Why Hairless?
Q. Why do you think hairless women have become a social norm in the west, if not elsewhere as well?
Men think –
Why do I think? Well this is my fantastic speculation... Tweaking our external appearances has been around probably since cave people found sharp rocks. Why did the women choose to apply the sharp bits to their hair (or did the men do it to them) might be a more difficult thing to answer. Perhaps the cavemen liked the appearance of skun rabbit before they put it in the pot... and so they shaved the cavewomen... because shaven-ness made them think of food, and food made them think of sex. Maybe the cavewomen got so sick of rapacious sex crazed cavemen that they shaved their whole bodies to be more slippery and elusive. Maybe the gods of evolution and random biological construction wired women to like hairy brutes, and men to like delicate china-dolls (although they tell me that china dolls evolved after women... a startling archaeological discovery!).
ccccMore recently, advertising and popular culture promotes hairlessness, tidy and conventional for both women, and male athletes. Anyone else notice this? Here in Australia many of the most macho footballers are waxed. Makes me wonder if they shave their other bits The things we have done since finding sharp rocks! Personally I blame those sharp rocks.” ~ Tim, 24, Aus
Vanity and the sense to be in “fashion” ~ Ravi, AUS
Because people are used to it and anything different to normal is frowned upon. Like everything else. ~ Talis, 15, NZ
Social norms are quite easily established, it is most likely because people found it somehow different – men are naturally hairy, so obviously women should not be. The less masculine one is, the more feminine. ~ Edd, 18, ENG
I think it probably just started out as a “different” trend, and now people are so obsessed with beauty and mutilating themselves for (now? I guess it’s always been this way), and people are afraid to let themselves just be natural for the fear of other people’s fears keeping them in check. ~ Nick, 25, Canada
Four reasons; it became a fashion to shave in the olden days, Christianity (I'll explain later), money (this is obvious; shaving products etc... make money), and society has conditioned us to dislike body odour (pheremones).
ccccEveryone knows, even if they've had a shower a few hours ago, they'll start smelling of body odour unless they wear deoderant; this is because the smell is not dirt or bacteria, it is chemically produced pheremones by the body- they are an extra form of communication Christianity tried to ban as well as everything else, this is because the communication is sexual. If we hadn't numbed our sense of smell by under using it, we would be able to sense "a chemistry" (as people say) a lot better between ourselves and the opposite sex. 'Love at first sight' is infact 'love at first smell'. Dogs can smell fear; we used to be able to too.
ccccAs we know it is important to communicate; pheremones can tell your brain the genetic makeup of a person, and their diet. It is very important to know these things when chosing a partner; firslty, to avoid incest, because we are naturally unattracted to the smell of relatives of the oppostie sex. Secondly, if someone has a particularly different genetic make up to you, you are likely to like their smell; as this suggests reproductively, that your children would be a combination of a far greater gene pool, resulting in them being healthier and speed up evolution. Thirdly, the diet of an individual tells us a lot about the health of the person, which will, in turn, insure the health of the offspring. So all these things get picked up on by the brain, which then releases chemicals, which tells the rest of the brain and body "I WANT SOME OF THAT!" So basically society's got it all wrong, I believe we keep skipping from relationship to relationship, because we only get to properly work out people's smells when its too late! ~ Sam, 18, ENG
Society tends to encourage its members to achieve by mechanical means what nature gives to the ‘best’ of them. ~ Matt, 21, ENG
A combination of factors: The increasingly revealing nature of women’s clothing; the traditional association of body hair with manliness and the 21 st century norm that attractive women should not have body hair. ~ Wayne, 21, Hong Kong
As with most western cultural values with roots in the latter part of the 20th century, the drive by marketers on a consumer based society plays a significant role. These have altered the perceptions of a civilisation on what is considered clean, and what is not. ~ Dale, 33, NZ
Peer pressure is one factor that is most obvious at secondary school level. Although there is an historical pathway that leads up to this point, the most pervasive influence on young women is through television advertising and magazines that purport to be aimed at an adult market when a cursory glance at the tone of the magazines in question will tell you that the target market is the pre-teen/early teen female. Added to this, most young women are given their first cue to shave by another female member of the family, be it an aunt, sister, or the mother. This is not to say that there is always any pressure from these female role models, but simply through observing, the young female will copy the action rather than question the need for it. But whether there is a “need” may be the question, but the answer has more to do with the notion (or social construct) of desirability. Interestingly, most editors of the magazines in question are female, when one would expect to find such a phallocentric editorial policy to be steered by a male. That said, advertising heavily influences the content of such magazines, and here you may find a heavy male bias behind the product/product placement/advert, or “advertorial”.
ccccWhile girls in school are starting to succumb to these influences, boys are also very much feeling the pressure to have a “need” to shave: While young women are encouraged to shave (at this stage it would normally be legs) as a means to removal, boys are desperately trying to encourage the “bum-fluff” on their upper lips to grow – often by repeated shaving… This sets the mark in the young adult mind: boys aspire to hairyness while girls aspire to hairlessness, but both initiate shaving in order to achieve different goals: While woman are trying to suggest absence of hair, the male is hoping that his efforts will be noted as the need to remove hair. There is a subtle difference. ~ Sean, 36, ENG
I've being thinking about that question for a long time. I live in an area that is dominated by self-endulging women who wax, pluck, hack, remove all body hair. Its so bad the women look plastic and painted (eyebrows). I kid you not, 90 percent of the women in southern california remove most, if not all their body hair. There was a time I could count at least 20 hairy women (hairy arms) in a weekend while working in a retail store. Now I'd be lucky to see 20 in a year! Also the defination of hairy has changed over the last 10-15 years. Hairy today is mainly referred to light to hardly any hair on a females arm... to whereas 10-15 years ago, hairy was - hairy - covered dark dense and long enough to grab. Those days are gone. It all seem to start with celebrity and high fashion and make-up industry removing body hair. Then came the ads, commericals etc.. It began a cultural movement. Hair removal is the norm for every adolenscent girl. Its sad. ~ Scott, 29, US
Women who don’t remove their body hair say -
Like having blonde hair and red lips, males are attracted (in theory) to women who look young and fertile. Like with smoking, you think it makes you look cool when you're young. ~ Genevieve, 20, NZ.
I actually think it’s a kind of creepy fascination with pre-pubescence, and it really does give me the creeps. ~ Kate, 36, AUS.
The idyll of youth… ~ Laurene, 54, AUS
It started as a fashion as I understand it, it the ‘olden days’ so to speak, and it just seems to have become the done thing. Girls are seen as supposed to be these sterile beings, that are totally in control on the outside and the inside. Not a hair ‘out of place’. People have been growing up taught to find hairless women attractive for a long time now, and that is some difficult prejudice to shift ~ Jo, 18, ENG
I think they are a social norm pretty much everywhere! I think there are many reasons – Mr Gillette wanted to get rich so decided to make razors for women and told them this is what they need to do to be attractive. This was soon shown on every TV show/Magazine and general media outlet and people soon began to think this was the norm, women who do not remove hair are made to think they are unattractive. I think that is the main reason, its just such a social norm and so acceptable and ‘the way things should be’. To be completely honest, my sister told me about this website and until that point I thought me and my 3 friends were the only ones! ~ Pavan, 22, ENG
Hair is portrayed as NOT sexy or attractive. Its like tanning… we all know that it is detrimental but we all also have been taught that it looks good. ~ Christine, 20, NZ
Honestly? I have no idea. The pessimistic feminist in me says that some man probably wanted to make money selling razors to both men and women. ~ Madie, 16, AUS |
|
|
Pressure
Q1. “Do you think women are under to pressure to have hairlessly smooth skin?”
“Eleanor Roosevely got the credit for saying "no-one can make you feel bad without your permission"... which must be frustrating for all the people who said it before her... but for this question I am grateful a woman is most frequently quoted for the statement, because it lends credibility to the flimsy assertion I am about to attempt to construct. (that’s just a disclaimer)
ccccFilm, television, and advertising, as well as a large portion of our schoolmates and work colleagues pressure us into conforming to all kinds of norms. They can apply pressure to influence us... but if we are intelligent enough to perceive it, then I believe it is entirely up to us whether we stay "under" this pressure or not.
cccc Is society constructed by conscious endeavour or by fate? Is it the result of the bell curve? or is it true that as Thoreau suggests we can improve ourselves by conscious endeavour? (actually amusingly, Thoreau said 'men'!?)
cccc Certainly in the area of appearances and submission women have been dominated by men to a large degree... and I am amongst many men who fight the banal details of language and culture to reverse this oppression... but I wonder, why?
cccc To balance this statement I want to highlight the fact that men have been severely dehumanised by the pressure to be aggressive and macho and whatever other components of that list we might add. Men have an important role in child rearing and I believe most men will be seen to crave expressions of care and nurture when separated from the construct of their socially defined role. Wow what a sidetrack.” ~ Tim, 24, Aus
Society has brainwashed women to be hairless. It so bad it has trickled down to elementary girls. I use to say it was a generation thing - women under the age of 30 seemed to be more concerned with being hairless, but over the past few years I would say that age has increased. The sad part is... beside Madson Avenue's proganda to be hairless...the male population is also equally at fault. You dont know how many times I have heard a female tell me.. "really you like a natural woman, ...I thought all guys like girls smooth or trimmed to nothing"!! Yeah, women are afraid of a man seeing a full bush or excess body hair.. It has to change somehow. ~ Scott, 29, US
women who do remove their hair say -
Yes I do think women are under pressure to be hair free, but I feel it is unneccesary pressure and a lot of it is created in the media. ~ Amanda, 18, UK
Most definitely! ~ Kath, 33, AUS
I think some women feel under some pressure to have hairless arms/ legs/ face/ armpits. I think this is because depending on the colour, thickness and location of the hair, hairless skin can look (in my opinion) more feminine and groomed than hairy skin. I suspect that view has partly been formed as a result of the “norm” as seen in advertising, magazines, films, TV etc. I shave under my arms because it allows deodorant to work more effectively. ~ CF, 36
Q2. Why do you think women are under pressure to be hairless?
Males say -
Because it’s normal. If everyone was hairy nobody would expect women to be shaven. ~ Talis, 15, NZ
Women are under increasing pressure to ‘fit in’ with the constant images of ‘perfection’. They are repeatedly shown how they are ‘supposed’ to be, act and look. And, I would assume, ridiculed if they are not the picture of modern feminine perfection. ~ Edd, 18, ENG
Cuz it’s popular and has been allowed to be seen as the norm for so long that kids grow up being trained to think it is the only way, when it definitely isn’t. ~ Nick, 25, Canada
Society, such as it is, adjudicates that smooth skin is feminine (Why else would males want to shave if not to prove that their faces are smooth by action rather than inaction, which would be a sign of sexual immaturity.) ~ Sean, 36, ENG
Because of pressure from our peers, the media and attitudes of western societies. ~ Wayne, 21, Hong Kong
Yes, as above. The perception by many in western culture is that for a woman to be shaven is to be clean, and thus, unshaven is somehow not clean. The degree to which this is perceived changes from location to location and also changes with time, as does any cultural norm (as with any form of fashion). As well as the local media, other influences affect the wearing of body hair, such as climate and clothing generally worn. An example of which I have experienced is women in New Zealand do not tend to be as concerned about the issue of body hair as those in the warmer Australian climates. This may relate to Australian women being wearing more revealing clothing more often than New Zealand women, but may also reflect on the media's portrayal of women in each of these countries as well as a greater sense of confidence held by New Zealand women, than those of their Australian counterparts.
ccccOne cultural observation that I have made by way of discussions with friends in both countries is the wearing of pubic hair. It is nearly an expectation that in Australia women will have their pubic hair completely shaven or waxed, where as in New Zealand it is not such a cultural given. Of course, this finding is just through discussions with friends, and is by no means based on broad research! All the same, I found it something of an interesting cultural difference. ~ Dale, 33, NZ
Its simple its what socities deems the norm. Heaven forbid you go against a shaving norm, because you will be ridiculed. Too many people fear of not being able to fit in. Its why high school girls are hairless. It may not be like everywhere else, but it is in California. What Ive heard its like this everywhere too, but not as extreme. You dont know how many stories I've heard of girls saying they were made fun of or pointed out that they were hairy. Its a vicious cycle, and its not going to change unless the younger generation is able to accept body hair as being a sign of beauty. This negative stigmatism is embed at an early age and carried into adulthood thus keeping a hairless trend alive. ~ Scott, 29, US
women who do remove body hair say –
Because the media presents hairlessness (and slimness) as the epitome of femininity. When naturally women aren't either hairless OR thin! Plus there is HUGE money in hair removal products. They're not effective because if they were, we wouldn't need to continue to purchase their products. It's not in these companies interest financially to help women become hairless. ~ Kath, 33, AUS
Because it is cleaner. Culturally it probably suggests that they have the time to spend on themselves which means that they are not at subsistence level. In turn this indicates greater health and fertility. Lack of hair also suggests youth so we probably do it to appear attractive. ~ Vulnerome, 27, UK
I guess it is what most men like. ~ Emily, 18, ENG
I think it's partly historical, but I also recognize that the media really controls our ideas of beauty, holding women to those standards; i.e. if you don't fit the standard, you're not beautiful, and therefore not worthy of notice. ~ Mandy, 29, USA
Return to the Question Navigation Bar |
Rules & Preferances
Q1. Do you think that most people share the same opinion about hair?
Males say -
Hell no. Cultures and subcultures. Who the hell is most people? Most people on the morning train uptown? Maybe. ~ Tim, 24, Aus
Yes, because there would be more hairy people out there if more held the opinion of hairy being good so obviously a lot of people think otherwise. ~ Talis, 15, NZ
Yes, the majority of people are integrated fully into society, therfore dislike it [hair]. ~ Sam, 18, ENG
Yes. Most people share the same opinion about everything, if an unthought-out and unexplored point of view can be called an opinion, which it can. ~ Matt, 21, ENG
Depends on what you mean by most, I guess ... most people in north america, definitely – and maybe most of the americanized societies. As several jokes tend to point out, Europe tends to be more open to such things. ~ Nick, 25, Canada
I think generally, the mainstream tend to have a fairly fixed opinion on the matter. I wouldn't consider myself among that mainstream, as for myself, I am not fussed either way, and to be honest, when you talk about pubic hair, I prefer my partner to not be shaven. ~ Dale, 33, NZ
No; on the surface there may be a consensus, but through discussion, questions will be raised which will in turn lead to a discussion of a group’s own susceptibility to media influence. It’s probably fair to say that females leaving visible hair on their legs would generally be condemned as unacceptable – cosmetically unacceptable. This attitude is voiced as much by females as it is by males – but both have been educated to react to what is seen as inadequate grooming. ~ Sean, 36, ENG
No. Everyone is all about waxing, shaving and trimming. For some reason they have it in their mind that having body hair is dirty, unclean?? Tell me how is that being dirty unclean?? They can't appreciate the hair as being a natural aesthetic - a beauty mark. With the exception of a couple of people, everyone is against being hairy. Including those having "hardly any hair on there arms". ~ Scott, 29, US
Women who do remove body hair say –
No, I think some people are less worried ABOUT hair removal and some don't need to shave due to being very fair-haired. ~ Amanda, 18, UK
I don't really know. I know how I feel about it, but I don't talk to other women or men about it to know how they feel about it. ~ Kath, 33, AUS
No, otherwise all people and all cultures would treat hair in the same way. ~ Vulnerome, 27, UK
Most people I know; you see your mother/sister doing it, people on tv etc, you grow up thinking it's the norm. ~ Emily, 18, ENG
Q2. Do you think that different 'rules' and opinions apply to different kinds of hair?
males say -
I think ginger hair has a reputation, but personally all hair is hair. ~ Sam, 18, ENG
For the most part, there have been ... but lately the trends seem to be EVERYTHING bald (which is super gross), pubic, underarms, even eyebrows. But in North America underarms seem to have no tolerance, pubic hair has some tolerance, though usually as long as it’s cropped (I prefer a full bush, of course), and eyebrows are a choice – a BAD choice to shave, of course, but yah, heh. ~ Nick, 25, Canada
I think that hair can be divided and subdivided into many categories and it is clear that different rules apply to each. The rules vary largely depending on the level of visibility of the hair in question. No office in the world can reasonably fire a person for having hair under their arms, but it can bring disciplinary action against those with particularly unruly head hair. Ambient hair such as on the forearms, legs, and female facial hair is largely inconspicuous, and for it to gain a level of visibility such that a rule or overwhelming pressure forces action to be taken is a scenario which applies to a bare minimum of girls. ~ Matt, 21, ENG
Yes I think so. Speaking from personal experience, I think people tend to be less critical of body hair that blends in with one’s skin colour, like blond hair on blond girls. This is not the case for other combinations like black hair on yellow skin, which does stand out a lot more. ~ Wayne, 21, Hong Kong
Yes, I think it is generally believed that it is not as essential for a person with lighter coloured and textured hair to shave. ~ Dale, 33, NZ
There are different rules for hair on the body and hair on the head or face. Because it is so difficult to illustrate feminine hair “problems” in the genital region, or “bikini line” as some would have it (but they don’t want you to stop there…), a general, friendly, but insistent line of hygiene issues is introduced in place of visual example. Even the female armpit – which is now fair game for visual advertising – is only shown shaved – there is never a before or after picture. Similarly, women who shave their legs and men who shave their faces in TV adverts are always shown shaving what appears to the trained eye to be pre-shaven skin. ~ Sean, 36, ENG
Yes, but [the 'rules' are] progressively changing through social engineering. Hair is becoming less acceptable, even for men. ~ Anonymous, 48
“Probably. If someone has squiggly dark pubic hair all over it's probably more visually confronting than fine blonde hair... but I've certainly never seen any such fine blonde hair in an armpit. (I think I have an armpit fixation) Maybe armpits are just pubic and that’s life. If we're going to start talking about public nudity and clothes in general this is a whole new kettle of worms. Of course the difference between an armpit and a crotch is that a crotch has bits in it. Is that the sum of the difference? My Scottish friend was heard to say about wearing undies under a kilt "why would ye do that? Its a great opportunity ta get yer bits oot!"
ccccMaybe shaving armpits is a way of 'dressing' what is otherwise a pubic region that if we are avoiding being starkly sexual and nude 'shouldn't' be exposed. That would make sense of the increasing trend of male athletes and celebrities shaving their pits: Not because they are sporty, but because they are in the public eye, and under the close scrutiny of the telephoto lense and the sniping sports columnist. Another element supporting this idea is what I am told about Japanese film, after observing the shaven-ness of animated nudes. Apparently they can have as many bits on TV as they like without changing the rating, but pubic hair is considered totally unacceptable. Bits are okay, just not hairy bits.
cccc Back to general body hair... I do find women with moustaches a little hard to look at. Like Austin powers and the mole, I find my eyes drawn to the facial hair... and it becomes a fixation. I find myself trying to focus on the more attractive aspects of this woman, which immediately makes me realise that I am already withdrawing from her and feeling grossed out, at least on a sexual and aesthetic level.” ~ Tim, 24, Aus
I don't believe there should be rules or opinions to different kinds of hair, though I feel there is. More times than not, when I see an unshaven natural woman her hair is light or blonde that is isn't visibly noticeable unless you are looking directly at the hair. Rarely do I see a thick-dark hair legged or armed woman. I always wonder what if those women who are light-haired, were thick and dark would they wear their hair proud as if they were light?? This is where the fine-line comes into play. There is a difference between being "hairy" and "having body hair", though most people tend to think they are the same when in fact they are not. everyone opinion of whats considered hairy varies. The only way to desrcibe this is thru visuals, but hopefully you understand what I mean. ~ Scott, 29, US
Women who do remove body hair say –
I do think different types of hair have different rules. Hair that grows in sweaty places, originally was there to catch the smell and lure in our cave men husbands. Head hair is more to attract using beauty, than smell. ~ Amanda, 18, UK
I think it's socially acceptable now for women to have armpit hair (thanks to the likes of Julia Roberts flashing theirs) but should a woman have hair on her face - it's just seen as being freakish. I've even seen women's magazines "out" famous people for having facial hair or body hair! ~ Kath, 33, AUS
Of course. Not sure how to explain, but pubic hair is very different to the downy hair on an arm. A beard is very different to an eyebrow. ~ Vulnerome, 27, UK
Yes, dark facial hair is less generally “acceptable” than (for example) pale arm hair. ~ CF, 36
Q. Do you think there are hair stereotypes that apply to men?
Yes and they are changing. 'Metro-sexualism' is becoming much more prevalent in city areas and country football clubs. An older man with shaved armpits might be gay, but a younger man might play football. An older man who gets waxed might be gay, a Latin dancer, or a cyclist (or all three), a younger man could be anyone. But maybe just plays footy. ~ Tim, 24, Aus
Ish – Long hair, usually the “hippy” type, as it were, or at least quite liberal, relaxed people. Shaved heads are pretty townie / army so trying to look hard. And shaving anything but your face is just a bit weird. ~ Edd, 18, ENG
Skinheads are idiots. That’s one. I suppose the prodigious beards throughout history would be another. The idea of hairy chests and ‘monkey men’. I suppose that most male stereotypes extend to lend beneficial aspects to all sides. Hairy chests, beards, moustaches, clean-shaven faces – they all have positive and negative ideas attached to them. ~ Matt, 21, ENG
Yes. The more body hair males have, the greater the sense of masculinity. ~ Wayne, 21, Hong Kong
Male stereotypes generally concentrate on head hair and facial hair. The one stereotype that springs to mind is that baldness equals sexual virility… which is most odd given what we have been taught to accept. ~ Sean, 36, ENG
Some – I have long hair, and long-haired guys tend to be seen as weirdo's by the common-folk, but hot by the folk they wish to attract of course. There’s: balding men look old, bald men can be thought of as kkk or something (I don’t really associate that, though), men sometimes associate hairy chests with toughness ... etc... ~ Nick, 25, Canada
They do today. They never did before. The rules that apply to women are beginning to apply to men. Magazines, commercials etc.. hair removal for men is becoming a norm. I myself have very hairy legs - more than the average male. So let me say I can relate to these women who were ridiculed as a kid growing up. I basically had full grown hairy legs from the age of 12. Even being a boy, I still was pointed at etc. But to this day Ive never shaved nor trimmed them! Many times I've been told to trimmed and even shave them - I've been told I don't have hair, I have fur .... while prepping my knee/leg for surgey the nurse chirp in saying she was going to give me a "cut and shave"...and one of my girlfriends would never touch my legs - saying hair was only good for the head - but I never fell to the dark side! LOL.. Its what makes me unique, it makes me, me. I feel that is much more genuine and pleasing than conforming and fitting in because everyone else looks smooth. ~ Scott, 29, US |
|
|
History
Q. What do you know about the history of shaving?
women who don't remove their body hair say -
I know that in the USA it was something that changed fairly abruptly in the early 1900s. My guess is that it had to do with the 1920s “flappers” and the idea of the “liberated” woman. Prior to this time shaving was a sign of being “in the trade” (a prostitute). Some how protesting grandmothers were out voted and hairless legs went from being disgraceful to being part of the ideal woman. Since then, there has been little questioning of the status quo. ~ Ellyn, USA
I’m reading a women’s history book at the moment and it seems women historically have had to be either whores or virtuous paragons (and asexual). Being a vibrantly, happily, healthily, sexily, hairily, beautiful and lively woman is not easy for societies that have historically owned them as chattels or feared them as witches or tried to make them subservient in other ways. ~ Ruth, 42, AUS.
Nothing but my own. ~ Laurene, 54, AUS
Just that it started as a fashion. An alternative. ~ Jo, 18, ENG
Bits and bats, as far as I’m aware women’s shaving does come from the owner of Gillette deciding he could make some money. ~ Pavan, 22, ENG
Men say -
Other than the fact that the Buddhists (Males) have been doing it for ever as a sign of modesty, not really. ~ Dale, 33, NZ
Nope. I have a vauge recollection of de-hairing being part of a beauty or cleansing ritual of some nomadic tribes, even if it was just a one-off depilation on a wedding night because of the scarcity of water. I'm sure if one civilisation did, so did others. Nothing is new under the sun. What is perhaps different now is that western culture is so pervasive it seems adverse to allowing the haired state. ~ Anonymous, 48
Yes - Dam Gillette..if we could only go back into time and change history.. lol. ~ Scott, 29, US
In this country, pubic shaving became a matter of need around the 17th century (I think). This shaving was predominantly of the nether regions, but obviously spread to the removal of arm-pit hair (which was a more cosmetic decision... but more of that in a little while...
ccccYou should check out the history of merkins, or pubic wigs. Very interesting. (See Celebrate Hair: External Links)
ccccSo this type of hair removal was because of lice and general infestation. But a lot of people were influenced by the public entertainment at the time. Obviously there was no TV, no weekly fashion magazines and very little in the way of advertising – but there were painters.
ccccThe National Portrait Gallery in London has some fine examples of female nudes. Straight away it becomes obvious that nobody painted pubic hair. In the Victorian era pubic hair on women was considered vulgar, and so was left out of the paintings. There is a good basis for a discussion on whether this had an influence on Victorian perversion: Do men like shaved women because it makes sexual acts ambiguous because of the pre-pubescent presentation of women?
ccccDunno.
ccccBut I have never discovered how many female nudes shaved for their portrait, and how many had their hair "air-brushed" out by the painter. Arm-pit hair was just considered ugly.
ccccSo what difference does this make to anything? Well, there were many boys and men whose only concept of the complete female form was taken from portraiture. Particularly true of the Victorians who felt duty-bound to protect people from sexual/sexually stimulating imagery. The only problem is that by shielding so much they managed to evoke behaviours in men which would be seen as perversions. Besides, pubic hair masks intimate areas. I think the Victorians were quite plainly nuts.
ccccGeorge Bernard Shaw, the playwright (Arms And The Man et al...) had never seen an actual "naked" woman until he married. The problem with this situation was that all of his knowledge of the female form was garnered from portraiture. It is said that the first time he saw his lover naked he was severely traumatized to see that her pudenda was covered in hair. The effect on him was so severe he never had sex again. ~ Sean, 36, ENG
Return to the Question Navigation Bar |
|
