off. Quote
Members MsGuy Posted July 10, 2009 Members Posted July 10, 2009 On the other hand, a furry back just doesn't do it for me. Different strokes and all that. Quote
Guest StuCotts Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 'Twould be a great pity, in my estimate. I love the smooth twink look as much as anyone, but shaved pubes and pits turn me right off. So it would. But a trend is a trend is a trend, and I see it as inexorable. My own tastes lean toward natural body hair, within limits. Thickets of what looks like combed-out Brillo pads leave me cold. Quote
AdamSmith Posted July 10, 2009 Posted July 10, 2009 a trend is a trend is a trend Regrettably. One can nonetheless register one's distaste. My own tastes lean toward natural body hair, within limits. Indeed! A particular treat is when a favorite twink shows up slightly less groomed than usual. Thickets of what looks like combed-out Brillo pads leave me cold. As the grave. Quote
Members RA1 Posted July 11, 2009 Members Posted July 11, 2009 So far all the posters on this thread seem to be of like mind. So, please add my ditto to the list. Best regards, RA1 Quote
Members Lucky Posted July 13, 2009 Members Posted July 13, 2009 It is a trend, according to the SF Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../LV2V18I8S6.DTL Quote
