I've been thinking lately about how I dislike such hair in or around a woman's asshole and vagina. I like a bit above the vagina but not below. It made me wonder about what Bi guys must think. So if I were to assume that because bi guys are attracted to men, that therefore they're not turned off by body hair, and that this would mean that (regardless of their preference of it on women), they're not turned off by hairy legs on a woman?! So is it like hearing your favourite melody played on a different instrument, where you think "I wasn't expecting that but I like it that way too!" Or is it it a case of "I'm okay with hairy legs and assholes but only in the context of men, and for women I'm in a different frame of mind when sexual"? Please ease off on giving too much "personal preference" advice.
I have a problem with really hairy guys - just grosses me out and when having sex with one, eh, fuck, ew, I try to limit body contact with his 'fur coat' and pubic hair so thick that I need a guide to find his dick. I have never had a problem with women who don't shave and I grew up in that time where a woman with a nice bush was considered to be damned sexy but even then, there is such a thing as too much pubic hair - and I have never, ever been sexual with a woman who was suffering from hirsuitism. Hairy pits? Fine. Hairy arms and legs? Fine. Not shaving the pubes? Fine. Excessive body hair? I don't find it sexy or attractive at all.
I like my men to have shaved balls and my women to have a hair-free bung hole. I regularly helped shave the stray hairs around my first wife's bunghole once she became the "anal slut" she evolved into. I enjoy sucking on a clean-shaven pair of balls as much as I enjoy rimming a hair free bunghole on a woman.