It is one thing to look at a naked, hairy man and say, "He is covered in hair so he must be very manly and therefore in accordance with a normal view of the world." It is quite another thing to look at a woman who is covered in hairs and think she is beautiful. Why shouldn't the hairs on a woman's vagina also be on her chest, legs and nipples? When you start to see a vagina as an inverse heart, and the hairs extending from it as the rays of the sun you may realize that nature doesn't really pay attention to what you think is "natural" and "normal". I only ask that you please be open-minded and consider what I have just said.