GCSE biology textbook features woman with Brazilian

[Funkyfunkybeat12]

twitter.com/glaciuswhite23/status/1094341223102513158?s=21

The more I think about this, the more pissed off I get. What the fuck? The picture is of a woman at full term. And now the norm is apparently to make sure you keep up your expensive waxing ritual until you go into labour. Welcome to the new world where even your dorky school textbook teaches you about grooming expectations.

I won’t even go into the abuse Dr Victoria Bateman, the naked Brexit woman, got for daring to display natural pubic hair. Oh the horror.

PS: On this basis text books should not show men with shaved faces either. As for the porn argument, there is plenty of “hairy porn” out there too. And plenty if smooth genuinely lesbian women, so I don’t it is it all “man driven” as some have suggested.

@bigfluffy, how did the discussion with your students go?

Surely with all this porn people are enjoying they'd notice not only do so many of the performers have pubic hair, there is also a huge variety of vulvae amongst them.

Last time I looked Barbie and her doll mates didn’t sport a bush either. Neither would I expect a diagram depicting a penis to be shrouded in hair.

Barbie doesn’t have nipples either. Or space between her toes. Or a navel. Because Barbie is a child’s toy, and biological accuracy isn’t a requirement unlike a biology textbook. Of course an external diagram in a biology textbook of an adult penis should include hair, why wouldn’t it? Even Da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man had a bush drawn on.

Do a google image search of “Tanner staging female public hair” and see what accurate female development looks like. There isn’t a hitherto undocumented Stage 6, with hair sculpted into a landing strip . A biology textbook is about normal female development and reproduction.

And how is it “practical” to maintain a Brazilian in the latter stages of pregnancy?

Goodness me! In my view this is such a non-issue. We are talking about hairstyle for goodness sakes. People adopt different hairstyles. But the diagram is not about hair. It reflects a style that so many people have. And, as has been shown above, some women do persevere with grooming throughout pregnancy too.

Would lack of underarm hair have caused the same responses?

We are talking about hairstyle for goodness sakes.

No, we are talking about a diagram in a biology textbook that’s supposed to show biological accuracy. This isn’t a pic from Cosmo. If a biological textbook needed to show the external appearance of the axilla in an adult, then yes, it should show hair.

There are a lot of magic words missing in comments here such as “in my opinion*

Usually that’s not necessary to stipulate on a forum full of individuals holding individual opinion, it’s pretty much assumed that if I’m writing or speaking, I’m giving my own opinion and not anybody else’s. It’s not difficult to get your head around that, surely.

In terms of accuracy, it’s a fairly accurate depiction of what I look like.

A biology textbook is about normal female development and reproduction.

^

Biology textbooks have always omitted pubic hair, on birth sexes (just looked at some old ones we have here - 1950s-70s)

I deplore the pressure for pubic topiary, but do not think the decades-old stylised form of scientific diagram is a cause or significant factor in any way.

Will you be sending similar complaints to TfL that the Tube Map doesn't accurately reflect geography, which is deplorable as it's meant to aid those finding their way around, and they need to know what the real city looks like?

What I'm most shocked and disturbed by is the twitter responses from people who genuinely can't see the issue and think the problem is with the original poster on Twitter

Is it common now to be shaved before giving birth?

Before I gave birth last year my midwife gave me an English translation of the hospital procedure which stated that when you arrive in labour you will be shaven and given an enema. When I had had my first 7 years earlier I was given an enema so I assumed that they had added shaving to the list and was terrified I was going to be shaved! Turned out they just hadn't updated their English translation and I was not shaved, nor was I given an enema this time,

In terms of accuracy, it’s a fairly accurate depiction of what I look like.

But not what is biologically normal, in the same way biological textbooks don’t have arms with full sleeve tats, pierced ears, drawn on eyebrows, collagen filled lips, or breast implants.

Will you be sending similar complaints to TfL that the Tube Map doesn't accurately reflect geography, which is deplorable as it's meant to aid those finding their way around, and they need to know what the real city looks like?

What a silly comparison and poor attempt at trivialising an important matter. A human body is quite different to a place. The impact of images presented to young children should not be minimised, especially when we have a wealth of well researched information regarding the effects of pornified images of women on girls. A tube map is not used like an actual geographical map, it’s not designed or advertised as any such thing. It’s not meant to be geographically accurate. Nobody expects it to be. A biology book for GCSE’s is designed and intended to be biologically accurate.

None of this escapes the fact this is what the majority of us look like.

OK then, all ilustrations of mens’ faces should be unshaven; shaving is not natural. Regardless of the situation all humans should be illustrated naked; clothes are not natural. Ditto (head) hair cuts and filed nails. Most of us don’t have a huge bush between our legs or under our arms. So why suggest otherwise?

“It's absolute nonsense that you need to be rich to have a Brazilian. And also nonsense that it needs to be painful. You can get the same look with a bic razor and some cheap conditioner.”

Oh good.

Fascinating that the word “bush” is always prefixed by “huge”

clothes are not natural.

How are clothes relevant to biolgical diagrams? No, clothes shouldn’t be included in biological diagrams .

None of this escapes the fact this is what the majority of us look like.

It's an instructive text, not a fashion statement. There shouldn’t be some biology textbook version of Anna Wintour deciding what’s reflective or indicative of the latest trend, like that blue belt scene in Devil Wears Prada.

Someone obviously doesn’t understand the purpose of biology textbooks. As for what the majority of us look like, I’ve had the discussion a lot and I don’t know many women who have a Brazilian and absolutely none of my Mum friends had them while pregnant or at birth. So, I don’t know where the poll taking is being done, but you can’t really make statements about what ‘most of us’ look like... people have earrings too and they’re not depicted in biology books.

There shouldn’t be some biology textbook version of Anna Wintour deciding what’s reflective or indicative of the latest trend, like that blue belt scene in Devil Wears Prada.

😂😂😂 that is both funny and true

I’ve not once picked up my kid’s GCSE biology book nor has he pointed this out

Most of us don’t have a huge bush between our legs or under our arms.

Do we not?
Anyway, as many pp have said, the standard thing to do would have been to omit hair altogether as it is a diagram. That would have been fine. It's the choice of a very particular style of pubic hair removal that is so bizarre.

They didn't seem that bothered by it. I showed them the picture and asked them what they thought. Lots of them said the baby was shown the wrong was round so we talked about third trimester. They were of the opinion that it didn't really create any pressure on them either way "we'll do what we want, it's our bodies, Miss". Talked about pressures from boys, porn etc. Again, my lovely feminist girls told me that if a man told them to do something with their bodies, they'd do the opposite. "It's nobody's business but mine". Lots of them are into the sex education show on Netflix and have been talking about how much they admire Ola for sticking to her guns and her independence. Of course, what they say and what they do may differ but they were certainly brave enough to tell me what's what.

I am not going to pretend that l have undertaken any scientific research, l am just saying what I casually see at the gym and the sauna. Plus discussions with friends.

In the scheme of life, grooming is personal and a non-issue to others. I am also not convinced that a hair free diagram would not have caused similar reactions.

Most of us don't have a Brazilian anymore either-they are really out of fashion! (Even I know that and I'm old).
The book should have just shown the diagram with no hair like usual. Topiary on a biology illustration looks fucking stupid, and it makes me think of some misguided politician using "street" language to appear down with the kids.
Embarrassing.