Abstract only
Women and body hair

This is an academic book on women and body hair, a subject which has, until now, been seen as too trivial, ridiculous or revolting to write about. Even feminist writers or researchers on the body have found remarkably little to say about body hair, usually not mentioning it at all. If women's body hair is noted, it is either simply to accept its removal as an inevitable aspect of female beautification, or to argue against hair removal as a return to a ‘natural’ and un-oppressed female body. The only texts to elaborate on body hair are guides on how to remove it, medical texts on ‘hirsutism’ or fetishistic pornography on ‘hairy’ women. This book asks how and why any particular issue can become defined as ‘self-evidently’ too silly or too mad to write about. Using a wide range of thinking from gender theory, queer theory, critical and literary theory, history, art history, anthropology and psychology, the contributors argue that, in fact, body hair plays a central role in constructing masculinity and femininity, as well as sexual and cultural identities. Arguing from the theoretical position that identity and the body are culturally and historically constructed, the chapters each analyse, through a specific focus, how body hair underpins ideas of the ‘cultural’ and ‘natural’ in Western culture.

Body hair, genius and modernity
Daniela Caselli

The current absence of a debate around the cultural meanings of body hair within the many existing feminist discussions around the post-capitalist and post-colonial female body would be surprising if it did not reflect how body hair, ‘superfluous’ and ‘unwanted’, is hardly visible. It cannot be shown; it can only be exposed. 2 Much feminist criticism has been based on the idea of exposing the silent patriarchal structures of oppression, which can be shown as operating according to certain rules. 3 Feminism has

in The last taboo
Abstract only
Female body hair on the screen
Alice Macdonald

likely that most of the women on that plane would have been in the habit of removing some or all of their body hair 3 by a variety of methods, however painful or tedious. Even some radical feminists find this convention hard to resist, 4 for the recurring images of shapely depilated legs that come at us from the visual media have so conditioned our minds’ eye that even if we hold contradictory convictions, 5 the majority of Western women only feel acceptable to themselves and to society if their bodies are largely hair-free. The cinema

in The last taboo
Abstract only
Women and body hair in contemporary art and advertising
Laura Scuriatti

Body hair is constantly mentioned in magazines aimed at a female reading public (but increasingly also to a male readership), and is a relatively recent entry in art. Paradoxically, women’s magazines’ preoccupation with body hair only relies on a series of images in which female bodies are hairless, except for the genital area. 1 Advertising campaigns about body hair only consider it as refuse that needs to be removed from female bodies, and therefore just refer to it, but never show it. On the other hand, in recent years

in The last taboo
Abstract only
Women, body hair and feminism
Karín Lesnik-Oberstein

The vast majority of women in Western culture, as well as in many other cultures, remove the hair on their bodies. 1 The hair on the top of women’s heads is valued and admired, spoken, written and sung of as one of the ultimate signs of femininity. It is portrayed in movies, paintings, photographs and on television, and there is a large and profitable industry devoted to styling, colouring, and extending or replacing head hair. Body hair, 2 on the other hand, is described as ‘unfeminine’, ‘excess hair’, ‘superfluous hair’ or ‘unwanted

in The last taboo
Female body hair and English literary tradition
Carolyn D. Williams

Bringing the terms of the title into relationship with each other is no easy matter. Writing on female body hair in English literary tradition goes against the grain: everything below eyelash level has been subject to so much total or partial erasure that it would be easier to write on it behind, beneath, outside or even despite English literary tradition. The erasure is often redoubled in passages where, realistically speaking, depilation must have been involved: the removal of something whose existence has never been acknowledged cannot be mentioned

in The last taboo
Fur, hair and subversive female lycanthropy
Jazmina Cininas

, especially the female body. Notwithstanding three waves of feminism, John Bulwer’s 1654 declaration that ‘woman is by nature smooth and delicate; and if she have many hairs she is a monster’ 3 still holds true almost four centuries later. The glut of depilatory products on the market (never mind the proliferation of Brazilian waxing salons) advertises that female body hair – in any form – remains disturbing

in She-wolf
Sue Walsh

reading animal fur as body hair, a reading referred to especially in Chapters 4 and 7 of this volume. This is because, both in the texts cited in those chapters and those described there, and in the political actions and discussions that I will also be addressing, body hair and fur are connected with, and substituted for, each another in a variety of ways. So what grounds are given for making these connections and substitutions? Firstly, fur and hair are seen as having an obvious relation to each other: they are claimed to look and/or feel similar, and yet, if

in The last taboo
Sherry Velasco

well as patriarchal heterosexual values. Historically, women with excessive facial and body hair have been presented as monsters, anomalies and human prodigies. In Ambroise Paré’s 1579 teratology On Monsters and Marvels , for example, the birth of a ‘furry girl’ is attributed to the impact of visual stimulus on the mother’s imagination during conception: Damascene, a serious author, attests to having seen a girl as furry as a bear, whom the mother had bred thus deformed and hideous, for having looked too intensely

in The last taboo
A reading of Self-Portrait with Cropped Hair and its criticism
Neil Cocks

oppositions – by bringing it into play, I will suggest that it is not only in destabilising the permitted oppositions of patriarchy that one may question ‘naturalised’ or ‘ubiquitous’ cultural constructions. One can also return repressed oppositions to the centre of discourse, oppositions regarded as too irrelevant, comic or grotesque to be of any real value. One such opposition is that between head hair and body hair. Such a move does not only offer the opportunity of questioning ‘patriarchal prescription’, it also allows us to engage with some theoretical problems with

in The last taboo