A Sad State of Affairs
Does anyone else find it creepy that the entries on this website containing the word "rape" attract lots of porn spam? Why do we associate violence with sexuality?
Simply put, the modern definition of masculinity requires men to be dominant, seeing themselves as omnipotent masters of their universe. Of course they are not. They are merely human beings, nothing to be ashamed of unless your culture says there's something wrong with vulnerability--and ours does.
This state of affairs, which arose (or at least accelerated) under capitalism, discourages men from exhibiting weakness. In order to conduct the charade that men are naturally aggressive, competitive and independent, we've come up with the idealized child-woman, someone whose lesser power and greater vulnerability permits the fantasy of the masterful male. The only problem with this scenario--well actually there's LOTS of problems with it--but one big one lies in the fact that we women aren't actually weak and childlike. So lots of cultural resources go into keeping this myth alive.
For example, our body hair signals maturation, and so we are expected to remove it. Lest anyone think we are growing up, women reflexively shave our armpits as soon as they begin to sprout. Officially we all claim this daily and potentially dangerous routine must be done because body hair is "gross," but there's nothing naturally offensive about it. We've concocted this assertion and circulate it so widely that we rarely question why that would be the case or why we don't find male underarm hair offensive and require its removal.
In order to have a sense of self-definition, we females often claim that we personally decide to do things like shave, as if this is some unique aspect of our essential selves divorced from cultural imperatives. But if you are a woman who claims to "choose" to shave, try stopping. To say you are making a choice means that you have viable alternatives. Shave or not, take it or leave it. Yet most women I speak to cannot imagine not shaving. Therefore they aren't really choosing; they're being coerced into removing a detestable sign of maturity from their bodies because they fear cultural repercussions for failing to do so. Some choice.
Wanting to avoid harassment and criticism makes sense, of course. I don't fault us for desiring acceptance. The question for me as a feminist, though, is at what price do I obey cultural mandates? First, most of us must come to an awareness that we are even doing so, for as I have said, the pressure to follow these demands of modern femininity so pervades our world that few of us even stop to ask why we do them.
The fact is that the more we conform to the standards of the ideal woman, the more we undermine our own individuality. This culture values the notion of individualism more than any in history--indeed we've done much to invent the very concept itself. Yet the definition of the individual works on male parameters. To be an individual in the United States means to be independent and strong, aggressive and adult.
Far from being encouraged to be independent and strong, aggressive and adult, women today are encouraged to be small and weak, passive and childlike. We're told that we exist only to please men, and that men will be pleased most if we make ourselves available to them, conforming our notion of pleasure to what pleases them, conforming our bodies to girlish standards, skinny and hairless, no wrinkles or sagging.
This current image of femininity was made blindingly clear to me when my friend Freddy gave me the Playboy featuring undergraduate women of the Pac-10, which featured a former USC student of mine. Fred found it ironic that I had been the center of a scandal for daring to expose my body on my personal Flickr site and yet there was no scandal when these young women bared their bodies in a place which exists solely to perpetuate male pleasure and privilege.
Of course there are some obvious differences between us that makes their nudity more acceptable than mine, an analysis of which only goes to prove my point. I am bigger, older, and more mature than these gals--hence some find it objectionable that I do not hide my middle-aged and normal-sized body away in shame. I am also an authority figure at the university, and hence some find it objectionable that I would also position myself as a body, exposing the fact that I am naked under my clothes. We have an artificial mind/body split in this culture, with the very notion of "authority" constructed on masculine grounds. According to this scenario, thinkers don't have bodies, and thinkers are male. Females, on the other hand, have bodies, and are not thinkers.
For even as the fine print in the Playboy layout asserts that these young women "all have functioning brains," which I do not doubt for a second, they are missing something else: pubic hair. Not only has underarm and leg hair been erased from female bodies, but now women are expected to have vulvas that look exactly like those of little girls.
Yep, little girls.
So if this is all "natural," stemming from a male desire to procreate with fertile females, why insist that females appear pre-pubescent? And at what expense, literal as well as metaphoric, do women comply with such dictates?
We've learned so reflexively to hate real nature in this culture which prefers the Disney version with its neon-blue water and happy Indians that sometimes the person who points this out seems to be the aberrant voice. But as one who has walked both sides of this divide, I can tell you that shaved vulvas look as aberrant and unnatural to me as do artificial breasts. This current penchant for helpless little girls with big boobies reveals a female designed not to be an independent adult, but a helpless object available to serve and please. Hooters, anyone?
The problems with all of this range from the time and expense required of women to appear unnaturally feminine to the ways in which compliance subtly and overtly undermines our ability to be empowered. Instead we’re encouraged to cultivate the supposed power that comes from turning men’s heads and getting them to buy us drinks. The problem is, this kind of “power” only signifies that we are currently pleasing to the person with actual power and privilege, and that as soon as he ceases to find us pleasing, we can be tossed away and replaced. Hence the desperate struggle to prevent the signs of aging that so many women feel obligated to undergo.
Most chillingly, this message that females exist exclusively for men to use and dismiss creates a culture which encourages sexual violence both in fantasy and reality. Recall my original question: Why do we associate violence with sexuality? That’s why.
Comments
I broached this very subject a few weeks ago on my blog and inadvertently started what some bloggers were calling the "Crotch Wars" as others chimed in on the debate.
Thank you for stating it much more eloquently than I did.
Posted by: Suebob | June 7, 2006 03:53 PM
I think you're right about the little-girl aspect of the shaving thing; but I think there are other cultural influences/messages there as well. Coupled with the silicone tits and the "hardbody" business, I think sometimes it's this weird-ass sort of descendent of the mortification of the flesh; only now instead of trying for spirit, we're supposed to become machines.
Posted by: belledame222 | June 7, 2006 08:45 PM
When I saw the news story on MSN about "nude" photos you posted on your site, I took a look and sent you a note... Since then I sometimes stop by to see what you have to say... (You're a very sharp lady).
That said;
First, rape is a crime of violence. It has nothing to do with sexuality.
Nonetheless, watch any TV channel, or pick up and form of print media and look at the advertising.
It's all about selling something to make us sexy and or finding something, improving or discovering sexuality ...our own or someone else's.
With regard to body hair...Women have been hit over the head almost from the day they are born with how to behave, how to dress and what they had to do or say inorder to get a "good" husband.
Personally, I thought it was alot of bullshit in the late 50's and frankly, it's still alot of bullshit, but it sells ... and ... it sells big because todays woman and men are still buying into it.
PlayBoy would not be in business today were it not for those young, naked females who show it all (hairless or not) to those males who think they will find what they are missing in the media.
I discovered long ago, if I was ever going to find anything in life, I first had to find myself ... What I found after that, came with hair.
Posted by: John Dailey | June 8, 2006 04:22 AM
I choose to not shave. In general, I don't do my legs or arms, and I never, ever, under any circumstances find it normal to shave/wax my crotch. I have been in a stew about the pressure to shave snatch these days, and so in October 2005 I started the Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants (www.cussandotherrants.com).Thanks for talking about this topic too. Fight the dominant culture...
Posted by: Suzanne | June 8, 2006 06:43 AM
Actually, according to Natalie ___, the Dixie Chicks lead singer, who was recently interviewed on Howard Stern, some women shave their vulvas because it makes it easier for them to go without underwear. I think the "weak and childlike" theory behind women shaving their visible body hair has a ring of truth to it. It is remarkable how there is such a taboo against visible body hair on women. In the 37 years I've lived in the midwest, I cannot say I've ever seen a woman with hairy legs or armpits.
Posted by: Pat Myers | June 8, 2006 07:49 AM
Our society seems to have missed the point on body hair. Note that it mainly grows during a woman's reproductive years. Shaving it may make her appear prepubescent or post menopausal! I have always been a fan of a thick hairy bush. A curl or two peaking out of the bikini bottom or some ringlets wet with sweat nesting in the underarm can be erotic to my primal brain.
Posted by: Bushman | June 8, 2006 08:47 AM
Great post. A story I'll always remember about shaved genitalia came from an ex-girlfriend of mine - she and 2 female roomates were living adjacent to an all-male floor in a dorm, and due to plumbing problems, had to use that floor's toilets for a while. In one stall, the guys had put up lots of crotch shorts from porn mags, almost all of which featured completely shaved vulvas.
Ex-gf and her roomates were disgusted, and decided that they'd add their own contribution to the collage. They cut off their leg and underarm hair (none of them shaved), and glued it onto the pictures.
The guys freaked out - they thought that the girls had used pubic hair, and were shocked and appalled. The guys confronted my ex-gf and her roomates, and were totally baffled at the idea that these women had had other areas of curly hair that they could cut and paste to the photos - it took a number of explanations before it hit them that these women. Didn't. Shave!
For every person who wonders why I find it a big deal to wear short skirts with my unshaven legs, I can only point to incidents like these, where it seems some folks have forgotten that it's possible for women to have hair (not just stubble) on their legs and armpits.
Posted by: alice | June 8, 2006 05:24 PM
What a great anecdote! Thanks.
I am a drink-out-of-the-milk-carton kind of person, so the thought of all the work that goes into keeping ones vulva hairless makes me want to take a nap rather than run to the salon.
But I do find it ironic that the people who attribute male and female behaviors to "nature" are often the same ones sickened by the thought of us in our "natural" state.
A number of years ago I read about the potential dangers of underarm shaving, including infecting lymph nodes and perhaps even courting breast cancer, so I decided to stop. If a man doesn't want to have sex with me because I have underarm hair, well I'll just move on to someone less "unnatural."
And I certainly have no desire for anyone who wants to look at little girl genitals. Problem solved!
Posted by: Diana | June 8, 2006 06:38 PM
Hello from Minnesota. I like my meat without hair. Time to shave...
Posted by: B. | June 8, 2006 11:17 PM
There's another reason guys like shaved pubes on women - you don't get those lil' short 'n' curlies stuck in your teeth. Plus a thick muff tends to taste and smell like pee, which may be a turn on for some, but not for others.
Posted by: M | June 30, 2006 09:43 AM
What about the flip side? As far as mass media goes, nowadays men are expected to shave their whole bodies. Bodybuilders, fitness models, martial artists, actors-- if you're going to bare your chest, it better be shaved, unless you're going for humor a la 40-Y/O Virgin. For men also, that sign of maturity can be judged a weakness. Or maybe it would be more accurate to say youth is a sign of strength? But of course that's more applicable to models and the like, a pressure not that intense for everyday guys. And why does that pressure not cascade for men the way it seems to for women?
On another semi-related note, back in my USC days in the 90's, I heard about a calendar called "Studmuffins of Science." Legit male scientists, doctors, etc. would pose in swimsuits or whatever. As a scientific guy, I thought it was an awesome idea. The stereotype of a skinny science geek stripped of a body always bugged me, and it was great to see that smart guys can embrace that part of themselves. It's about subverting this whole idea of body/mind separation, body as sign of stupidity, and mind as sign of wimpiness. I wonder about parallels between the archetypal/stereotypical skinny geek bullied by the burly athlete, and the ultra-shaven "girlie girl". Maybe I could get some insight from watching "Legally Blonde"?! (Haven't seen it.)
Another question... does anyone care whether Condie Rice shaves her pits? I'd say probably not. Why is that? Once some respect is gained through accomplishment or position, maybe the point becomes moot. Or maybe it's moot because of her age, not accomplishment. To provide a younger counterpart, the only person I can think of is Chelsea Clinton. From what I read, she makes good dough as a hard-working consultant. Do people care if she shaves her pits? Is that answer different because she's young?
And another thing... sorry for rambling, but the youthfulness issue is so multifaceted.... Research into beauty shows a preference across cultures for signs of youth in women-- smaller chin, soft skin, etc. The theory is that a lot of risks of childbirth go up with age, so men are programmed in the darwinian sense to be attracted to the youngest women who are still obviously fertile. That might seem obvious, so then the question becomes what connects this fertility to the power structure? It's because in our culture, there's a notion that fertility is what women are for. So buying into breast implants and shaving might be a surrender to this fertility-as-everything notion.
Posted by: JT | July 7, 2006 12:43 AM
Does everything has to be analyzed these days. Why does the fact that men like women who shave their pubic hair have to mean that they want women to look like little girls. And as far as shaving underams and legs my personal opinion is that it looks better shaved as well as with pubic hair. That is my personal opinion and i feel there is nothing wrong with it, women shouldn't be forced to shave anywhere if they don't want and men should't be made to feel bad and called perverts and unnatural because they like a girl with a shaved pussy. Women are free to shave where they want or not shave at all and men are free to like shaved or not. I agree with almost everything that this author writes and i myself have studied and written papers on femminism and consider myself a supporter of femminism but seriously just leave likes and prefrences as they are rather than tear them apart and attack them as unnatural. A lot of things aren't natural, abortions are natural either im not against them i believe in the woman's right to choose but its still not natural so what? Let people be free to do what they want without blaming everything on the conspiracy of men to supress woman which i do agree there has been and women have been oppressed and continue to be, but not everything can be blamed on this. Prefrences in looks and apperances and sexuality change with the times, 50 years ago a fairly chubby woman was considered attractive and now they are not, is that wrong maybe but dont put everyone in a box and say that everyone man or woman has subscribed to Cosmo's or Playboy version of beauty just because they prefer shaved armpits and legs and shaved pubic hair.
Posted by: Chris | July 19, 2006 05:02 AM
The porn shaved vulva style is huge, so huge that the last time I took a yoga class in NYC I was surprised that of 20 women undressing in the dressing room I was the only one au natural! Along with the political implications, I'm shocked that so many do this due to the poor hygenics of it. These women go to waxing salons where that "tub o' wax" is used on multiple women! They also glide that wax into the anal region, just to enhance that baby fresh look. This is truly sick!
Posted by: Alison | July 29, 2006 03:16 PM
why do you need to act so disgusted with what other people are doing? why does it matter if someone shaves or not? i hope someone catches you staring at their crotch in the locker room and yells at you for being rude.
sometimes i shave, mostly i don't. if i do shave, it isnt because i want to look like a little girl. it's usually because i'm bored.as for waxing, you obviously don't know anything about it. if you go somewhere professional it only takes 10 minutes, it doesn't hurt, and it is actually quite nice for a change. it's different. some people like to try new things. and there is another obvious benefit, which is that most people don't like pubes in their mouth.
Posted by: little girl not | July 30, 2006 05:16 PM