They call it a birdy bath -when you don't have a full bath or shower but wash the hotspots, as it were.
Or you have a student shower, when baby wipes or a facecloth are used for those areas that need extra attention.
But because we live in a society obsessed with artificial cleanliness, if you admit that you don't shower at least once a day you risk being shunned.
This week it was revealed that four out of five women admit they don't shower every day, and a third say they can go for three days without washing their body.
Two thirds can't be bothered removing make-up before they go to bed, and one in eight own up to not brushing their teeth before they sleep, according to the survey by skincare range Flint + Flint.
Ironically, all this showering and scrubbing is not as healthy as the companies who manufacture shower gels and soaps would have you believe.
Dr Joshua Zeichner, Professor of Dermatology at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City, says that what we perceive as body odour is really "more of a cultural phenomenon".
Another dermatologist, Dr Ranella Hirsch, says we over-bathe because of "societal norms".
Dermatologists agree that showering too often can dry out and irritate skin, washing away the good bacteria that naturally exist. So we're actually sacrificing our health on the altar of manufactured hygiene.
Manscaping, hair removal and some waxing also makes your skin a breeding ground for infection as the tiny cuts a razor makes across your skin open you up to outside pathogens.
Despite the propaganda from salons and the beauty industry, hair is there for a reason.
Paranoid about losing face for not over-washing and over-grooming? Don't worry. You can buy your peace of mind. Whether it's a shower gel, strip wax or soap, the beauty industry is preying on your fear of not fitting in.
The solution to social acceptance is to buy their product, even if it might be damaging your health.
Clearly, if you live in a hot climate and you're very active, you need to shower more often than if you live in Ireland and have a sedentary lifestyle.
But shouldn't washing be about stopping cross-infection as opposed to for grooming reasons?
Adopt that attitude and you'll actually be healthier, richer and you won't have to work up the courage to step out from the shower into the freezing bathroom every single morning.
It was dubbed the most feminist Oscars yet, but it wasn't a wholesale slam dunk for women.
Of course there were glorious moments last Sunday night. Patricia Arquette's speech on equal pay and Meryl Streep's fist-pumping knocked it out of the park. But I was disappointed to hear that backstage Arquette said: "It's time for all the women in America and all the men who love women and all the gay people and all the people of colour that we've fought for to fight for us now."
Sounds to me like she thinks gay people and black people now have equality. Clearly they don't. All women, black, white, gay or straight, need the gender pay gap closed. Not just the white ones.
There was nothing that was outright sexist - remember Sofia Vergara on the rotating pedestal last year?
The fact that feminists like Julianne Moore and Arquette bagged gongs is a joy. But there wasn't exactly a surfeit of women in the main categories.
There was the #askhermore campaign, which encouraged reporters to ask the female A-Listers more than just what they were wearing. Lena Dunham tweeted "ask about the causes they support rather than their supporting garments", which was refreshing. But I guess women need to recognise that they too collude with this red carpet preening and posing.
Some women wore dresses that were more body stocking. I think it's fair enough to deduce that in those cases it really was all about what they were wearing.
For its part, E! got rid of the mani cam - the teeny camera that focuses on your nails and jewels. It was so utterly absurd we'll kind of miss it (there - I've said it).
Oscars 2015, the most feminist yet? For sure. But there's still room for improvement from the Academy. And some of the women themselves.
We're still about a fortnight away from the official launch of Lucinda Creighton's new party. Some might say a launch in around, well, never, would be too soon. But hopefully we'll hear some policies this time around. The last launch she held - the one for a party with no name - had hardly any members and no policies. It wasn't exactly inspiring.
Maybe Creighton's team are lining themselves up to be Fine Gael reserves? Reboot Ireland? It's hard to see how when they're this slow to get the party off the ground.
The taxpayer could be forgiven for thinking that the reason Fine Gael TD Michelle Mulherin paid a further €1,295 for calls to Kenya from Leinster House is because she believed she should have and that she owed the money to the taxpayer. She had already repaid €2,000 even though she claimed the calls were all in relation to work. Still, it strikes me as bizarre that anyone would pay for calls that weren't personal. Hmmm. Also, is using Skype technologically beyond TDs? Or is it that they couldn't care less about cost when the taxpayer picks up the bill?