On some girls, you can see these little holes all over their legs, I guess where the hairs would come out. It's rather visible. But on other girls they don't have this at all. It's all smooth and even-looking.
I'm not complaining, I'm just wondering why. Are they just naturally like that, or do girls without them do some special treatment to their legs?
Most Helpful Girl
My legs have always been that way, and it's even more noticeable when I'm cold because I have very fair skin, and sensitive skin at that. Even if I tanned [which for me always means severely burning first, prior to any real change in skin color], I don't think it would change the texture at all, the pores would still be visible, even if the color evens out more. The hair on my legs also tends to grow back thick, not like a lot of it, but the individual hairs are thicker than what I see on a lot of other girls when theirs grows out a little. So I guess hair follicle size would have to be wider to accommodate thicker hairs like that too, and that could contribute to how noticeable the pores will be. It isn't as bad in the last year or two as it used to be, but it still kind of irritates me because I notice it, even if no one else does. I've always been kind of jealous of girls whose legs look completely uniform in color and texture like that. I know it's not just because I'm pale, I know plenty of super white girls who have those smooth perfectly textured legs. I do wonder though if my skin sensitivity has anything to do with it, because my pores are like that on my arms, more-so when I haven't acquired any color yet due to my local climate, and also in my pubic area, which I only notice where I shave, and the entire area is extremely sensitive, easily irritated. That s.hit is all obviously determined by genetics, but it's like... why? Hahah.2