You're being facetious, obviously. There was a time, in 60s & 70s porn, where the "Jungle Bush" was a turn-off. Why? Because it was a subliminal message to male viewers that the female wasn't very hygenic, allowing her pubes growing all over the area. It was kind of the same complaint for females as related to hairy men. Some people were just hairier. The prevailing thing of trimming pubes in porn was to attract more viewers. More viewers, more money.Landing strip is fine, no issues with Laura having a landing strip but if you leave it up to the Bush Masters she would have hair coming out of every orifice.
Somewhere in the early 70s, shaving pubes got started in Playboy and Playgirl. Not trimming it down but totally shaven. There was some minor controversy because the complaint was, for displaying females at least, that it was eerily close to being pedophilic, since only pre-pubescent girls were hairless. Also, the theme of totally shaved pubes blew up when more foreign travellers were emulating the micro-bikini cuts of Rio, Brazil, because of the string and micro-bikini craze. The idea began a fad in American and European countries and thus, the "no pubes" craze began. As a side note, there were some females who shaved, not because of the porn industry's influence or the micro-bikini craze but, simply, because they said that having all of that hair there made them hot (the pubic region is part of where a human body's core heat is registered.)
Imo, if you've never lived in the time frame of the 60s and 70s, you'd think that having pubic hair is an atrocious concept but I would argue that, having a neatly trimmed bush, is more womanly, symbolically. Having landing strips or designs cut like arrows, hearts or diamonds is having fun with their womanhood without saying "I'm trying to look like a virgin child." To each their own though.
