I came across this article last week: prepare yourself. Initially, I wasn't sure whether it was being serious or just a joke. Turns out, it's very serious. There are so many things that are wrong with this product I don't really know where to begin. Firstly, it confirms my belief that we are all, more or less, obsessed with the female naked body and how to make it more desirable to ourselves and others.
This is my beef with the hairy tights - they are telling us that having body hair is "ugly" and that a woman with hairy legs is "unnatural." This is wholly untrue as human beings are covered in body hair making it, in fact, very natural. The craze for smooth, shaven or waxed limbs and body parts is a recent phenomenon thanks to an infamous advert in Harpers Bazaar in 1915 Fast forward to today: we have J-Lo strutting her stuff for Venus razor blades, an image of a woman's smooth legs going viral as fellow women gasp at their "smoothness" in the latest Veet advert. The anti-body hair surge has exploded in the last decade with the American hair removal industry being valued at around $2.1bn in 2011 with the UK's hair removal industry estimated at a similar value.
It's hard to imagine that a pair of stockings can cause such a reaction. Why should women have to dress a certain way so that they don't have to be made to feel vulnerable whilst they are out in public? It only fuels the idea that: "women have to look a certain way to be considered attractive" and that only "sexy" women get raped or sexually harassed. Wrong: rape and sexual attacks are not about desire and can happen to anyone - male or female. It is about control and power. The product's USP declares itself as a 'practical fashion item' - rubbish. If you want hairy legs, don't shave them. Hashtag: common sense. And the phrase: 'anti-pervert' is as though it were some form of antibacterial cleaning product. It not only distorts women's own ideas of what is natural, but it patronises male behaviour. Obviously, not all men are leering perverts in the same way that not all women are innocent, but the way that each sex views each other has definitely become distorted.
Not only are we obsessed with how our body looks, we seem to be more interested in what everyone else thinks of our bodies. Another thing I've never really been convinced by is the infamous bikini wax. The third article discusses the health implications that occur as a result of removing hair from your nether regions. The removal of pubic hair has been around for centuries and is not entirely Western; there is evidence for it in ancient India, Greece and Egypt. I've personally never understood why 'shaven' is often considered to be 'natural' - did we miss a step in Darwin's theory of evolution? - and why 'shaven' nether regions have become sexually desirable and a hot topic for discussion. I'm not saying grow an Amazon bush down under, it's your body and your choices, but this is just a point to consider. To have pubic hair is a sign of sexual maturation - it's natural, but thanks to the porn industry and advertisements, to have hair down under is now considered to be 'unnatural.' The sexual desire of a hairless va-jay-jay can also be interpreted as a perversion; who else has no hair down under? Pre-pubescent females which is a serious sign that things need to be addressed.
So why do we feel the need to dehair ourselves? Is it to be appear more attractive to our partner? Be more sexually desirable? Or is it just a vanity issue that has been associated with ideas of 'femininity?'
This is my beef with the hairy tights - they are telling us that having body hair is "ugly" and that a woman with hairy legs is "unnatural." This is wholly untrue as human beings are covered in body hair making it, in fact, very natural. The craze for smooth, shaven or waxed limbs and body parts is a recent phenomenon thanks to an infamous advert in Harpers Bazaar in 1915 Fast forward to today: we have J-Lo strutting her stuff for Venus razor blades, an image of a woman's smooth legs going viral as fellow women gasp at their "smoothness" in the latest Veet advert. The anti-body hair surge has exploded in the last decade with the American hair removal industry being valued at around $2.1bn in 2011 with the UK's hair removal industry estimated at a similar value.
It's hard to imagine that a pair of stockings can cause such a reaction. Why should women have to dress a certain way so that they don't have to be made to feel vulnerable whilst they are out in public? It only fuels the idea that: "women have to look a certain way to be considered attractive" and that only "sexy" women get raped or sexually harassed. Wrong: rape and sexual attacks are not about desire and can happen to anyone - male or female. It is about control and power. The product's USP declares itself as a 'practical fashion item' - rubbish. If you want hairy legs, don't shave them. Hashtag: common sense. And the phrase: 'anti-pervert' is as though it were some form of antibacterial cleaning product. It not only distorts women's own ideas of what is natural, but it patronises male behaviour. Obviously, not all men are leering perverts in the same way that not all women are innocent, but the way that each sex views each other has definitely become distorted.
Not only are we obsessed with how our body looks, we seem to be more interested in what everyone else thinks of our bodies. Another thing I've never really been convinced by is the infamous bikini wax. The third article discusses the health implications that occur as a result of removing hair from your nether regions. The removal of pubic hair has been around for centuries and is not entirely Western; there is evidence for it in ancient India, Greece and Egypt. I've personally never understood why 'shaven' is often considered to be 'natural' - did we miss a step in Darwin's theory of evolution? - and why 'shaven' nether regions have become sexually desirable and a hot topic for discussion. I'm not saying grow an Amazon bush down under, it's your body and your choices, but this is just a point to consider. To have pubic hair is a sign of sexual maturation - it's natural, but thanks to the porn industry and advertisements, to have hair down under is now considered to be 'unnatural.' The sexual desire of a hairless va-jay-jay can also be interpreted as a perversion; who else has no hair down under? Pre-pubescent females which is a serious sign that things need to be addressed.
So why do we feel the need to dehair ourselves? Is it to be appear more attractive to our partner? Be more sexually desirable? Or is it just a vanity issue that has been associated with ideas of 'femininity?'
2 comments:
Quite a hair raising post you got there. Okay, my say on it is very simple. Being a silky haired full sardar I know not only the importance of hair but also its natural beauty and power. I have known female counterparts who have hair on their arms and legs, so what! Nothing wrong with that chief. Okay so both male and female shave (my thoughts on that another day)however there is more value in keeping the balance. In reference to porn stars, well fake body parts and a body so shiny that it could put turtlewax out of business, never find that attractive. Nice. MJAR
If you want to get a snapshot of how mean & cruel people can be about a girl child with heavy eye brows and hirsute upper lip, look no further than the flood of tweets about #ChildGenius girl shrinidhi who won Childgenius 2013 this week.
@Singh_Mo
Post a Comment