Shaving is too expensive
Modern cartridge razors and other “convenience” products like coffee pods, meal kits, and electronic bike shifters are criticized as expensive, wasteful, and often worse than simpler alternatives, yet many people still choose them for ease of use, safety, and time savings. Commenters contrast cheap, durable options such as double-edge safety razors and electric shavers with proprietary, high-margin systems, highlighting how retail incentives, social norms (e.g., needing to be clean-shaven for work), and varying skin and hair types shape what actually works in practice. The broader theme is a tension between cost, sustainability, and convenience in everyday consumer goods.
Double-edge vs. cartridge razors
- Many find modern multi-blade cartridges easier, faster, and more comfortable, with fewer cuts and less skill required.
- Others strongly prefer double-edge (DE) “safety” razors for lower cost, less waste, better control, and often a closer shave once mastered.
- Some report never getting comfortable with DE (persistent nicks/razor burn) despite trying good soaps, brushes, and multiple blades.
- A middle-ground desire appears repeatedly: DE blades in modern-style, pivoting or otherwise “forgiving” heads (e.g., Leaf, Henson, OneBlade, Proof, Bevel travel DEs).
Safety, irritation, and technique
- Disagreement over which is “safer”: cartridges protect against side-slips; DE users say once technique and grain-mapping are learned, cuts are rare.
- Razor aggressiveness (razor design, blade choice, angle, number of passes) matters a lot, especially for sensitive skin or conditions like pseudofolliculitis barbae.
- Some argue “skin gets used to it”; others say even weeks or months with DE never got less bloody.
Cost, availability, and waste
- Long‑term DE users report extremely low ongoing costs (bulk packs lasting many years).
- Some keep cartridges for months or years, far beyond “3–5 shaves,” by good cleaning or tricks (denim stropping, oil storage), so they see cartridge costs as modest.
- Environmental arguments: steel blades are easily recycled; plastic cartridges and pods are seen as wasteful.
Electric and other alternatives
- Several settled on electric razors (especially higher-end models) as the best comfort/convenience compromise; not as close, but minimal irritation and low yearly cost.
- Straight razors and shavettes give very close shaves but are maintenance- and skill-heavy.
- Depilatory creams (e.g., Nair) exist, mainly used on body hair, with caveats about cost and convenience.
Travel, regulation, and access
- DE blades generally can’t be carried on planes; experiences differ on how easy it is to buy blades locally after landing.
- Some report DE blades widely available at pharmacies; others say they never see them.
Broader consumer-product and social themes
- Many agree razors exemplify a wider pattern: products shifting toward higher-margin, more “convenient” options (pods, subscriptions, smart TVs, HelloFresh) that often cost more and generate more waste.
- Debate over whether this is simply consumer preference for convenience or a structural market failure driven by margins and shelf-space economics.
- Shaving frequency and necessity are contested, tied to job requirements, respirator seals, culture, and appearance norms.