following on from the i'm a feminist but thread...on the subject of nature/nurture gender

[Heathcliffscathy]

I don't believe that the differences between men and women are exclusively about patriarchy.

I think there are intrinsic differences between the sexes.

Controversially (I imagine) I think it might be possible that self beautifying and adornment might have an intrinsic female slant.

I know there are tribes where men adorn themselves for ceremonies, but I think the act of beautifying (whatever the cultural contextual shape that beauty takes) may be intrinsically woman. And I don't think there is anything at all wrong with that.

I do think there is something wrong with a patriarchal context that pressures women to self mutilate or to HAVE to conform to a beauty ideal though.

I'm not sure that in the pacific island matriarchal cultures women are not into beautifying and self adornment? I bet they are!

I don't think that shaving legs necessarily means giving in to heinous patriarchal norms tbh. In fact, given that shaving legs is a relatively new thing and that patriarchy is MUCH MUCH older, how does that square?

I imagine the spread of leg-shaving had a lot to do with the invention of the safety razor.
the existence of certain technologies, and the possibility of making money out of those technologies, has a big impact on what form the patriarchal strictures take.
and didn't leg-shaving take off in the 60s when women started wearing mini-shirts? I imagine one reason why it hadn't happened before was because women's legs haven't been visible through much of history. Nylon tights must be a factor too.