My dating years were from 1988 to 2003, so being with one with a hardwood floor was rare...maybe 2 out of 25+ different women. Back in junior and high school, the thought to many of my fellow male friends who hadn't gotten laid yet or were with only one girl up to that point was that if a girl's got big boobs, she's got a big bush. I supposed that was a guess of proportionate nature, which in school, a guess is virtually gospel. But, what I found over the years during that time and later years was that the direct opposite appeared to be true. If I was with a girl with an A or B cup, she had quite the denseness down below. Quite a bit of those particular "specimens" contained multiple-haired-curls where a small group of pubes coleasce together and become one thick pube-curl in the midst of all the regular pubes. I must note, however, the overall parameters of their pubic region was the same as their larger breasted and thinner pubes female counterparts. Neither the large or smaller breasted females had "bush on the top thigh". Maybe a few stray pubes - which is standard to all females. I'm guessing it's a hormone level thing. Estrogen contributes to breast growth while testosterone contributes to hair growth. When testosterone is a comparatively greater in a female, it may inhibit breast growth to a small degree, thereby contributing to the thick-curls bush down below. When testosterone is comparatively lesser in a female, she'll have larger breasts and average bush. What do you guys think? Share your possible findings on this if you can recall them.
Tiny tits and a rainforest of pubes ........ well you described me perfectly. :dizzy2: What an amazing bit of research. Gotta be a Nobel Prize nomination at least!
Hold off on the call to the Nobel Committee. I have an excess of testosterone and andogens, and that condition is what made most of my body hair fall out, and the hair on my head get thin. My arms and legs are completely hairless, and I need only shave my knees about once every two months. My eyebrows are stubs. I grow hair under my arms and on my mons, and even between my butt cheeks, but the hair is fine, soft, and sparse. Meanwhile, my tits remain as gigantic as ever.
While thoughts about such patterns occurred to me years ago, experiences shows that there really aren't any general observations one can make. There is so much variation which has nothing to do with body size or size of boobs. Most women are just unique. Pubic hair density, spread over the pubic triangle, length varies with each individual. From memories of women before shaving became routine, I saw women who had small boobs with very sparse growth. One casual lover who was completely unshorn, had very sparse curly medium blonde hair, was thin and petite, had small boobs but what I remember above all was how wiry and harsh her pubic hair felt. It was irritating to the touch and had we kept up our relationship, I would have asked her to shower with me and allow me to shave her. Equally, I have known women who were larger, with profuse blonde hair spread widely and growing trails down thighs, a happy trail to the navel and thick long hair which was soft but its density was off-putting for me. I just don't think there are stereotypes and thank goodness for that. Pubic hair growth is as different as vulva appearance but any attempt to link pubes growth patterns with body types is so easily displaced by reality. Genes and hormones (related to age too) vary but there is only a limited connection between types e.g. latin dark haired women with profuse growth but then I have seen Nordic types with equally profuse hair.
Have sex and ignore the pubic hair growth pattern and its relation to body type? This might be more interested than some sex.
Sex usually isn't boring but 'some' can be. Pubic hair growth patterns I can easily being a prelude to interesting sex.