Removing Pubic Hair Methods

[xik...@yahoo.com.tw]

Shaving is the most common removing pubic hair method. However, it is
not the only one.

After you have decided you want to remove your pubic hair, you will
have to examine the different methods for removing pubic hair and
decide which one is the best for you.

The following lines include a brief glance of the existing pubic hair
removal methods:

1. Shaving - razor shaving is the most popular removing pubic hair
method. One should shave his pubic hair area carefully and gently
using a proper razor and shaving cream. Make sure you wash and clean
your pubic hair area before and after the shave.

2. Hair removal creams - those can cause lots of pain and allergic
reactions. However, they are very effective in removing pubic hair. We
suggest you test in on a harmless spot like your back or the inside of
your elbow to check for possible allergic reactions. If your skin gets
red or itchy for a long period of time (more than 3 hours) do use it.
Again, wash you pubic hair area carefully after using this removing
pubic hair method.

3. Waxing - We strongly suggest avoiding using wax for removing pubic
hair. Most of the women can not stand the pain and the outcome is as
good as the other removing pubic hair methods.

4. Electrolysis - A permanent pubic hair removing methods using
electric shocks. It can be done in a hair salon or at home after
purchasing a personal device. This method is very expensive (It may
cost more than a thousand dollars). It also painful in most cases but
this method provides a permanent pubic hair removal.

5. Pulling - We got to know in our research quite a few women who
prefer pull their pubic hair out. It takes time, Its painful but it
involves a satisfaction.

Now you can make the proper decision on the best removing pubic hair
method for you. Good luck.

http://www.dontplayplay.com/html/Bothsexes/20061002/47329.html

[xik...@yahoo.com.tw]

[xik...@yahoo.com.tw]

[Ben Finney]

xik...@yahoo.com.tw writes:

> Shaving is the most common removing pubic hair method. However, it
> is not the only one.

Clearly you haven't done the Python tutorial, otherwise you'd realise
there's no distinction between pubic methods and privy methods.

Also, there's one, and preferably only one, obvious way to do it::

>>> del foo.hair

--
\ "A man's only as old as the woman he feels." -- Groucho Marx |
`\ |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

[John Machin]

On Jan 30, 9:14 am, Ben Finney <bignose+hates-s...@benfinney.id.au>
wrote:

> xiko...@yahoo.com.tw writes:
> > Shaving is the most common removing pubic hair method. However, it
> > is not the only one.
>
> Clearly you haven't done the Python tutorial, otherwise you'd realise
> there's no distinction between pubic methods and privy methods.
>
> Also, there's one, and preferably only one, obvious way to do it::
>
> >>> del foo.hair
>

Brazilians allegedly have some expertise in this area -- the OP could
try comp.lang.lua

[Tobiah]

class genital:

def pubic_hair(self):
pass

def remove(self):
del(self.pubic_hair)

"Removing pubic hair methods"

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch]

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:48:38 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

> class genital:
>
> def pubic_hair(self):
> pass
>
> def remove(self):
> del(self.pubic_hair)

I think `pubic_hair` is an attribute instead of a method.

Oh, and ``del`` is a statement and not a function. So the way you wrote
it with parentheses is a bit misleading.

Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch

[Sion Arrowsmith]

And who's going to want to call genital().remove() anyway?

--
\S -- si...@chiark.greenend.org.uk -- http://www.chaos.org.uk/~sion/
"Frankly I have no feelings towards penguins one way or the other"
-- Arthur C. Clarke
her nu becomeþ se bera eadward ofdun hlæddre heafdes bæce bump bump bump

[Gerardo Herzig]

Sion Arrowsmith wrote:

>Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch <bj_...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>
>>On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:48:38 -0800, Tobiah wrote:
>>
>>
>>>class genital:
>>> def pubic_hair(self):
>>> pass
>>> def remove(self):
>>> del(self.pubic_hair)
>>>
>>>
>>I think `pubic_hair` is an attribute instead of a method.
>>
>>Oh, and ``del`` is a statement and not a function. So the way you wrote
>>it with parentheses is a bit misleading.
>>
>>
>
>And who's going to want to call genital().remove() anyway?
>
>
>

I will use genital().extend(), thats for shure ^^

[Wildemar Wildenburger]

Gerardo Herzig wrote:
> I will use genital().extend(), thats for shure ^^

Well, you never go wrong with apply(genital(), females), do you?

/W

[Steve Holden]

That's enough genitalia [ed]
--
Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/

[Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch]

`apply()` is deprecated. And ``genital(*females)`` looks a bit odd. :-)

Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch

[Asun Friere]

On Jan 31, 3:13 am, Steve Holden <st...@holdenweb.com> wrote:

> Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:
> > Well, you never go wrong with apply(genital(), females), do you?

Never?!

class PowerSocket () :
def __init__ (self, plug=female, active=False) :
self.plug = plug
self.active = active

females = [p for p in powersockets if p.active and p.plug == 'female']

Ouch!! If on the other hand 'females' is populated by instances of
(or merely includes instances of) class 'Human', I suggest you test
for female.consent somewhere in your code!

[George Sakkis]

Well, that use case alone is enough to convince anyone that apply
should stay :-)

George

[MRAB]

The Pythonic approach would be to try the action and catch a
NoConsentException.

[MRAB]

The original had genital(), so that would be genital()(*females). But
what is genital() anyway? A factory?

[Ben Finney]

MRAB <goo...@mrabarnett.plus.com> writes:

You're making the classic Pythonista mistake: you behave as though
EAFP applies everywhere. I assure you, in the above situation, it does
not apply.

--
\ "He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don't let |
`\ that fool you. He really is an idiot." —Groucho Marx |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

[Sergio Correia]

So in this case it is REALLY better to ask for permission rather than
forgiveness?

> --
>
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

[Steven D'Aprano]

(Top-posting corrected.)

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:38:30 -0500, Sergio Correia wrote:

> On Jan 30, 2008 10:30 PM, Ben Finney
> <bignose+h...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>> MRAB <goo...@mrabarnett.plus.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Jan 31, 12:57 am, Asun Friere <afri...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> > > Ouch!! If on the other hand 'females' is populated by instances of
>> > > (or merely includes instances of) class 'Human', I suggest you test
>> > > for female.consent somewhere in your code!
>> > >
>> > The Pythonic approach would be to try the action and catch a
>> > NoConsentException.
>>
>> You're making the classic Pythonista mistake: you behave as though EAFP
>> applies everywhere. I assure you, in the above situation, it does not
>> apply.
>
> So in this case it is REALLY better to ask for permission rather than
> forgiveness?

Oh yes. The NoConsentException has a number of extremely unpleasant side-
effects on both the code that raises it and the code that catches it.

--
Steven

[George Sakkis]

It actually implements several design patterns. Factory is just one of
them; others include the Bridge and the Object Pool patterns. Some
advanced instances of genital() may also implement the Visitor pattern
while others less advanced implement primarily the Observer.

George