#3

  1. We spoke today about the fragmentation of the body regarding hair removal for men and women.  Does this fragmentation make the body some thing else? (Note the difference between something and some thing.)
  2. Based on the modification of bodies, has the language that described them changed?
  3. The term unhygenic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown.  Why?  Is this a body politics issue?
Advertisements

17 thoughts on “#3

  1. 3. The term unhygienic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown. Why? Is this a body politics issue?

    This is absolutely a body politics issue. In the article “Razor’s Edge: The Politics of Facial Hair,” the researchers came to the conclusion that “facial hair is associated with the perception of masculine traits.” Now, with more hair on whomever’s body, whether they identify as male or female, they could be seen as more masculine, strong, aggressive, and dominant. For instance, if we take a look at women, is it normal for a woman to have a beard? Absolutely not. If I had a beard, would I be seen with more masculine designated traits? How have men been given the ability to take facial hair under their wing, only to leave females looking like fools if they wanted facial hair too? This is clearly a double standard. Similarly, if we shift gears to another part of the body, the same theme will be apparent. In the article “The New Full-Frontal: Has Pubic Hair in American Gone Extinct?,” Ashley Fetters discusses the history of pubic hair and analyzes the possible “extinction” of all pubic hair for women specifically. The biggest contributors to the “no hair” movement are celebrities, fashion, and men. First of all, celebrity icons, such as Kim Kardashian, have famously proclaimed that women “shouldn’t have hair anywhere but their heads.” When famous icons like the Kardashians come out and say something like this publicly, they are making every woman around the world rethink their decisions, and in a situation like this, even make them feel self-conscious and insecure, if they do have more hair than the hair on their heads. Secondly, the article examines the art of a Brazilian wax, which is extremely painful and very expensive. Why pay for pain? To fill a societal image of what a woman should appear as? Brazilian waxes should only occur if it makes you feel better as an individual because of Sophia Pinto’s reasoning of simply “feeling cleaner down there.” In addition, the current fashion leans toward more “skimpy clothing trends,” and something as simple as a bath suit has every woman questioning themselves. In the same article, researcher Debby Herbenick claims that “our underwear today is a lot smaller than women’s underwear was 20 years ago,” she says. “And if you have hair sticking our of the sides of your underwear, that’s just kind of, like, unkempt.” Finally, we must take a look at men’s contribution to the normalization of no pubic hair. Women have been given this impression from men that the hairless the better; no leg hair, no underarm hair, and absolutely no pubic hair. As mentioned in the article, “guys can be, and often are, absolutely brutal. It’s not uncommon for a college-aged man to “go out of his way” to make fun of a girl’s pubic grooming habits with his buddies after he’s hooked up with her, […] instead of just being a girl who’s had a fun night with her respective guy, she becomes that girl who has weird pubic hair. And nobody wants that label.” How is it okay for men to dictate how we live our lives? Why do ‘they’ get to determine if I’m hygienic or unhygienic, natural or unnatural? Women should not have to live in fear of the opposite sex not finding them attractive due to the natural state of a woman’s body. We should not be seen as unnatural or unhygienic if we have a few stubbles on our legs, or a little hair down below. At the end of the day, you need to be happy with yourself and no one else, so make that choice for YOU and only YOU. Don’t let society dictate your well-being and physical appearance.

    Like

  2. #3 The term unhygenic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown. Why? Is this a body politics issue?

    Most Women in the US shave their bodies as they feel that pubic hair are unhygienic and unnatural, as having hair on bodies for females is becoming a politic issue for many years. They’re women who prefer shaving their pubic hair to smell fresher and clean, especially in the down stairs area. Not cleaning or taking hygienic precautions of keeping their feminine hair on their body parts to smell clean, can become noticeable when bad odors surface on the body. To avoid this problem, they’re females who rather shave the hairs away so these odors don’t stay on the hair strands. Also women who work out or play sports tend to shave their bodies more. In the “Has pubic hair in America Gone Extinct” article, Pinto expresses that “I work out a lot. I get sweaty. And it starts to smell when you’ve got hair down there. So yeah, but I just feel so much cleaner” (Fetters 8). The capability for some women to shave her pubic hairs has become very common in this generation. The preference to be clean and not reeking of odor is a way for women to keep their hygiene under control. In today’s society, is not feminine for women to have or grow pubic hair on their body. The naturalistic of it is that is not the idea standards of how a women’s body should look like. In the “Has pubic hair in America Gone Extinct” article Herbenick says that pubic hair is characterized as “dirty or unfeminine” (Fetters 14). She also goes into saying that if that particular women don’t save her legs or underarms they would feel embarrassed or ashamed. “They wouldn’t want people to see that on them, Herbenick says. They say they would feel unfeminine; of that they wouldn’t feel sexy” (Fetters 14). It is natural to feel desirable for women; to be shaved and cleaned from body hairs, and to be unnatural is to have pubic hairs on their bodies. If they do not shave their bodies, it would make that particular female feel unfeminine and unsexy to society. I believe hair has become a body politics issue since society and media contributes to the idea in the norm of what women’s body should look like. From advertisements on promoting hair removals for women or your favorite celebrity for example Kim Kardashian, who thinks that women “Shouldn’t have hair anywhere but their heads” (Fetter 3). Society puts high standards on women with their body; to look a certain way to be labeled as beautiful or sexy. In today’s society it is praised and looked upon of that idea role model and sex symbol that everyone wants to be. That desirable look of Barbie with no pubic hair.

    Like

  3. We spoke today about the fragmentation of the body regarding hair removal for men and women. Does this fragmentation make the body some thing else?

    Feeling comfortable in your own skin is of great importance to well being and feeling content with oneself. In regards to hair removal for men and women, fragmentation does make the body something else if one succumbs to the pressure of society’s definition of good personal hygiene. The problem is how there seems to be a serious societal taboo and embarrassment when people don’t remove body hair. In consequence, the article from class states that “both men and women alike largely consider pubic hair dirty or unfeminine. In other words, it carries a less-than-desirable stigma among members of both sexes” (Fetters 12). Hair doesn’t make you dirty or unactractive, it’s part of being a human being. Some find hair beautiful and natural. Yet, In the Western World women being expected to shave is advertized in the beauty industry in hopes of selling more products. We’ve been brainwashed into thinking this is the norm, when in the past it wasn’t recognized as the ideal definition of beauty. People that feel obligated to remove hair from their body may feel pressured into going against self comfort in order to please society views. This fragmentation constructs bodies into something else

    Like

  4. When a female has body hair besides what’s on their head, she may be seen as unappealing because she does not portray women in pop culture, modeling, porn, and other media outlets that have standardized how body hair should appear on the human body. When men have body hair, it’s not as controversial as it is for women because its “natural for men” to have body hair. These fragmentations we discussed makes the body some thing else. Modifying your body hair so that your body is appealing to another person makes your body a thing of admiration to another person. Simultaneously, you make your body your own thing, by deciding how you display yourself, your soul, forming your self-image. In religious terminology, “Your body is your temple”. Meaning, you should cherish your body because it’s a home for your soul to live in for life. Your body is given to you not by choice, but by nature. It is up to that person to decide what they do with the body they are given, whether it’s getting a tattoo or embracing your body hair by not shaving. Removing hair can be a reason based on religion, or just personal choice. In the article “The New Full-Frontals”, a woman says, “I work out a lot. I get sweaty,” she explains calmly. “And it starts to smell when you’ve got hair down there.” Your body is some thing that you can control and personalize. The way you display your body, presence of hair and odor, is how people will judge you as a person. Normalized standards made by society for how women and men should manage their bodies becomes noise in a stadium, as it becomes a person choice to do your own thing with your body.

    Like

  5. Question #2:

    Words such as unhygienic and unnatural come up when discussing body hair. However, this is exclusive to the female body. Everyone has his or her own grooming practices and preferences, but a woman is held to a specific standard. If she does not comply with societal norms, she will be the target of criticism. One of the topics that we discussed in class was pubic hair. In “The New Full Frontal: Has Pubic Hair in America Gone Extinct?,” Ashley Fetters explores America’s recent obsession with Brazilian waxes. When discussing the stigma and disgust that goes along with women having pubic hair, she states, “both men and women alike largely consider pubic hair dirty or unfeminine” (Fetter 12). These ideas are largely influenced by modern porn and fashion. Porn has introduced the fully shaven/waxed vagina as the norm. The fashion industry is promoting less body hair by making clothing more revealing. Both porn and fashion pressure women to mirror a pre-pubescent image. Fetter explains, “Women remove their leg hair and underarm hair…and many report that they would feel ashamed or embarrassed if they didn’t” (12). Their shame and embarrassment are fueled by fear of being rejected by the people within their societies, especially men. They want to feel beautiful, and the media, fashion industry, and men are telling them that body hair is not.
    Breasts are seen as a feminine feature. For a female to not have breasts, this is also something that would be labeled as unnatural. Many times, women are criticized for having breasts that are too small. Media often portrays perfectly sized perky breasts as the norm. However that is not the reality for many women. In “Bared breasts and body politics,” Kathy Davis discusses the ‘Boobie Bible’ put together by college students in Europe. Davis explains, “their goal was to criticize the sexualization of women’s bodies and the unrealistic images of perfect breasts in the media that make women feel ashamed of their bodies” (Davis 233). Breasts come in all shapes and sizes, so when the media projects an unrealistic beauty standard onto the masses, it has the ability to promote self-shaming.
    In the cases of body hair and less than perfect breasts, things definitely become body politic issues. Many times, the people behind these perceptions of the perfect female body are men. Women are constantly being told that their beauty is not enough and that they need to alter themselves in some way. Without complying with these standards, women are left with feelings of self-consciousness. The fact that body hair and breast size are public issues, rather than personal, demonstrates its political nature. Why does a society as a whole have the right to discuss personal matters of the female body? More importantly, why doesn’t the male body receive as many guidelines of perfection? These are the questions that should be discussed, rather than a woman’s grooming habits and bra size.

    Like

  6. Question # 3: The term unhygienic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown. Why? Is this a body politics issue?

    Yes, this is definitely a body politics issue. In the article, “The New Full-Frontal: Has Pubic Hair in American Gone Extinct?” Ashley Fetters discusses the pubic hair and analyzes how the “no pubic hair” thing has evolved throughout the years. it has been established that celebrities, fashion and men are the main top reasons behind it. The media and the society portrays an image of how a woman’s body should look like. For example, in the article “The New Full-Frontal”, celebrities such as Kim Kardashian thinks that women “Shouldn’t have hair anywhere but their heads” (Fetter). There’s more pressure on women than men on how their body should be. Fashion has also became another reason for “no pubic hair” thing. In the article, researcher Herbebnick claims that “Our underwear today is a lot smaller than women’s underwear was 20 years ago” (Fetter). The bathing suits have also started to become smaller than before which results in the hair sticking out of the sides of the underwear. Men also play a role in normalizing this issue; as the article discusses how the men would “never hook up with a girl who had pubic hair and would frankly be disgusted to undress a woman and discover a veil genital fur” (Fetter). The women nowadays have started to shave or wax their pubic hair because of these reasons and also to smell fresh and stay clean/hygenic in their private area. The women are considered to have this perfect body with hair on the appropriate places that the media portrays. We are constantly being judged as a person by the way we look, smell and display our body to the world.

    Like

  7. We spoke today about the fragmentation of the body regarding hair removal for men and women. Does this fragmentation make the body some thing else? (Note the difference between something and some thing.)

    This fragmentation does make the body some thing else, it achieves it in two ways. The first is that when you remove body hair you are changing some thing that is natural since you were born with body hair. Humans were born with body hair to keep themselves warm, but throughout the years, humans started to get have less and less hair since the temperature of the world started to get hotter and hotter. Another way this fragmentation makes the body some thing else is that you are conforming to society on how should you look. In the Body Hair Removal: The ‘Mundane’ Production article they mention, “Moreover, there is strong evidence of a widespread symbolic association between body hair–or its absence–and ideal gender: to have a hairy body is a sign of masculinity; to have a hairless one, a sign of femininity” (1). Where that in today’s society you look more feminine when you have a hairless body and the opposite when you have hair on your body. Were women in today society remove all of their body hair so then they appear more feminine to society’s eyes. People care about what other’s perceive themselves to be. As well the extreme actions women take in removing their body hair; Brazilian waxing, and laser hair removal. The reason I’m classifying Brazilian waxing as extreme is that in Ashley Fetters article it mentions how the one women take two Advil every time before every appointment. Women are going through pain to just remove the hair from their body and they are paying at least fifty dollars for every appointment they have to remove their body hair. This also applies to laser hair removal. but it just a whole lot more expensive. Also it interesting that in the same article the same girl graduation present from here mother is going to be to get the laser hair removal done. That’s why this fragmentation make the body some thing else.

    Like

  8. Keziah Riddick
    10/10/16

    Body politics can be seen as addressing the practices and policies through which powers of society regulate the human body. According to this broad and loose definition deeming the lack of breasts on a woman’s body “unnatural” or hair on a woman’s body “unhygienic” is a body politics issue because these terms are being used to regulate the female body.
    It is a common argument that breastless female bodies are seen as not feminine by most men and society overall. Women seen without breasts are deemed “unnatural” which argues that breasts are needed to indicate femininity or womanhood; which is a clear regulation placed on the female body. The body politics issue, for me, arises because breastless bodies are also excluded from the feminists fight against the sexualization of female bodies. In Davis’ “Bared Breasts and Body Politics,” she states that a group of female students had a goal to “criticize the sexualization of women’s bodies and the unrealistic images of perfect breasts in the media that make women feel ashamed of their bodies”. It is safe to say that their definition of “women” isn’t all encompassing because it excludes the women who may feel uncomfortable about their breastless bodies. This exclusion in my opinion is the most pressing body politics issue and refers back to the first article we read concerning feminists language (Sally Haslanger’s Gender and Race: (What) Are They? (What) Do We Want Them To Be?).
    Society makes women feel less feminine or “unhygienic” for having pubic, leg, underarm hair or hair that is not “carefully shaped, as the eyebrows often are” (Toerien, Wilkinson, Choi, 403). This is definitely a body politics issue because again it is terminology being used to regulate the female body which influences how they are seen by other bodies out in the world. People believe that being hairy or hairless serve as indicators about a woman’s hygiene and femininity when in reality they are completely unrelated. The identification that takes place based on these indicators is precisely the reason hair and hair depilation are body politics issues.

    Like

  9. We spoke today about the fragmentation of the body regarding hair removal for men and women. Does this fragmentation make the body some thing else? (Note the difference between something and some thing.)

    In today’s society, both men and women are judged distinctively in terms of hair removal. There is indeed fragmentation that makes the body some thing else. When a woman is criticized for having hair in her armpits or in her private parts, that person is often subjected to harsh treatment and hurtful words. This can lead to the woman feeling like she is not woman-like and is some thing that is rough and manly. In the article that was read in class called, “The New Full-Frontal: Has Pubic Hair in America Gone Extinct?,” by Ashley Fetters, the author says, “Many men, like Bob Fitzpatrick, a finance student at the University of Michigan, are more likely to perform oral sex on a female partner if she has no pubic hair”(Fetters 8). Comments from men like these are what makes a female feel subconscious about where she has body hair and leads to her shaving it all off.

    For men, fragmentation also makes the body feel like it is some thing else. A man is also subconscious when it comes to having a beard or no beard. Men that have no beards are often described as being soft and feminine like a woman. This can lead to a man feeling like he is not manly and rough but in fact is a delicate and soft person that doesn’t live up to his standards. This can be periodically seen in men that cannot grow beards and it makes them feel like they’re fragile people.

    Like

  10. 1 The term unhygienic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown.  Why?  Is this a body politics issue?

    In the world we live in today , physical appearances ,hair style, smell , “curves” and other bodily features play a huge role in how people but mostly men judge women. When you look at models, actresses , singers, better part of them has transformed their bodies in various shapes or forms. Buffing your lips, expanding hips, bigger boobs appears to be the fastest technique to achieving that perfect barbie look alike, that most women strive to acquire, and majority of men desire. In an article “The New Full-Frontal” we read about a knew “phenomena” Brazilian wax , removal of pubic hair, that has taken over United States. Herbenick states : ” that today, both men and women alike largely consider pubic hair dirty or unfeminine. In other words, it carries a less-than-desirable stigma among members of both sexes”. Where as stars like Kim Kardashian make a point that hair shouldn’t be anywhere else but on the head (Ashley Fetters). Meanwhile, breast size in a way is graded as a passing level for females when it comes to social standards society holds for them. Man or boys rate the opposite sex based on these features. This pushes woman into greater extant as written in “The Effects of Aesthetic Breast Augmentation on Quality of Life…”. “Aesthetic breast augmentation results in significant improvement in women’s body satisfaction and self- esteem (Aesth Plast Surg,2012)”. The “unhygienic” and “unnatural” factors are body politics issue. Women are effected by the media or these so called role models that “Sophia Pinto” tries to emulate. Imitating superstars and tv personal only shows how women will do what ever it takes to feel beautiful, feminine, and reach perfection. Going under the knife, laser or wax heated to 140° F will not stop them from getting their ultimate prize of getting that accolade and glory in the eyes of social and cultural referees. How ever, having pubic hair or different size of bra should not put an identity on the body , but most of all this shouldn’t interfere with how women feel about their natural beauty.

    The Effects of Aesthetic Breast Augmentation on Quality of Life, Psychological Distress, and Eating Disorder Symptoms:
    A Prospective Study.

    The New Full-Frontal: Has Pubic Hair in America Gone Extinct?

    Like

  11. 2. Based on the modification of bodies, has the language that described them changed?

    The language that has been used to describe the modifications of bodies has changed drastically over the years. According to the article titled “The New Full-Frontal: Has Pubic Hair in America Gone Extinct?” by Ashley Fetters, “Less than two decades ago, the idea of ‘taking it all off’ seemed painful, unnecessary, and even vaguely fetishistic.” The article goes onto state, “Trimming away a few strays during swimsuit season was one thing, but removing all the hair from one’s genitals, effectively turning back the clock on puberty? Traumatizing. Selfish. Inhumane, even.” The article uses words like these to describe how one felt about removing their pubic hair twenty years ago. However, the article also goes onto state how things have drastically changed. The article quotes a researcher from Indiana University, Debby Herbenick, who states “Our underwear today is a lot smaller than women’s underwear was 20 years ago. And if you have hair sticking out the sides of your underwear, that’s just kind of, like unkempt.” The language that is used to describe pubic hair in the present tense with words such as “unkempt” shows us how women are willing to look past what they believed to be “inhumane” in order to modify their bodies to society’s standards.

    Like

  12. 3. The term unhygienic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown. Why? Is this a body politics issue?

    Women have always been targeted by society and its norms and this generally plants the idea that women have to conform to societal norms in order to enhance and express their physical beauty. Societal norms for women include having breasts and waxing of the entire body: an idea of the perfect woman. This idealistic demonstration of the perfect feminine body makes women feel embarrassment and thus force them to conform to society’s idea of feminine beauty. A woman’s body that contains hair anywhere except the head is considered unnatural; pubic hair is also considered to be the personification of pure disgust. Women and men alike are not in favor of pubic hair as it does not fall under the representation of beauty. In her article in The Atlantic, Ashley Fetters writes, “Herbenick readily admits that today, both men and women alike largely consider pubic hair dirty or unfeminine…‘They wouldn’t want people to see that on them,’ she says. ‘They say they would feel unfeminine, or that they wouldn’t feel sexy’…it’s a telltale sign of oppression or forced conformity” (12). In other words, women generally become hairless everywhere except the head in order to comply with society’s vision of feminine beauty and society considers pubic hair unhygienic. Pubic hair is also considered unnatural after it became the norm in the lives of people who were always the center of media attention. Fetter, the author of “The New Full-Frontal: Has Pubic Hair in America Gone Extinct?” states that pubic hair is “on the fast track to the endangered species list, and its chief predators include the porn industry, smaller bathing suits and lingerie bottoms…Victoria Beckham announced that she thought Brazilian waxes should be compulsory at age 15” (4). Media is a very strong platform through which the idea of not having any pubic hair was introduced. After a certain method becomes known as unfeminine, it is usually implied that feminine beauty is nonexistent until that method is not practiced.
    The authors of “Body Hair Removal: The ‘Mundane’ Production of Normative Femininity” also mention that “…women’s practices of depilation–the work required to produce themselves as hairless–may be understood as one means of transforming the body such that it more closely resembles the feminine ideal. As such, hair removal may act as a ‘structuring device …reflect[ing] larger cultural conceptions of masculinity and femininity, of sex roles, and of changes in social-sexual status’ (Ferrante, 1988, p. 220)” (Toerien, et al. 400). This implies that the terms ‘unhygienic’ and ‘unnatural’ are used in order to differentiate between the ideal feminine figure and the realistic as well as imperfect bodies of women. The term unnatural is also used when discussing whether or not a woman has breasts. Women are considered unnatural by the same society which introduced the idea of the perfect body in the first place. When women defy society’s norms by not ridding themselves of pubic hair, they are being unhygienic; however, when women comply with society’s norms and acquire breast augmentation, they are unnatural. Either way, society’s image of the perfect women has not been met so far and probably never will as women’s bodies will never be ‘perfect enough.’
    This is definitely a body politics issue since the topic of pubic hair and breast augmentations take away the little confidence women have over their bodies. Women are generally more doubtful of their appearance than men; there is a constant pressure on them to conform to society’s norms. The self-doubt that builds in them takes away the power women have over their bodies. Therefore, yes, the issues of pubic hair and breasts are relative to the politics of body as they are both not the ideals in neither society nor men’s views.

    Like

  13. 3. The term unhygienic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown. Why? Is this a body politics issue?

    There are many layers to the answer to this question. First, we have to consider gender. There is a distinct difference between acceptable places of hair on a man and hair on a woman. On a man, it is socially respectable to have hair on their face, chest, arms, and legs. It is also more socially common for a man to have pubic hair than a woman. In class, we discussed the politics of men with facial hair and how a person might view a man with facial hair versus one without. However, when we were told to apply the same concepts to a woman with facial hair, people could not take the discussion seriously. This is because in our society women are told that any hair not on the head is unnatural. The reason we need to explore gender within this question is because men and women are not held to the same standards when it comes to hair thus creating a double standard. Becuase of this double standard, body hair should be considered a body politics issue. An example of this standard is shown in “The New Full Frontal…” where a scenario was described in which young women who had never thought about touching their pubic hair felt ashamed because of a boy’s opinion in class and felt like they had to remove the hairs afterwards. Women are biologically prone to grow hair but are constantly told to remove it and are shamed by society if they choose not to. Even celebrities in the media shame young women if they’re not completely de-haired by the time they are in their mid-teens. This same concept can be applied to breast augmentation. Some women do not naturally grow large breasts. Other biological factors or diseases can even leave a lot of women breastless. This is considered a negative trait and sometimes even unnatural because it does not coincide with the normal beauty standards of today’s society. Because of this, it might lead some women to undergo breast augmentation surgery. However, once a woman goes under the knife, society begins to blow up the procedure and demonize women who undergo it. In class, this was very obvious as there were many people who judged the women for doing something unnatural to their bodies and called in question the women’s intentions. However, when speaking about women protesting by going topless, there were zero questions about those women’s intentions. This shows that breast augmentation is also a body politics issue. I personally believe that there is an unnecessary condemnation of body modification for the purpose of wanting to be more aesthetically pleasing.

    Like

  14. Question #3

    The term unhygienic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown can possibly be a body politics issue. The fact that society seems to always have prejudice thoughts against women and everything that pertains to them, makes it a body politics issue. It is clear that no matter what women decide to do with their bodies, they will always be judged by their decisions on what they do with their bodies. Whether it be growing out their pubic hair or simply not have the proper size breasts due to biological reasoning. It is society that creates these kinds of terms that make women feel obligated to meet societal standards. For example, in the article “The New Full-Frontal: Has Pubic Hair…”, it states that women nowadays especially at the ages between mid-teens and twenties are practically forced to wax or shave their pubic hairs dues to smaller pieces of clothing like low-rise jeans. Men judge women when they do have hair grown down in their genitalia. They are viewed as “unhygienic” if they decide to grow out their hair down there or anywhere else besides their head. Of course, these concepts do not apply to men because it is normal for them to grow facial hair if they wanted to and not be judged. In the article “Razor’s Edge…”, it is noted that men are seen more masculine with a beard. But what if women chose to grow out their facial hair, they would not be accepted in the eyes of societal norms. Becoming a very controversial topic in today’s world.
    Additionally, many women who do not seem to have big breasts are often criticized and identified as “unnatural”. Breasts are known to be feminine features that come in different shapes and colors, not only in the way the media presents them to be. In the article, “Bared Breasts and Body Politics”, a girl at the University of Amsterdam Protests topless while handing out “Boobie Bibles”. Her argument was coming from a feminists point of view. She argued why men had the right to walk around shirtless but if a woman were to do it, it would be unaccepted and “unnatural”. The answer is in the title itself, how bared breasts create this sort of body politics issue.

    Like

  15. The term unhygenic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown. Why? Is this a body politics issue?

    While it is true that body hair is described as unhygienic, this is only ever in the case of females, and if the general experience of being a living, and conscious human doesn’t suffice in proof of this bias, the article “The New Full-Frontal: Has Pubic Hair in America Gone Extinct” itself serves as proof of the negative focus on female body hair simply on the fact that 90% of its content was female centered. The only times males are ever really mentioned are when females in the article are describing male opinions (perceived, or verbally expressed) on their body hair, or in the one sentence that addresses males in the issue of male porn stars who shave their pubic hair simply to provide better visibility on camera. The fact that female body hair, and females bodies in general, are so disproportionately policed, to the point where it can cause anxiety about simple things that women do in their day to day, (wear dresses, go to the beach, go on dates, have sex etc.) and as mentioned in “The Effects of Aesthetic Breast Augmentation…” in regards to breast size/augmentation, psychological distress, and even full blown mental illnesses, makes it a body politics issue.

    Like

  16. Question # 3: The term unhygienic or unnatural has been used often to describe hair not on the head or breasts not grown. Why? Is this a body politics issue?

    Hair not grown on the head has become deemed as unhygienic for women, specifically, by society. Women grow hair on almost every part of their body that men do, except women are the only ones expected to remove this hair for reasons of hygiene or otherwise. This definitely makes it a body politics issue. While men and women both grow hair on their legs, armpits, and genital areas, the idea of shaving/waxing to appear completely hairless is generally directed towards women. What hygienic purpose does this provide if only one sex out of both who experience such, has to adhere to it? Is it not more unnatural to be removing what naturally grows on your body rather than to consider it unnatural for body hair to be kept? According to the article, “The New Full Frontal: Has Pubic Hair…” the porn industry heavily influenced the now stigma towards pubic hair. Around 50 years ago, nude models on the cover of Playboy magazines still had their pubic hair, un-shaved and fully grown, with no shame. Now-a-days a nude picture would not even be considered for any magazine if the woman still has their pubic hair. Along with the changes happening to female clothes, where underwear and bathing suit bottoms have been continuously getting smaller, women especially feel the need to remove their pubic hair to avoid embarrassment, let alone if they would prefer to for “hygienic” purposes. While women do mention how they feel more clean by removing their pubic hair, or do it so it does not leave a smell after sweating and such, it’s a matter of preference at the end. As long as hair on whatever part of the body is being kept clean, just as hair on one’s head would be, there is no argument for hair to be unhygienic. There is only a double standard that needs to be taken down.

    Like

Comments are closed.