Is pubic hair a feminist issue?

[Pipbin]

Sorry if this has been done to death already.

Following on from another thread elsewhere there seems to be a divide between women who do and don't remove their pubic hair.

Some women who don't do it see it as another form of control that men have over women. That women are removing all their hair to please men and because it is now being normalised.
The women who do do it do so because they want to and they like it.

So, is it a feminist issue? Should women be able to do what they chose or are women doing it because it's another form of control even if they are doing it through their own free choice?

It strikes me as something of a coincidence that the gender that earns the least, that suffers the most discrimination is the one that generally speaking invests so much time and money on meeting a beauty standard.

I say that as someone who spends a small fortune on skincare and makeup.

Aww Alex, you and I could start our own hairy legged revolution!

It is also through pictures of other things, pictures of totally hairless celebrities, the fact that we never see (for example) armpit hair on TV or in newspapers except in order to ridicule. And so on.

Tiny example, Lost, The Walking Dead etc horrible things happening all around, but women still taking the time to do underarm topiary, really??? Women in historical bonkbusters similar, in films where they're supposed to have been kept prisoner by psychopaths who just happened to have provided them with a bic and some shaving gel, but not a hairbrush.

Even cave women on screen had the foresight to put a flint to their unsightly pubes, Puffins...

You would think a hairy zombie might make for more scary viewing, given the aversion to body hair!

Well quite. You and I are letting the side down terribly

I think the last time I saw pubic hair on a model was Lucian Freud's portrait of Kate Moss in the 90s!

Just as a small note: I don't understand why some people consider it unhygienic not to shave, or make comments about BO.

My house has a fully equipped working bathroom, and I make use of the shower facilities regularly. I assume Puffins does similarly. Why would it be unhygienic??

It's because they've been told it is by the media.

And yes, house is fully equipped with all the latest bathroom equipment, soap, truly wonderful loofah-type exfoliator, reasonable collection of not tested on animals showergels/shampoos/soaps/face degungers. It's all so lovely, I sometimes avail myself of the facilities more than once a day, when the weather demands it.

I smell divine!

I have a solar water heater, which means free hot water, Puffins! I have also been known to use the facilities more than once a day!

We're looking in to solar, purely so I can ensure I can wash my disgusting furry body without breaking the bank!

I would think that if you are going to do something which takes time and effort you need to think of a reason for it?

I'm sure there's stuff I do that I don't really do for any good reason that I give myself good reasons for.

I have seen a couple of women on here on other threads state categorically "it is unhygienic" which obviously has caused a ruckus where the less accusational "I feel for me that it's unhygienic" might be a bit less confrontational.

Either way clearly some women and girls DO feel that pubic hair on women is dirty, and that is obviously really depressing. Women have been fighting for years not to have their natural states considered dirty, disgusting, out of control etc (attitude to menstruation in many major religions being one example) and it just feels like going backwards. It's bad enough when you're a teenage girl getting periods having subsumed the message that (even if not dirty) they are something to be hidden, embarrassed about. And to add on top of that an idea that when your first pubes start sprouting that makes you unhygienic (dirty) is just really depressing to me. I don't know how widespread that attitude is, obviously.

Have the media actually said "pubic hair is unhygienic on women"?

Or is it, like, a strong suggestion, from hairless models, to pantliners all being full of horrible perfume, and so on. That women are dirty and smell and need to work hard and spend lots of money to make their bodies acceptable, as in their natural state they aren't?

Thinking about that mitchell and webb sketch now

Sorry Pilchard, yes, it is a strong inference from every single facet of media. From hairless models, through hairless actresses in unlikely scenarios, to 'feminine washes' and scented bloody tampons. Every single bit of it saying "This is how you must look to be acceptable in society". Same thing happens with the lack of larger women, disabled anyone, older women, woc in media. In order to be acceptable it seems it's best to be young, white, slim, perfect hair and teeth, groomed, plucked and waxed if you're a woman, or male.

The MandW sketch is pretty much perfect.

I've also given up arguing with the type of person who states that having body hair is unhygienic.

Re time and effort at the moment due to experiencing recent head hair loss (which seems to have stopped and I can feel fuzzy regrowth which my hairdresser told me I would ) I am using a product which has to be left on my scalp for 3 minutes. Counting one elephant, two elephant etc gave me enough time to shave my armpits and below knees before I reached 180 elephant.

And before any tells me off for believing the hype about the hair product it really does makes a huge,noticeable difference.

I did it as soon as I got my first pubic hair because I didn't like it being there.
^^ exactly the same for me
And at the risk of way TMI, I was masturbating before I got pubic hair. When it started growing, I found it irritating, it got in the way and I didn't like it.
At first it grew back really itchy and I swore I wouldn't do it again, but it annoyed me again so I persevered until I got the hang of it and there was no more itching.

Why do I think it is now so common?
Maybe more women have tried it since razors and waxing have improved so it is now possible to get a really smooth finish that doesn't itch and lasts a long time. It started with bikini waxing, then I remember there was a fashion of love hearts, then the landing strip, and it just progressed from there because it felt good.

I worry far more about the influence of skinny photoshopped models than I do about shaved pubes.

I was asked to shave mine about 20 years ago by a Swedish partner. I can remember being quite surprised by it and have had it short ever since.

Originally, shaving would have been done to reduce places where lice could live. So I suppose that could be partly where the idea of hygiene comes from, although I'd have thought it would have been linked to prostitution, too. I don't know.

But yes... I'm not sure I would be keen on doing it with a cut-throat style razor, let alone any issues to do with aesthetics or social pressure or anything. Just a good sense of self-preservation there.

I was at an art exhibition today, and there was a Courbet of a female nude, and she had armpit hair, though I have to say my attention was mostly focussed on the painting of the waves (she was waist-deep in the sea), and I'm not sure I'd have really noticed it at all, were it not for this thread. This photo just doesn't show how the waves really looked, and her armpits are more noticeable, because the colour reproduction isn't quite right - I'd have said the hair was lighter, and you don't really see the luminosity of the skin here. The Woman in the Waves.

Of course, Courbet's most famous work is arguably L'Origine du Monde, which definitely depicts pubic hair. (If you don't know it, be aware it's not safe for work or children, even if it's art.)

Gosh! No, it isn't. It is beautiful though, his painting of skin is just perfect.

Thinking about it we had a painting in my folks house of a nude lady. She had no pubes. Still didn't make me want to shave mine off.

Some years ago (possibly enough years ago that it was just the Tate, not Tate Britain), I went to an exhibition on the Victorian Nude, and they did show that in many cases, the genitals - particularly women's genitals - were still covered by a fig leaf, or a wispy bit of cloth or trailing vine or something - their actual bits were usually obscured in some way, and if you could see them, were often very indistinct. Some of this would be because of commercialism, making it easier to sell paintings which could be displayed in public. Actual Victorian porn, which was photographs, did include pubic hair though

Sometimes they went for the wispy cloth (male genitals often got that treatment too) but a lot of art would show nude women with a smooth curve of flesh in what ought to be the pubic region, with no hair or vulva to embarrass the viewer. Because nice girls are so pure, you know.

I've heard the line of hair that some people have from the navel to the pubic hair called a "treasure trail". In my opinion natural human bodies are interesting, erotic and just plain fun. It would be a fine thing if everyone agreed.

Perhaps now that there is such variety of pubic hair in porn, from the completely hairless to extremely hirsute, women (and men) can be free to do whatever they want with theirs.

My marriage ended a couple of years ago. I am now 50 and my younger girlfriends all told me that when I start dating I would have to shave my pubes off as men don't like them. These are well educated women in jobs such as the police etc. I have ignored that advice as I refuse to be told what to do and my exes never had any complaints.

so from what ive read on this thread woman don't seem to be able to win this argument - damned if they do, damned if they don't - and it seems to be other woman who are looking down their noses at those who do and those who don't.

some people really don't give a toss about adverts or magazine or watch porn or care what other people think. they genuinely do it because they want to - doesn't matter why they want to all YOU need to know is because they want to - end of!

why do people also keep saying you are influenced by society - NO not everyone is - fuck off and stop saying that. YOU may be influenced but not everyone is as shallow as you and they don't feel the need to follow the crowd - they are happy doing what they how, how they want.

ive never had anything said to me by any partners as to how I should fashion myself however like another poster my DH could be wearing a wooly jumper - guess who gives him the most stick - WOMAN - some of the comments have left him really red faced and he gets really upset about it and has left places like the gym, the swimming and the beach because the comments and abuse got so bad - and yes it is abuse - ive heard woman shouting monkey man at him and making monkey sounds and lots of other unpleasant things. I knew him before we went out together and we had some mutual friends but some of the comments about him being hairy were bang out of order - all woman though. his male friends don't give two hoots about him being hairy so I disagree it men who are making other men uncomfortable about being hairy...

Peggy, do you say excusee when you burp? Bless you if someone sneezes? Put on something smart for an interview or wedding?

Then you are influenced by society, it doesn't make you weak.

Excuse me, not excusee

The people talking like that to your DH are very rude.