ResearchArticle - PDF document

ResearchArticle PerilousPatchesandPitstaches: ImaginedVersusLivedExperiences ofWomen’sBodyHairGrowth BreanneFahs 1 Abstract Althoughsomeresearchhasexaminedmenandwomen’sgeneralattitudestowardwomengrowingbodyhair,littleresearch hasengagedinaside-by-sideexaminationofwomen’simaginedexperiencesofgrowingbodyhairwithanexperientialcom- ponentofgrowingtheirownbodyhair.Inthefirstoftwostudies,Iaskedadiversecommunitysampleofwomenaged18to 59toassesstheirimpressionsofwomenwhogrewbodyhairandtoimaginetheirown,andothers’,reactionstotheir inanundergraduatewomen’sstudiescourse,whogrewtheirbodyhairforanassignment.Resultsshowedoverwhelming negativitytowardwomengrowingbodyhairinbothstudies,buttheydifferedinperceptionsofsocialcontrolandindividual agency.WomeninStudy1,whomerelyimaginedbodyhairgrowth,describeditmorenonchalantlyandindividualistically,cit- ingpersonalchoiceandrarelyacknowledgingsocialpressuresplaceduponwomenevendisgustedbyotherwomen’sbody hair.WomeninStudy2regularlydiscussedunanticipatedsocialpressuresandnorms,rarelydiscussedpersonalchoice,and reportedaconstellationofdifficulties,includinghomophobia,familyandpartneranger,andinternalizeddisgustand‘‘dirtiness.’’ Theseresultsonaseemingly‘‘trivial’’subjectnuancethe‘‘rhetoricofchoice’’debatewithinfeministtheoriesofthebodywhile cationsforassessingandchangingattitudesaboutwomen’sbodies—particularly‘‘abject’’or‘‘othered’’bodies—arediscussed. Keywords physicalattractiveness,bodyimage,socialnorms,choicebehavior,socialbehavior,sexroleattitudes Women’sbodieshaveoftenservedascontestedterraininbat- tlesoveragency,control,power,andidentity.Therhetoricof ‘‘individualchoice’’oftenappearsindebates—feministor otherwise—abouthowtocriticallyexaminebodyalterations andmodificationsincludingplasticsurgery(Davis,1995; Eriksen&Goering,2011;Kirkland&Tong,1996),recon- structivebreastsurgeryfollowingmastectomies(Cromp- voets,2006;Gagne ´&McGaughey,2002),labiaplastiesand genitalself-image(Schick,Calabrese,Rima,&Zucker, 2010),fashionand‘‘technologiesofsexiness’’(Duits&van Zoonen,2006;Evans,Riley,&Shankar,2010;Hakim,2010), andtattoos(Thompson,2011).Similarly,ideasabout,and criticalinterrogationsof,the‘‘disgusting,’’‘‘mismanaged,’’ or‘‘unkempt’’bodyoftenappearinthefeministliteratures (whatJoanChrislercalls‘‘leaks,lumps,andlines,’’seeChris- ler,2011).Alongsidediscussionsofthemenstruatingbody (Hyde,Nee,Howlett,Butler,&Drennan,2011;Mandziuk, 2010),the‘‘leaky’’breastfeedingbody(Hausman,2004; ingbody(Carter,2010;Draper,2003;Dworkin&Wachs, 2004),conflictsaboutbodyhairhavebecomeincreasingly relevant(Basow&Braman,1998;Fahs,2011b;Kenyon& Tiggemann,1998;Toerien&Wilkinson,2003).Addition- ally,theoriesofmodernsexismpositthatwomenoftenignore orminimizetheextenttowhichpracticesconstrainandinflu- encewomenincontemporarysociety(Swim&Cohen,1997). Doesremovingbodyhairrepresentadecisionmadebyindi- vidualswho choose todoso,ordoesitreflectlargercultural mandatesthatrequirethecomplianceandobedienceof womenandtheirbodies?Canwomenwhohavenevergrown quencesofhavingahairybody,ormusttheyexperiencethe growthofbodyhairtounderstandthekindsofsocialpenal- tiestheymightencounterwithsuch‘‘transgressions’’?Do differentgroupsofwomenfacedifferentoutcomesforbody 1 WomenandGenderStudiesProgram,ArizonaStateUniversity,Glendale, AZ,USA CorrespondingAuthor: BreanneFahs,WomenandGenderStudiesProgram,ArizonaStateUniversity, 4701W.ThunderbirdRoad,Glendale,AZ85306,USA. Email:breanne.fahs@asu.edu 2014,Vol.38(2)167-180 ª TheAuthor(s)2013 Reprintsandpermission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI:10.1177/0361684313497924 pwq.sagepub.com hair,oristhenormofdepilationsopervasivethatfewwomen remainexemptfromthedemandsforhairlessness? HereIutilizetwostudiestoexaminethedifferentprocesses thatoccurwhenwomenimaginebodyhairgrowthand/or evaluateotherimaginedwomenwithbodyhair(Study1) comparedwiththeexperiential,pedagogical,andlived experiencesofwomenwhohave(temporarily)growntheir bodyhairforaclassassignment(Study2).Indoingso,my studiesassessthevastlydifferentthemesandnarrativesthat emergewhenwomenthinkaboutbodyhairhypothetically versusexperiencetheirbodyhairascorporeal,hairy,and potentiallytransgressivesubjects.Ultimately,thedifferences betweentheresultsofthesestudiespointtogapsbetween howwemight imagine beingmarkedas‘‘other’’andhowit feelsto live as‘‘other.’’Further,mystudyhighlightstheinvi- sibilityofomnipresentsexismdirectedtowardthosewhovio- latepracticesto‘‘maintain’’thefemalebody. NormalizationofWomen’sBodyHairRemoval Thepervasivenessandnormalizationofbodyhairremovalin theWesternworld—particularlytheUnitedStates—suggest thatbodyhairremovalhastransitionedfromanoptionalform ofbodymodificationtoarelativelyuniversalexpectation placeduponwomen.Recentstudiessuggestthatbetween 91 % (Kenyon&Tiggemann,1998)and97 % (Lewis&Tig- gemann,2004)ofAustralianwomenshavedtheirlegs,93 % ofAustralianwomenshavedtheirunderarms(Kenyon&Tig- gemann,1998),andover99 % ofwomenintheUnitedKing- domhaveremovedbodyhairatsomepointintheirlives (Toerien,Wilkinson,&Choi,2005).Avarietyofothercoun- tries(e.g.,England,Egypt,Greece,France,Uganda,Italy, andTurkey)reportedthatover80 % ofwomenremovetheir bodyhairstartingatpuberty(Cooper,1971;Kenyon&Tig- gemann,1998;Toerienetal.,2005).Pubichairremoval—a practicethatlargelystoppedinthelate19thcenturybut restartedinthe1980s(Ramsey,Sweeney,Fraser,&Oades, 2009)—hasalsoshownadramaticincreaseinrecentyears, withyoungerandpartneredwomenintheUnitedStates removingpubichairatagrowingrate(Herbenick,Schick, Reece,Sanders,&Fortenberry,2010)andpornographyand popularcultureidealizinghairlessandprepubescentfemale genitals(Schick,Rima,&Calabrese,2011).Moreover,one recentU.S.studyfoundthatalthoughmenandwomenboth removedpubichair,womenreportedgreaterfrequencyof pubichairremovalanddescribedremovingpubichairto achieve‘‘sexiness,’’cleanliness,andtofeelnormative(Smo- lak&Murnen,2011).WomeninNewZealandreported removingpubichairasanissueofchoice,privacy,physical attractiveness,cleanliness,andtoenhancesexuality(Braun, Tricklebank,&Clarke,2013).Althougholderage,feminist identity,andlesbianidentitypredicteddecreasedlikelihood ofbodyhairremoval(Basow,1991;Toerienetal.,2005), thesenumbersshowbodyhairremovalandpubichair ‘‘grooming’’asstrikinglycommonplace,sincethe1960sand 1970sbohemiancounterculturenolongerhasmuchinfluence onwomen’sbodyhairpractices. Wheneverabodynormbecomesthispervasive,questions ariseaboutthereasonsforitscompulsorystatus.Deborah Aronin’sforthcomingdocumentary, Pitstache ,fromwhich thetitleofmyarticleisderived,addressesthecompulsory aspectsofunderarmhairremoval.Acrossallsocialidentity groups,hairlessfemalebodieshaveenteredtheculturalimag- inationasacompulsoryideal,inpartgeneratedbymass mediaandmarketingcampaignsthatfeatureBrazilianwaxes, eyebrowwaxes,permanenthairremoval,andbodyhair removalcreamsaspositivechoicesforbodymodification, particularlywithinindustrializedcountries(Hodgson&Tig- gemann,2008;Whelehan,2000).Asearlyasthe1930s, advertisingcampaignsintheUnitedStatesfeaturingflapper girls,photospreads,andanewfoundobsessionwithphysical beautylaunchedbodyhairdepilationasawidespreadsocial norm(Hope,1982).Today,bothmainstreamfilmsandadver- tisements,aswellaspornography,generallypromotewomen’s hairlessnessasanabsolutedefault(e.g.,pornographyfeaturing haironwomen’sgenitalsonlyexistsnowasa‘‘fetishmarket,’’ seeDault,2011),aswomenshouldergreatereconomicand socialburdensofmakingtheirbodies‘‘acceptable’’viabody alterationsthandomen(Duesterhaus,Grauerholz,Weichsel, &Guittar,2011).Thenotionthatwomen’shairinessequals dirtinessorevenabominationhasafirmgriponthecontempo- raryculturalimaginationaboutwomen’sbodyhair. Women’sManagementofBodyHairExpectations Thesefindingsonbodyhairremovalsignifytheextentto whichwomen,includingfeministsandthosewhotypically rebelagainstsocialnorms,internalizemechanismsofsocial controlplaceduponthebody.Women‘‘dogender’’(West &Zimmerman,1987)bothtomanagetheirown(dis)comfort withtheirbodiesandtomanageothers’anxietiesandexpec- tationsabouttheirbodies(Gimlin,2007;Kwan&Trautner, 2009;Reilly&Rudd,2009),particularlyalongraciallines (Patton,2006;Sa’ar&Gooldin,2009)andsexualitylines (Fahs,2011b;Huxley,Clarke,&Halliwell,2011;Schilt& Westbrook,2009).Womenlearntopassasheterosexualto escapeworkplacediscrimination,violence,andnegative judgmentsfromothers(Anderson&Holliday,2004;Button, 2004;Rosenfeld,2009),restricttheireating(vandenBerg, Mond,Eisenberg,Ackard,&Neumark-Sztainer,2010),hide orpathologizetheirmenstruation(Stubbs&Costos,2004; Zita,1988),straightenandlightentheirhairandskin(Byrd &Solomon,2005),medicatetheirsadnessandanger(Kegan Gardiner,1995;Zita,1998),andminimizesexualviolence (Fahs,2011a).Theyalsodisguiseandconcealtheir‘‘natural’’ bodiesby‘‘maintaining’’theirbodiesinawaythatconforms tosocialnorms.Thesetrendsdeserveseriousempiricaland theoreticalanalysis,for‘‘byrefusingtotrivializewomen’s ‘beauty’practices,then,wequestionthenarrowdefinition of‘acceptable’feminineembodiment,whichmaintains—at 168 PsychologyofWomenQuarterly38(2) themost‘mundane,’and,hence,insidiouslevel—themes- sagethatawoman’sbodyisunacceptableifleftunaltered’’ (Toerienetal.,2005,p.405). Clearly,thosewhoresistbodyhairdepilationfacesocial stigmaandnegativesocialpenalties,particularlybecause womenwhorefusedtoshavefeltnegativelyevaluatedbyoth- ersas‘‘dirty’’or‘‘gross’’(Toerien&Wilkinson,2003,2004). Similarly,theU.S.womenratedotherwomenwhoretained theirbodyhairaslesssexuallyattractive,intelligent,sociable, happy,andpositivecomparedtohairlesswomen(Basow& Braman,1998),justastheydescribedhairywomenasless friendly,moral,andrelaxed,butmoreaggressive,unsociable, anddominantcomparedtowomenwhoshavedtheirbodyhair (Basow&Willis,2001).Womencomplywithbodyhair removalnormsinordertoachievefemininityandoverall attractivenessaswellastofeelcleaner,morefeminine,more confidentaboutthemselves,andmoreattractive(Hodgson& Tiggemann,2008).Somewomenadmittedtolikingthesoft andsilkyfeelingofshavedlegs,whereasothersenjoyedthe wayhairlessnessmadethemfeelsexuallyattractiveformen (Hodgson&Tiggemann,2008).Infact,partneredwomen reportedmoreconsistentpubichairremovalthannonpartnered womeninbothU.S.andAustralianstudies(Herbenicketal., 2010;Hodgson&Tiggemann,2008). Suchcompliancewithsocialexpectationsofhairlessness hasnotcomewithoutacostforwomen,aswomenwithneg- ativeattitudestowardbodyhairreportedmorebodydisgust (Toerien&Wilkinson,2004),strongerfeelingsthattheir bodieswereunacceptableandunattractiveintheirnatural state(Chapkis,1986),andmorecompliancewithother restrictivebodynormslikedietingandcosmeticsurgery (Hodgson&Tiggemann,2008).Conversely, not removing bodyhairalsoproducedavarietyofnegativeoutcomesfor women.Lesbianandbisexualwomenoftenfearedthatgrow- ingbodyhairwouldfurther‘‘out’’them;somequeerwomen evenworriedthathavingvisiblebodyhairwouldprovoke hatecrimesagainstthemfornotcomplyingwithcompulsory heterosexuality(Fahs,2011a;Rich,1980).Comparedto Whitewomen,womenofcolorandlowersocioeconomicsta- tus(SES)intheUnitedStatesdescribedmorenegativereac- tionsfromfamilymembersandfriendswhentheyresisted removingbodyhair,astheynegotiatednarrativesof ‘‘respectability’’ontopofthealreadyracistandclassistjudg- mentsofothers(Fahs&Delgado,2011). ThePresentStudy Clearly,bodyhairpracticeshighlightsexist,racist,classist, andheterosexistassumptionsaboutwomenandtheirbodies becausehairinessconnotesmanlyormasculinequalities, whereashairlessnessconnoteswomanlyorfemininequalities (Toerien&Wilkinson,2003).Thesedichotomiesalsoelicit ideasabouttheconnectionsbetweenhairandpowerbetween differentgenderedideals(Basow,1991;Toerien&Wilkin- son,2003).Thus,evenwhenmenalsoremovebodyhair (as63 % didinarecentU.S.study;seeBoroughs,Cafri,& Thompson,2005),theydothiswithoutnearlythesamesocial penalties(Dixon,Halliwell,East,Wignarajah,&Anderson, 2003),particularlyfromtheirpartners(Fahs,2013).Women’s hairremovalhassignifiedavarietyofsexistassumptionsabout women,includingtheirsubmission,tameness,differentness frommen,andthefundamentalunacceptabilityofwomen’s ‘‘natural’’state(Basow,1991).Womenwhoresistbodyhair removalnegotiatestereotypesthatthey‘‘cannotgetaman,’’ donotcareabouttheirbodies,orwanttopurposefullyrepel others(Fahs,2011b).Takentogether,bodyhairsignifiesan intersectionofexplicitlycommunicatedculturalnormsabout thebody,taken-for-grantedassumptionsaboutwomen’shair- lessness,andthedangerouspowerofarelativelyinvisible socialnorm. Consequently,mytwostudiesaskthreecentralresearch questions.(a)Becausewomen’shairlessnessrepresentsan invisibleyetcompulsorysocialnorm,howdowomenthink about,talkabout,andexperienceviolationsofthatnorm? (b)Whatnarrativedifferencesappearwhenwomen imagine growingtheirbodyhaircomparedwiththosewhoactually grow theirbodyhair?(c)Finally,howdowomenconceptua- lizefreedom,agency,andchoicewhenimaginingandexperi- encingbodyhairnormviolations? Study1:ImaginedExperiences Method Participants InStudy1,Iutilizedqualitativedatafromasampleof20 adultwomen( M age ¼ 34,standarddeviation ¼ 13.35) recruitedin2011fromalargemetropolitanSouthwestern U.S.city.Participantswererecruitedthroughlocalentertain- mentandartslistingsdistributedfreetothecommunityas wellasfromthe‘‘volunteers’’sectionofthelocalonlinesec- tionofCraigslist.Bothoutletsreachedwideaudiencesand werefreelyavailabletocommunityresidents.Theadvertise- mentsaskedforwomenaged18–59toparticipateinaninter- viewstudyabouttheirsexualbehaviors,practices,and attitudes.Participantswerescreenedonlyfortheirgender, racial/ethnicbackground,sexualidentity,andage;noother prescreeningquestionswereasked.Giventhatprevious researchhasshownrace,class,andsexualidentitydiffer- encesinwomen’sexperiencesofbodyhair(Fahs&Delgado, 2011),apurposivesamplewasselectedtoprovidegreater demographicdiversity;sexualminoritywomenandracial/ ethnicminoritywomenwereintentionallyoversampled,and adiverserangeofageswasrepresented(11womenaged 18–31;5womenaged32–45;and4womenaged46–59).The sampleincluded11Whitewomenand9womenofcolor, including3AfricanAmericanwomen,4MexicanAmerican women,and2AsianAmericanwomen.Forself-reported sexualidentity,thesampleincluded12heterosexualwomen, 7bisexualwomen,and2lesbianwomen(thoughwomen’s Fahs 169 reportedsexualbehavioroftenindicatedfarmoresame-sex eroticismthantheseself-categorizedlabelssuggest).Allpar- ticipantsconsentedtohavetheirinterviewsaudiotapedand fullytranscribed,andallreceivedUS$20.00compensation. MaterialsandProcedure Aseparatetranscriptionisttranscribedeachinterview,alth- oughtheauthorreviewedthesetranscriptionsforaccuracy andeditedeachonethoroughly.Identifyingdatawerere- moved,andeachparticipantreceivedapseudonymtoensure anonymity.Participantsdirectlyreportedarangeofsocioeco- nomicandeducationalbackgrounds,employmenthistories, andparentalandrelationshipstatuses. Participantswereinterviewedusingasemistructured interviewprotocolthatlastedforapproximately1.5to2 hoursandduringwhichtheyrespondedto36questionsabout theirsexualhistories,sexualpractices,andfeelingsandatti- tudesaboutsexuality.Theauthor—aWhitewomaninher early30s—personallyinterviewedallparticipantsanddidnot disclosethepresenceorabsenceofbodyhairtoparticipants. Questionsincludedaspectsoftheirbestandworstsexual experiences,feelingsaboutcontemporarysexualcultureand media,personalexperienceswithorgasmandothersexual events,negotiationsofpowerwithpartner(s),andreflections ontheirbodiesandbodyhair.Priortothebodyhairquestions, participantshadreflectedontheirbestandworstsexual experiencesandtheirfeelingsabouttheirbodiesandtheir menstrualcycles.Severalofthesubsequentpromptsaddressed issuesrelevanttothepresentstudyonwomen’sattitudesabout bodyimageandbodyhair.Forexample,womenwereasked fourquestionsaboutwomen’sbodyhair:(a)‘‘Women describedifferentfeelingsabouthavingbodyhair,particularly leg,armpit,andpubichair.Howhaveyounegotiatedyour bodyhairandhowdoyoufeelaboutshavingornotshaving?’’ (b)‘‘Haveyouevernotshavedduringyourlife?Ifso,didyou faceanysocialpunishments?Ifnot,whatwoulditbeliketo notshave?Isnotshavingempoweringordisempowering?’’ (c)‘‘Doyoufeelthatshavingisachoiceorarequirement?’’ (d)‘‘Whatdoyouthinkofwomenwhodonotshavetheirbod- ies?’’Thesequestionswerescriptedbutservedtoopenup otherconversationsanddialogueaboutrelatedtopicsbecause follow-upquestionswerefree-flowingandconversational. Becausethequestionswerebroadandopen-ended,partici- pantscouldsetthetermsofhowtheywoulddiscussattitudes aboutbodyhairandwhatinformationtheywantedtoshare. ThematicAnalysis Responseswereanalyzedqualitativelyusingaphenomenolo- gicallyorientedformofthematicanalysisthatdrawsfrom feministtheoryandgendertheory(Braun&Clarke,2006). Thistypeofanalysiswasconsideredthemosteffectiveand usefulbecauseitallowedforgroupingsofresponsesbased onwomen’sattitudesandfeelings(e.g.,allindividualchoices areacceptable;hairywomenas‘‘dirty’’).Thismethodof analysisalsosupportedanexaminationoftheintersection betweenbodyhairandothercomponentsofwomen’ssexual lives(e.g.,bodyshame).Toconducttheanalysis,theauthor trainedandworkedwithfouradvancedundergraduatecoders (allwomen,withthreemajoringinwomenandgenderstudies andrepresentingdiverseracialbackgrounds:oneAfrican American,twoLatina,andoneWhite).Collectively,weread thetranscriptsthoroughlyandidentifiedpatternsforcommon interpretationsposedbyparticipants.Indoingso,wereviewed lines,sentences,andparagraphsofthetranscripts,lookingfor patternsinparticipants’waysofdiscussingbodyhair(Braun& Clarke,2006). Inordertoremainascloseaspossibletoparticipants’own wordsandlanguage,wechosetoidentifydescriptiverather thaninterpretivethematiccategories(Miles&Huberman, 1994).Weselectedandgeneratedeightthemesthroughthe processofidentifyinglogicallinksandoverlapsbetweenpar- ticipants.Tofurtherrefinethesethemes,weidentifiedsimila- rities,differences,andgeneralpatterns.Wethennarrowedour themesandreachedconsensusonthreemainthemeswithsev- eralsubthemesinordertominimizeoverlapbetweencate- gories(thoughsentencesandstatementscouldbeendorsed formultiplethemes).Thefourindependentcodersandauthor eachrereadthetranscriptsandcodedforpresence/absenceof thethemesforeachparticipant(interraterreliability ¼ 80 % ). Theydiscusseddiscrepanciesinagroupmeetingandcameto anagreementofthecodingbasedonthesediscussions. Results Thecommunitysampleofwomenwhoimaginedbodyhair growthanddiscussedtheirfeelingsaboutotherwomenwho didnotshavedescribedresponsesthatclusteredaroundthree themes:(a)beliefthatbodyhairremovalrepresentedatrivial personalchoiceratherthanastrongsocialrequirement,(b) languageofdisgusttowardotherwomen’schoicestogrow bodyhair,and(c)refusaltovoluntarilygrowtheirbodyhair andjustificationforalwaysremovingbodyhair.Asnotedin thedescriptionsbelow,someparticipants’responsesover- lappedbetweenthemesinthatoneparticipant’sresponsesfit intomultiplethemes. Theme1:PersonalChoice WhenIaskedwomendirectlywhethertheyfeltthatshaving representedachoiceorarequirement,15of20saidfrankly thatbodyhairremovalwasachoice,2otherssaiditwasa requirement,andtheremaining3saidthatitwasbothachoice andarequirement.Womenoverwhelminglyconstructedbody hairremovalassomethingthey,andothers,chosetodo,even thoughafewacknowledgedthecomplexityofblending choicesandrequirementstogether.Mostwomenunequivo- callystatedthatbodyhairremovalrepresentedachoicefor themselves,suchasApril(a27-year-oldLatinalesbian)who 170 PsychologyofWomenQuarterly38(2) said,‘‘It’sachoice.Idon’tfeellikeit’sarequirement.Ijust prefertoshave.’’Dessa(a19-year-oldLatinaheterosexual woman)said,similarly,‘‘It’sachoice,yeah,achoice.Idoit onlyoutofmyownpreference.’’Tania(a25-year-oldWhite heterosexualwoman)reflectedonthewaybodyhairremoval feltcompulsorybysaying,‘‘Ithinkit’sachoicethatImakea requirement,’’whereasKeisha(a34-year-oldAfrican- Americanwoman)said,onlyhalf-jokingly,‘‘It’sachoice,but ifitgetsoutofhandit should bearequirementtoshave,espe- ciallyifyouhavebodyodor.Itshouldberequired ! ’’ Somewomenindicatedthattheywantedotherstoaccept themwithoutjudgment,althoughtheystillfoundbodyhair disgustingandrepulsive.Inga(a24-year-oldWhitebisexual woman)admittedthatshefeltbodyhairremovalwasachoice butstillstruggledwithlettingherhairgrow:‘‘I’dprobably feelgrossifIgrewitout.It’sjustonemorethingIhaveto trytokeeptidyandcleanbecauseI’mkindofOCD,and becausesocietydoesn’tfeelit’sattractiveandmygirlfriend doesn’tfeelit’sattractive.’’Similarly,Kelly(a23-year-old Whiteheterosexualwoman)firmlybelievedthatbodyhair removalrepresentedherpersonalchoice,andeventhough shesaidshewouldnotjudgeothers,sheacknowledgedthe disgustshefelttowardbodyhair:‘‘IfIdidn’tshave,Idon’t thinkmyboyfriendwouldlikethatbutIdon’tthinkIwould either.Peoplewouldbegrossedoutandhewouldn’tbecom- fortablewithit.’’WhenIaskedherwhatshethoughtofother womenwhodidnotshave,shesaid,‘‘Ithinkit’sfineand great.Everyonedeservestolivethewaytheywanttolive,but ifIwastheirpartner,Idon’tknowifI’dbecomfortable.’’ Althoughwomenconveyedthatremovingbodyhair seemedlikeachoiceinoursociety—andsawthemselves asindividualagentswhosimplydecidednottoshaveforaes- theticreasons—theirlanguageoftenconveyedjudgmentsand negativitytowardwomenwhodidnotshavecombinedwith statementsabouttheiracceptanceofallbodies.Whenasked toimaginenotremovingbodyhair,Sylvia(a23-year-old Whiteheterosexualwoman)describedconflictsaboutthe kindsofstereotypesitwouldevoke: Wewouldjustlooklikewewereina70sporno.Ijustdon’twant toseepubesonmybarofsoaporanything.That’stheonlything. Idon’treallycare.It’snotthatbigofadeal.Iseemymomwith hairylegsorarmpitssometimesandI’mlike,‘‘Whatareyou doing?’’andshe’slike,‘‘Idon’tcare.’’Shesaysitdoesn’tmatter, thatit’sherbodyandnobodyelse’s.Itdoesn’tbotherme. Shantele(a30-year-oldAfricanAmericanwoman)said, frankly,‘‘It’stheirchoice.Idon’thavetotouchyouorany- thingsoIdon’tcare.’’ Theme2:Disgust Althoughwomenmostlydiscusseddepilationasachoice, theyoverwhelminglyconsiderednotremovingbodyhairan undesirablechoice.Disgusttowardotherwomenappeared frequently,particularlyaswomenconstructedbodyhairas ‘‘dirty’’and‘‘unclean.’’Somewomendescribeddistastefor hairthattheyprojectedontootherwomen,suchasCris(a 22-year-oldWhitelesbian)whosaid,‘‘Ithinkwomenwho don’tshavearealittlegross.Becausesometimes,likeifpeo- pledon’tshavetheirentirelives,that’sjustalittletoomuch tohandleforme.Ialwaysshave.Idon’tlikehair.Ishave everything.’’Similarly,Abby(a26-year-oldWhitehetero- sexualwoman)wantedtoacceptotherwomen’schoicesbut ultimatelyfoundunshavedwomendisgusting: Iknowtherearepeoplewhochoosenottoshave.Iwouldn’t wanttosubjectotherpeopletothat.There’skindofastigma, maybebeinguncleanorsomething,andIthinkpeoplewould havethosethoughts.Iwonderwhattheirpartnersthinkabout it,whethertheyare‘‘hippies.’’Iguesstheirpartnersdon’tcare. Mei(a22-year-oldAsianAmericanheterosexualwoman) showedthevastcontradictionsinwomen’snarrativesabout depilationasshesimultaneouslydescribedsomedisgust towardwomenwhodidnotshave,combinedwithacceptance fornotremovingbodyhair,whilealsoadmittingthatdepila- tioncausedherproblems: IhadlaserhairremovalbecauseIhadreallybadingrownhairs fromshavingandtheywouldgetpimplyandpus-filled ... Ifeel shavingisarequirementinthissocietyandwomenshouldshave everythingexceptfortheirheads.Youdon’twanttoseewomen withhairsontheirfingersorarms.Itdependsonwhichculture they’rein.I’mveryopentowhetheryoudoordon’tshave,but somepeopleIknowreallycare. Evenwhenwomenclaimedthattheydidnotjudgeother womenfornotremovingbodyhair,theirstatementsoften indicatedotherwise.Forexample,Taniadescribedastereo- typeofhairyGermanwomenbysaying: Ithinkit’sapersonalpreference.Ithinkthere’sthatGerman stereotypethattheydon’tshavetheirarmpitsanditgrossespeo- pleout.Typically,ifyou’vegotalotofhair,itlookslikeaman andit’snotveryattractiveonwomen,butIdon’tthinkImake totaljudgmentsonit.Imightjuststandtenfeetawayfromthem ! Leticia(a41-year-oldLatinabisexualwoman)toosaid thatwomencouldchoosenottoshavebutthenadded: Hairylegsandhairyarmpitslookgross.Ijustthinkit’sgross.It signifiesawomanbeinglazyandnottakingcareofherself. Maybethey’renotinvolvedwithsomeone,that’sjusttheircul- ture,butitbothersme.Whydoesn’tshejust shave ?Youknow whatImean? Theme3:RefusalandJustification Discussionsofmanagingtheunruly,‘‘smelly,’’and‘‘dirty’’ bodyappearedfrequentlyinwomen’snarrativesaboutbody Fahs 171 hairremoval.Shanteleadmittedthatshealwaysneededto keepherbodyincontroltomanageheranxieties: Ineverletitgetoutofcontrol.WhenIdon’tshaveI’mnot aroused,I’mnotturnedon.Ialwaysdomyarmpitsbecauseof thesmell.IfIgoafewdayswithoutshavingmyarmpitshave adifferentsmellsoyouhavetousedeodorantmoreoftenand that’snotgood.Andthenmylegs,ifitgetstoolongitstartsto actuallyhurt,doesn’tfeelgood,sothenI’llshavethatofftoo. Itdoesn’tactuallygetlongever. Taniaworriedthatshewouldharmothersbyhavingbody hair:‘‘It’sgotalottodowithcleanliness,andyouknow, there’snothingstuckdownthere.Youcanactuallyhurtthe otherperson,ortheygetcaughtinyourhair,anditjustkind ofmakesamessotherwise.’’ Justifyingbodyhairremovalbasedonattractivenesstomen alsoappearedfrequentlyinwomen’snarratives.Sometimesthis appearedmoredirectlyaswomensaidtheyfaceddirectsocial penaltiesfornotremovingbodyhair.Forexample,Zhang(a 36-year-oldAsianAmericanbisexualwoman)notedthather boyfriend‘‘getsupsetwhenIdon’tshavebecauseitturnshim offandhewillgetcrankyallday.’’Moreoften,women describedthistensionmoresubtly,suchasAprilwhoconflated thenotionofpersonalchoiceand(heterosexual)socialnorms when‘‘confining’’herbodyhairtopleasehermalepartner: ‘‘Ithinkwomenareexpectedtoshavebutit’sstillmychoice. IcouldstopshavingifIwantedbutmyboyfriendwouldn’tlike it.Itmakesmefeelmorecomfortableanyway.’’ Asanotherfusionofpersonalchoicerhetoricwithpleasing men,Rhoda(a57-year-oldWhiteheterosexualwoman)who saidearlierintheinterviewthatshe‘‘cleanedup’’herpubic areabutgenerallythoughtshavingabore,describedcontradic- tionsofbothshavingformenandshavingforherself:‘‘WhenI don’thaveamanaround,Idon’tshave.Ithinkit’sapersonal choice.IfeelbetterifIamshaved.Ijustthinkitlooksbetter, feelsbetter.Smoothfeelsbetterthanstubbly.’’Asanother exampleofaccommodatingthemalegaze,Angelica(a32- year-oldLatinaheterosexualwoman)alsofuseddepilationto pleasemenandremovingbodyhairtopleaseherselftogether: ‘‘IchoosetodoitbecauseIdon’tfeelsexyhavingsexother- wise.Mostmenlikesmoothness.Ithinkthat’sfemininetome. Iknowinsomecountrieswomendon’tdoallthat,buttome it’sfemininetobesmoothandsoftandclean.It’smychoice.’’ Althoughwomenoftenremovedbodyhair,theysome- timesreportedinternalconflictsaboutthesocialandtechni- calmeaningsassignedtohair.Jean(a57-year-oldWhite heterosexualwoman)recalledthatbodyhairnormshadchan- gedsignificantlyinherlifetime: WhenIwasyoungerandfirstgotoutintotheworlditwasfree loveandallthatstuff.Ididn’tshavemuchandIdidn’thaveto. ThenIgotintothecorporateworldandIstartedshaving.Ididn’t realizethathairwasevenbaduntilthen,thatitwasunattractive, untilthetimeschanged.NowIhaveeverythingshaved. Patricia(a28-year-oldAfricanAmericanwoman)also describedalwaysremovingherpubichairdespitehaving someconflictsaboutthefunctionofpubichairandothers’ treatmentofherasaprepubescentgirl: IlikethewayIlookshavedandIhatewhenitgrowsback. Eventhoughthey’llsaykeepingyourhairkeepsstufffrom goingdowninthere,atthetimesameitcancausemoisture andIdon’tlikethat.Youdon’twanttostartsmelling.It keepsyoucooldownthereinthesummertonothavehair- WhenIstartedhavingsex,Iwas18butIlookedlikeIwas 14atthetimebecauseIdidn’thaveanyhairdownthere. Soguyswouldbelike,‘‘Man,youknowyoureallylooklike alittlegirl,likeI’mrobbingthecradle ! ’’Thatwasfrustrating. Finally,Jane(a59-year-oldWhiteheterosexualwoman) admittedthat,thoughsheadmiredwomenwhoresisteddepi- lation,shecouldneverdoitherself: IfIwantedtomakeastatement,it’snotgoingtobeaboutbody hair.I’mgoingtosavemysoapboxforsomethingalittlemore importantthanaboutwhetherIshaveornot.Ithinkthatwomen whodon’tshavearesocomfortableintheirownskin.They’re nottryingtobesomeoneelse.That’sgreatiftheycancarrythat offandtheyfeelcomfortabledoingthat.Ijustcan’t. Discussion Notably,womeninStudy1framedbodyhairprimarily withintherealmofpersonalchoice,citingitassomething thatwomencanorcannotchoosetogrow.Theirnarratives oftenignoredlargersocialcritiquesandstoriesaboutremov- ingbodyhairasasocialrequirementoramandatorysocial normtoavoidpunishment.Thefascinatingcontradiction betweenframingbodyhairasarelativelybenignpersonal choiceandthentalkingabouthairywomenwithstrongdis- gustandrejectionrevealsthewaysocialnormsmayembed themselvessilentlyandinvisiblyinwomen’slives.Inother words,womenmayfindthemselvesinafamiliarquandary: ‘‘IfeellikeIcanchoosewhateverIwantbutIstillchoose toconform.’’Thisopensupmanynewquestions,particularly thenotionofwhatwouldhappenifwomenactuallygrewout theirbodyhairandfacedthesocialpunishmentsforactually violatingthenormratherthanmerelyimaginingsuchavio- lation.Study2,then,revealstheexperientialfacetsofgrow- ingbodyhair,givingastarkcontrasttotherelativelycasual assessmentsportrayedinStudy1. Study2:LivedExperiences Method Participants ThefindingsfromStudy2emergedfromathematicanalysis ofawrittenclassassignmentundertakenbywomenenrolled inanelectiveupperdivisionwomen’sstudiescourseata 172 PsychologyofWomenQuarterly38(2) largepublicsouthwesternuniversity.Ofthe129students enrolledintheseclasses,79participatedintheassignment, including17menand62women.(Menintheclasswere askedtoshavetheirunderarmsandlegs,seeFahs,2013).The sampleforStudy2—the62participatingwomen—included 23(37 % )womenofcolor(primarilyLatinaandAfrican American)and39Whitewomen.Nearlyallparticipantswere undertheage30(onlysevenstudentswereoverage30). AlthoughIhadpreviouslyanalyzeddatafromthefall2010 group( n ¼ 13;seeFahs,2012),thespring2011( n ¼ 22)and fall2011( n ¼ 27)datawerefromdistinctsamplesofstu- dents.Ididnotaskdirectlyaboutstudents’sexualidentities, butmoststudentsreferredintheirresponsepaperstothe genderoftheircurrentorpastsexualpartner(s)(e.g.,‘‘my boyfriend’’)orspecificallymentionedtheirsexualidentity aspartoftheirnarratives.Roughly40(65 % )describedhav- ingexclusivelymalepartnersorsuggestedaheterosexual identity,whereasroughly13(21 % )describedhavingexclu- sivelyfemalepartnersormentionedalesbianidentity,and 9(14 % )describedbothmaleandfemalepartnersand/ora bisexualidentity.Ididnotcollectinformationaboutsocial class,althoughthiscampusdrawsfromarangeofsocial classesandboastsahighpercentageoffirst-generationand nontraditionalstudents(e.g.,married,withchildren,working fulltime,outsidethetraditional18–22agerange). MaterialsandProcedure Duringthefall2010,spring2011,andfall2011semesters, studentswereaskedtoparticipateinanextracreditassign- mentthataskedthemtogrowouttheirbodyhair(underarm andleghair)foraperiodof10weeks.Studentskeptweekly logsoftheirpersonalreactionstotheirbodyhair,others’ reactionstotheirhair,changesintheirownorothers’beha- vior,andthoughtsabouthowchangesinbodyhairaffected them.Theyturnedintheirlogs(averagingfivepagesina more‘‘free-flowing’’diaryformat)andareflectionpaper (averagingtwotothreepagesinamoreformalanalysisofthe entireassignment)abouttheseissuesattheendofthe assigned10weeks.Participationwasoptional;studentswere givenasmallnumberofpoints(theequivalentof1 % oftheir overallgrade)forsuccessfulcompletionoftheassignment.If studentsterminatedtheassignmentearly,theyweregiven onepointforturninginapaperabouttheirexperiencesalong withtheirpartiallycompletedlogs.Noofficial‘‘checks’’ wereevercompletedtoconfirmwhetherstudentswereparti- cipating;studentssimplyinformedtheprofessor(andoften theirclassmates)oftheirparticipationandkepttrackoftheir feelingsandreactionsthroughoutthesemester. AlthoughIdidnotsolicitinformationfromstudentsabout theircurrentbodyhairremovalhabits,fivestudentsdisclosed thattheyalreadydidnotdepilate(theywereexcludedfrom thestudyandnotincludedamongthe62participants);all otherwomenengagedinatleastsemifrequentbodyhair removalpriortobeginningthisassignment.Therewereno requirementsaboutmakingthehairvisibleordiscussingthe assignmentwithothers;studentscouldchooseif/whentodis- closetoothersaboutthisassignment(althoughmosteagerly discussedit).All62womenchosetosigntheinstitutional reviewboardconsentforms,allowingtheirresponsestobe usedforresearchpurposes. Myrecruitmentlikelyself-selectedforfeminist-leaning studentswhohadcompletedmorereadingsonwomen’s rights,bodypolitics,andsocialconstructionsofgenderthan thegeneralstudentpopulation.Thesecourseshadaprerequi- siteofanintroductorywomen’sstudiescourse;thus,most studentshadencountered(orinternalized)feministattitudes priortobeginningthisassignment,althoughIdidnotdirectly measurefeministidentity.Althoughthisselectionbiasmay limitmyfindingsinimportantways,especiallybecausethese twostudiesarenotaperfectordirectcomparisonofeach otherbothinsamplecharacteristicsandintypeofresponses, Study2alsoshowcasesthepowerofexperientiallearningto facilitatedeeperlevelsofconsciousnessandawarenessabout gender(Kenway&Modra,1992),evenforthosepredisposed tofeminism. ThematicAnalysis FouradvancedundergraduatecodersandIcodedsentencesin theirwrittenassignmentsusingthesamethematicanalysis processasdescribedforStudy1(Braun&Clarke,2006), whichledtohighinterraterreliability(94 % ).Theyworked togetherasagrouptoresolvethesediscrepanciesandagreed uponthecoding.Study2generatedthemestoilluminatehow experienceswithgrowingbodyhairaffectedwomen’satti- tudesaboutthemselvesandtheirnetworks. Results WomeninStudy2,whoactuallygrewtheirbodyhairdis- cussedtheseexperiencesbyrelatingtheirbodyhairexperi- encestothesocialandculturalexpectationsplacedupon women.Manywomenreflectedonhow,althoughtheyinitially framedbodyhairasa(sometimesinsignificantorcasual)per- sonalchoicepriortodoingtheassignment,theychangedtheir viewsoncetheygrewtheirbodyhair.Fourthemes(sometimes overlapping)appearedinwomen’sdiscussions:(a)newper- spectivesonthesocialmeaningsofbodyhair,(b)encounters withhomophobiaandheterosexism,(c)angerfromfamily membersandpartnersaboutgrowingbodyhair,and(d)inter- nalizedfeelingsofbeing‘‘disgusting’’and‘‘dirty.’’ Theme1:SocialMeanings Becausemoststudentswhoundertooktheassignmentself- identifiedasfeminist,manystudentsinitiallyfeltthatthe assignmentwouldbe‘‘nobigdeal’’andthattheyhadavast arrayofpersonalchoicesaboutbodyhair.Attheendofthe semester,severalwomendescribednewperspectives,changes Fahs 173 ofheart,ormoresolidifiedconsciousnessabouttherelation- shipbetweenbodyhairandsocialnorms.Dee,aWhitehetero- sexualwoman,reflectedonhowshewishedshecouldfeel morecarefreeaboutbodyhair: Itmakesmerealizethesillythingsthatweworryaboutinour society,thingsthatreallyshouldn’tmakeadifference.Itrynot toletthemediaencouragemetoomuchaboutwhat’sacceptable andwhatisnotbutnomatterhowhardItry,Istillfindmyself followingthesetrendsandnotbeingabletogetawayfromit. Kelci(aWhiteheterosexualwoman),reflectedonhercon- flictedfeelingsaboutthesocialmeaningsofherbodyhair: Ireallydidgainalotfromtheproject.Ilearnedaboutpeopleand whatsocietyhasdeemedasoutcastbehavior.Ididkindoffeel likeanoutcastwhenpeoplefreakedoutaboutit,butatthesame timeIfeltlikeabadassbecauseIstuckitoutandjustkindof acceptedmyhairasabadgeofhonor ... Ilovemakingotherpeo- plestepbackandhaveagoodlookatrealissues,issuesthat affectthewaysocietyhastrainedusalltobelievethatshaving isexpectedofwomen.I’vebeenaskingmyselfifIfeeltheneed toconformtoomuchtotheexpectationsofsociety. Nichole(aLatinabisexualwoman)admittedthatadialec- ticbetweenpersonalchoiceandsocialnormsappearedoften forherduringtheassignment: Whenthisassignmentwasfirstgiventotheclass,Ithoughtitwas useless.Ifeltthatshavingwasentirelymyowndecisionandthat regardlessofhowsocietyplaysintomylife,Iwastheonewho willinglytookrazorstomylegsandarmpits ... .Aftercompleting thisassignment,Ihaverealizedthathavingbodyhairhas allowedmetoseethingsthroughadeeperlens.Ifthemalesare contentonputtingthepressureonus,weshouldallriseabove themandstickittothem—withourhairylegsandarmpits. Theme2:HeterosexismandHomophobia Women’sencounterswithhomophobiaandheterosexism— somethingthatappearedonlysubtlyinStudy1—typically involvedoneofthetwoscenarios:eitherwomenencountered peoplewhoexplicitlysaidthattheywouldnot‘‘getaman’’or ‘‘findaman’’iftheygrewbodyhair(heterosexism),orthey encounterednegativecommentsthatbodyhairhaddirectly signaledalesbianornonheterosexualidentity(homophobia). Asanexampleoftheformer,Leila(abisexualWhitewoman) wroteaboutaFacebookinteractionwithamaleacquaintance aftershepostedaboutgrowingbodyhair: Him:Goodthingyou’resinglerightnow.GULP. Me:Thatissofuckinginsensitiveandoffensive. Him:Whyoffensive?Mainlymythoughtswerethatanygirl wantingtotakepartinthatprojectwouldbetough.Mostguys don’tliketheirgirlsallhairy. Me:Bodyhairisnotgross,firstofall.It’sHAIR.I’mnotcover- ingmyselfwithleechesorrefusingtousetoiletpaper. Him:It’spartofadailypersonalcareroutine,likesayingdon’t takeashowerforXdays. Me:Bodyhairdoesn’tsmell.I’mstillshowering ! Him:Iandtherestoftheworldhavethisviewpoint.It’san inconvenienceforyouandyourboyfriendoranyothercouple. Asanexampleofdirecthomophobia,Noelle(aWhite bisexualwoman)describedherboss’snegativereactionto herbodyhair:‘‘Mysupervisormadesomelesbianjokes. HeknowsIamprettyvocalaboutfeminismandgayrights, sohemakeslotsofjokesaboutmybodyhair,saying,‘Are youtryingtotellmesomething?’’’Or,asHilary(aWhiteles- bian)saidafterdescribingthehomophobicstatementsshe heardfromothers: Neverunderestimatethedifficultyofgoingagainstsocialnorms. Itiscertainlynotaseasyasitseems,evenfor‘radicals.’Itisnot easytobedifferentinaworldthatmasqueradesbehindthefaceof individuality,butinrealitythrivesoffoftheconformityandthe predictableandsheepishnatureofpeople. Theme3:AngerFromOthers Severalwomenrecounted‘‘horrorstories’’oftheirpartners andfamiliesreactingwithanger,disgust,andoutrageabout thebodyhairassignment.Inparticular,womensometimes feltpressuredtoseekpermissionfrompartners(especially malepartners),whichelicitedavarietyofresponses.For example,Marina(aWhitebisexualwoman)recountedher boyfriend’sadamantresistancetotheassignment: WhenIbroughtuptheideaofdoingtheproject,hewasautomat- icallyopposed.FirstIgot,‘‘Ew,no.Iwon’tletyoudothat.’’ ThenIgotajokingbutupsetting‘‘Iwillnotengageinanysexual actswithyouuntilyoushave.’’Obviouslyupsetandhurtthatmy partnerwouldputmyshavedbodyonsuchapedestal,Idecided rightawaythatI would betakingpartinthisproject.Afterthis verbalassaultonmywomanhood,hewentontosayhow‘‘itwas pointless’’and‘‘womencandowhatevertheywantnowbecause itis2011.’’Outragedagain,Ihadahardtimedecidingnottobea lesbianseparatistandputmyinnerradicalfeministbackinher placetoclarifytheproject.Iexplainedthattherewasobviously anissuewithwomen’sbodyhairandthathehadjustqualifiedit inhisminipanicattackovermywantingtostopshaving. Asanotherexampleofnegativepartnerreactions,Liz(a Whiteheterosexualwoman)recalledthatherboyfriendbecame angryandhostilewhenshefirstmentionedtheassignment: MyboyfriendstartedyellingwhenIfirsttoldhim,notatmebut hewasupsetthatmyteacherwastryingtointerferewithmylife inthisway.Heisreallyattractedtolegsandthatisabigpartof oursexlife.Hisangermademecry. 174 PsychologyofWomenQuarterly38(2) Still,bothwomenproceededwiththeassignmentand notedthatitservedapivotalroleindecidingwhethertostay inarelationshipwithamanwhowouldnotaccepttheirhairy bodies.Bytheendofthesemester,Marinastayedwithher boyfriend,whereasLizhadlefttherelationship. Familyreactionsalsorevealedthepowerfulwaysthatpar- entsandsiblingsmonitoredandcontrolledwomen’schoices abouttheirbodies.Asfoundinpreviousresearch(Fahs& Delgado,2011),womenofcolorreceivedparticularlyharsh judgmentsfromtheirfamilieswhengrowingbodyhair.Lola, aLatinaheterosexualwoman,recalledhowhermotherfound it‘‘amusing’’whentheprojectwastemporary,butwhenLola threatenedtodoitforever,hermotherbecameenraged:‘‘Her voicechangedfromcontentandhappytoshockedand appalled.Shetoldhowunderarmhairis‘formenonly’and howitmakesgirlslook‘sloppy’andhowshe‘didnotraise asloppydaughter.’’’Rosa(alsoaLatinaheterosexual woman)hadasimilarencounterwithhermotherwhofused concernsaboutrespectabilitywithideasaboutcompulsory heterosexuality: ShewasabsolutelyopposedtothefactthatIhaven’tshaved. Shesaiditwasgross,dirty,andnotright.SheaskedifIhad aproblemorifIwastoobroketobuymorerazors.Shetold mygrandmotherthatIwaslettingmyselfgoaftermyrecent four-yearrelationshiphadended,thatI’dneverfindaboyfriend now. Asanunexpectedtwistonfamilyrejection,Michelle(also Latinaandheterosexual)notedthatherdaughters(both ‘‘tweens’’)alsoconveyedthesesamemessagesofrespect- ability:‘‘Myeldestdaughtersaiditwasgrossofmenotto shaveforthatlong.Sherubsmyhairylegs.Iheardhercalling hersisternamesandreferredtoherasbeingdisgustinglike mylegs.’’ Theme4:InternalizedFeelings Manywomenstruggledwithfeelingdisgusting,dirty,and sexuallyunattractive,evenwhenothersdidnotprovidethat directfeedback.Anika(aWhiteheterosexualwoman)who admittedthatshewouldreadilytakeapilltostopallhair growthonherbody,recalledfeelingpreoccupiedwithhow ‘‘gross’’shefelt: Mylegslookeduglyandfatwiththeirhairon.Iconstantly thoughtaboutmygrosshair,especiallyatthegym.Everytime Iwastakingashower,everytimeIchangedmyclothes,itwas alwaysonmymind.Icouldn’tbelievehowmuchtimeIspent thinkingaboutmyhair.Itwasinsane ! Rosa,too,feltdisgustedbyherarmpithairsuchthatthe meredisclosureofhavingitupsether:‘‘Iwillneverever showanyonemypithair.Ireallydon’twantanyoneelseto everknowthatIeverhadpithair.Ever.’’ Somewomenalsoreflectedonhowtheywantedtofeel moreconfidentaboutgrowingbodyhairbutnevertheless caughtthemselveswithfeelingsofdoubt,anxiety,andself- directeddisgust.Rux(abiracialbisexualwoman)admitted thatshewantedtofeelfreerthanshedid: Ifeellikewomenaretrainedtooppressthemselves,thatwe’re brainwashedtoapointthatevenwhenwequestion,thereisstill somethinginsideuswhichrecoilsfromthatquestioning.That’s thewayIfelt.EventhoughIknewwhatIwasdoingwassup- posedtobefreeing,andit was toapoint,mostlyIfeltembar- rassedandill-defined. Lolawroteaboutherconflictedanxietiesatthestartofthe assignment: I’lladmitthatIwassuretoshaveentirelybeforeIstartedthis assignment.Halfwaythroughtheprocessofmymeticulous shavingofmybody,IrememberthinkinghowpatheticIfelt. ItwasasifIwaspreparingforbattleandthatmyhairlessness beforethewarwouldhelpgivemeanadvantageformy courageoustaskofovercomingmyjudgmentalenemies. Cat(aWhitebisexualwoman)alsoexpressedsimilarcon- flicts,notingthatshefluctuatedbetweenfeelingattractive andunattractivewithbodyhair,evenwhileultimatelyseeing itasrebellious: SinceIamnotheterosexualandsomewhatactivelylookingfora girlfriend,willmyhairgrowthappealorrepulseanother?Today Isawsomewomenwalkbyandeverysingleoneofthemhad theirlegsshaved.Myinitialreactionwas,‘Eww.’Thatkinda tookmebysurprisedandIlaughedabit.KindacoolthatIhad thatreaction. Asafinalexample,Leiladidsomesoulsearchingafter someparticularlydifficultencounterswithcoworkers: It’shard.MycoworkertoldmeIwas‘‘brave’’andshesaidshe’d neverhavethecouragetodothat.PeopleactlikeI’mstandingup toHitler ! AnotherguysaidthatIshouldtelltheteachertogo fuckherself.I’mstilldecidingwhatIwantmyformofresistance tobe.TowhatextentamIgoingto‘‘playbytherules’’?WillI pretendtobeagoodmemberofsocietywhileactuallyrevolting againstit?Mybodyhairremainsaworkinprogress. Discussion WomeninStudy2,whofacedthechallengesofactually growingtheirbodyhair,hadnewperspectivesaboutthe meaningofbodyhair,particularlythecompulsoryaspects ofneedingtoremoveit.Womenfacedheterosexismand homophobiaaswellasangerfromfamilymembersandpart- nersaboutgrowingbodyhair,andtheyinternalizedfeelings of‘‘disgust’’and‘‘dirtiness’’aboutthemselves.Incontrastto Fahs 175 Study1,thewomeninStudy2discussedtheirviolationof bodyhairnormsashavingsevereconsequencesforthem. Inadditiontotheaffectiveresponsesitprovokedinothers, itclearlychallengedtheirowncomfortwith,andagency around,theirbodilychoices.Inparticular,itmadevisiblethe intersectionsbetweensocialidentitieslikesexualidentity, race,andclasswhilealsoprovokingthemtoassesstheirown comfortwithpushingbackagainstsocialnormsabout women’sbodies. GeneralDiscussion Asawomenandgenderstudies’professor,Ioftenencounter conversationsanddebateswithinclassrooms,atprofessional conferences,andamongfriendsthatcenteraroundthe ‘‘rhetoricofchoice’’(andtheimaginedlesseningofsexism andheterosexisminmodernsociety).Howdowecritically analyzethechoicesotherwomenmakeabouttheirbodies whilealsoholdingourselvesaccountableforourown choices?Towhatextentshouldfeministpsychologyopen upspacefor more choices,andtowhatextentshoulditcriti- callyinterrogatetheillusionofexistingchoices?Whichbody modificationsreflectwomen’sagency,andwhichrepresent women’scompliancewithoppressiveinstitutions(ormaybe both?)?Mystudiesextendtwoliteratures,theliteratureon bodyhair,whichhasrarelytakenanexperientialapproach, andtheexistingliteratureonchoice,whichhasalsotaken mostlyatheoreticalandrhetoricalapproachtoexamining choice(Hakim,2010;Jagose,2010;Komter,1989;Pitts, 1999)aboutthebodybyadvancingamoreconcreteexamina- tionofchoicebasedonwomen’sexperiences. Mystudiesweredesignedtointerrogatethenotablediffer- encesinwomen’snarrativesaboutbodyhairwhenthey thoughtintellectuallyandimaginativelyaboutchoicefrom amoreabstractperspective(‘‘Howdoyoufeelaboutbody hairwhenyouhavenotactuallygrownoutbodyhair?’’)com- paredwiththeperspectivesthatemergefromthelived experiencesofwomengrowingbodyhair(‘‘Howdoyoufeel aboutbodyhairafterhavingtemporarilygrownoutyourown bodyhair?’’).Suchacontrastmakesacaseforthekindsof differencesfoundwhenexaminingtherhetoricofchoice fromanabstractversuslivedexperienceandfromoutsideand withinacademicsettingsdedicatedtocriticalthinkingand feministinterrogation. Theultimatestrengthsofmystudieslieintheiruniquecom- parativeconsiderationofimaginedversuslivedexperiencesof thebodybecausemostexistingresearchonbodyhairhas focusedonattitudesabouthairy(orshaved)bodiesrather thanonwomen’slivedexperiencesofbodyhair(Basow& Willis,2001;Basow&Braman,1998;Kenyon&Tiggemann, 1998;Lewis&Tiggemann,2004;Toerien&Wilkinson, 2004).Byusingqualitativeresearchtoassessthe‘‘messi- ness’’ofhowwomenimaginetherangeofbodilychoices availabletothem—bothwithandwithoutactuallytestingthe socialpenaltiestheyfacefordeviatingfromsocialnorms— wecanbetterunderstandthechallengespresentinmerely imaginingissuesofembodimentfromafar(particularlyinthe classroom).Ahypotheticalconsiderationofa‘‘deviant’’ bodyworksquitedifferentlythanatangibleandliteralenact- mentof‘‘deviance.’’ Notably,mytwostudiesdifferedinmanyways.Study1 utilizedacommunitysamplefromawidervarietyofages, SESs,andeducationalbackgrounds.MostwomeninStudy 1didnothaveacollegedegree,andnearlyallwomenin Study1hadneverexploredgenderandsocialidentitiesin anacademicsetting.Incontrast,womeninStudy2notonly hadtheprivilegeofanearlycompletedcollegeeducation (alongwithupwardmobility),buttheyalsohadmoreexperi- encesinterrogatingandthinkingabouttheirbodies,sexuali- ties,andsocialidentities.Althoughthesegroupsdidnot serveupaneatandidenticalcomparison(andarebetteras asortofside-by-sidedescription),theydidexploretheprivi- legesandpitfallsofexperientiallearninganddirectconfron- tationsofpower.WomeninStudy1hadtheabilitytostay distantfromthewaysthatbodyhairprovokesreactionsin others—theymayneverhaveseentheirownbodyhairor trulyconsiderednotremovingtheirbodyhair—whereas womeninStudy2spokeabouttheirbodyhairafterdirectly andpersonallyconfrontingtheirown,andothers’,reactions tochangesintheirbodyhair.Ultimately,mysetoftwostud- iesmakesacasethat,tomorefullyunderstandthebodyas constrictedandshapedbysocialandpoliticalnorms,experi- entiallearning(howeverflawed)isavaluablecomponentofa feministeducation.Inotherwords,theabilitynotonlyto imaginethebodyasshapedbysocialforcesbutalsototest theselimitsandexperimentwiththeminatangiblewaycan complicateandtroublewomen’snotionsoftheirownbodily freedoms.Indoingso,itcanreshapetheirunderstandingof gender,power,andsocietalnorms.Womenimaginemuch moreexpansivefreedomswhenonlydealingtheoreticallywith thenotionofbodilycontrol—afindingfeministclassrooms musttakeseriouslywhennurturingmeaningfuldebatesabout therhetoricofchoice.Effectiveconsciousness-raising,it seems,mayrequirebothclassroomsandbodilyexperiences. Interestingly,manycontradictionsappearedinthepresent data,particularlysurroundingthedialecticbetweenpersonal choiceandsocialrequirementsaboutwomen’sbodies.Alth- oughwomeninStudy1almostallconstructedtheremovalof bodyhairasapersonalchoice,theyadmittedtofeelingjudg- mentalofotherwomen’shairinessand/orcommittedto remainingentirelyshavenatalltimes.Still,theyimagined thosejudgmentsashavinglittlebearingontheirowndepi- lationpractices.Thiscontrad ictionbetweendescribingbody hairremovalasapersonalch oiceandthenoutliningthe waysthatthey(orotherwomen)aredisgustingforgrowing bodyhairdidnotseemclearlyvisibletowomeninStudy1. Thevalueofengaginginqua litativeresearchwithwomen abouttheirbodynarrativesseemsparamountindeconstructing andunpackingthesecontradictions.Womenmaysaytheyfeel free,butthenrestrictthefreedomofothersorthemselves—all 176 PsychologyofWomenQuarterly38(2) withoutnotingthisironyandlogicalcontradiction.Similarly, womeninStudy2oftenwantedtofeelfreeandliberatedwhile growingbodyhair,onlytonotethattheystillfeltridiculous, constricted,hypocritical,oroutrightdisgusting.Neithergroup ofwomencouldtrulyreconcilethedynamicsbetweenpersonal choiceandsocialexpectation,althougheachgrouphadadis- tinctlydifferentwayofdescribing,narrating,andmaking senseoftheseconflicts. Still,mystudieshaveflawsthatfutureresearchcouldbet- teraddressandbuildupon.Thesesamplescannotserveas directcomparisonsbecausetheydifferincontext(commu- nityvs.studentsamples),demographics(diverseagesvs. youngage),modeofdescribingtheirexperiences(spoken ideasvs.writtenresponses),andeducationalbackground(lit- tleornofeministeducationvs.takinganupper-division womenandgenderstudiescourse).Mysetofstudiesisnot intendedtotestexperimentallythe‘‘intervention’’ofgrowing bodyhair;rather,thissequencelooksatdifferencesinhow womennarratebodyhairwhentheyimagineversusliveas hairysubjects.Futureresearchcouldperhapsassesswomen’s attitudesaboutbodyhairmoredirectlypriortoengagingin theassignment,althoughthisapproachwouldlimitthesam- pleonlytoundergraduatesandwouldprecludeabroader communitysample.Additionally,thequestionsforStudy1 alsocamefromalargerstudyofsexualitythatmayhave biasedparticipants’answersormadethemmorelikelyto reflectonthesexualaspectsofbodyhairratherthanother socialaspectsofbodyhair.Futureresearchcouldtargetonly bodyhairasthesolesubjectofresearchquestions. PracticeImplications Thesefindingshaveseveralimplicationsforthoseworking withyoungwomen,astheroleofexperientiallearningforms acentralroleinourunderstandingofoppressionandsocial identity.Mostnotably,instructors,therapists,activists,and policymakerswhoworkonbodyimageandbodypolitics shouldstrivetomovebeyondmerely imagining thebodyas ‘‘Othered’’(orprocessingfearsoffatness,oldage,hairiness, andsoon)andinsteadfocuson lived experienceswiththeso- calleddisgustingbody.Forexample,therapistscouldfocus onconcretewaysforwomentoengagewiththeirbodiesand usetheirbodiestounderstandtheirpsychologicalcomplaints. Asatherapist,Ihaveoftenworkedwithclientsnotonlyto focusontheirbody’sfeelings(e.g.,deepbreathing,locating sitesofpainandtrauma,menstrualcyclechanges,andsoon) butalsotousethebodyasamethodofteaching(e.g.,askinga photographerpatientwithnegativebodyimageissuesto photographthepartsofherselfshefinds‘‘disgusting’’and tothenworktobetteracceptherself). Theterrorpeopleoftenfeelaboutembodyinganeven- more-abjectbody—perhapsgainingorlosingtoomuch weight,developingagespotsorlines,losingtheiryouthful ormoreactivebodies,outingthemselvesasbisexualorles- bianinpublicspaces,becoming‘‘different’’somehow—can perhapsbebetterunderstoodandexploredviamorebenign experienceswithbodyhair.Forinstructors,bodyhairsig- nifiesatemporaryexcursionintoabodydeemed‘‘disgust- ing,’’allwhileallowingstudentstoexploretheperilsand dangersofabjection.Foractivists,bodyhaircanserveas anin-your-facegenderedrevoltthatcallsforthnotionsof ‘‘properfemininity’’;usingbodyhairtochallengenotions ofacceptablebodieshasdeeptiestoothersilencedand shamedbodilyevents,particularlymenstruation,childbirth, andaging.Inshort,bodyhairisa‘‘gatewaydrug’’intotopics thatcarryloftierandmoreseriousconsequencesforwomen, anditthuscanstartconversationsthatmaybeotherwisetoo painfulorriskytoengagein. BroaderReflections Amajorgoalofconductingthebodyhairassignment—some- thingIhavewrittenaboutinpreviousstudies(Fahs,2011b, 2012,2013)—istohelpwomen’sstudiesstudentsmorefully andpotentlyengagewiththerealityoflivingas‘‘Other.’’If theycanexplorethemeaningssurroundingbodyhair—arel- ativelybenignbodilyexperience—thentheycanpotentially betterunderstandtherealitiesofembodyingmorepermanent aspectsoflowerstatus,‘‘abject’’bodies.Thepotentialfor learningaboutdimensionsoflivinginafatbody,queerbody, blackorbrownbody,ordisabledbodyappearstangiblyin women’sdescriptionsofbecominghairy(oftenforthefirst timeintheiradultlives).Classroomdiscussionsaboutthe exercisehaveshownthepowerofthisassignmenttoboth transformreluctantstudentsandhighlyconfident(oreven radical)studentsintohavingamorecriticaleyeaboutthe invisiblepowerofsocialcontroloverwomen’sbodies.Using thebodyasadirectsiteofconsciousness-raisinggivesfem- inisteducatorsauniqueopportunitytopushstudentstoward examiningprivilege,power,compliance,andresistance. WomeninStudy2hadtheopportunitynotonlytotrythis assignmentasindividualsbutalsotoprocessittogetherwith classmates,ultimatelyleadingtocommunityknowledge- making,conflict,andunderstanding. WomeninStudy1—perhapsrevealingmoregeneralizable andlessbiasedinformationfromthosewithoutexplicitly feministeducationsortheluxuryoffeministcommunities— showcasewomen’sviewsaboutbodyhairwhendisconnected fromlargersocialandpedagogicaldiscoursesaboutgender, power,andidentity.Inthisway,theyrevealthestrangediscur- sivefusionsofremovingbodyhairtopleaseotherscompared withremovingbodyhairtopleaseoneself.Theseconcepts aredifficulttoseparateandthinkclearlyaboutwithoutthe experientialcomponentintroducedinStudy2.Womenin Study1mayneverhaveconfrontedtheirownsocialbiases aboutthebody,sotheirexplorationsaboutthistopicfeel moreuncertainandfresh.Thatsaid, both groupsofwomen expressedoverwhelmingnegativitytowardbodyhair,often seeingthosewhogrowbodyhairasinherentlydisgustingand dirty.AlthoughsomewomeninStudy2describedbodyhair Fahs 177 growthasrambunctiousandrebellious,their‘‘perilous patches’’stillcarriedculturalmarkersofdeviance.Most clearly,thedistancebetweenStudy1andStudy2,aswell astheoverlappingmomentsinthesestudies,revealstensions betweenfeministeducationandtherealitiesofapatriarchal world. Isometimeshearatconferences,fromcolleagues,oreven fromresearchsubjects(Jane)andstudentsthatwomenhave ‘‘betterthingstoworryabout’’thantherelativelysillyandtri- vialtopicofbodyhair.Tocounterthis,Iwouldarguethe opposite:bodyhairrepresentsanavenueintotougherand morepainfuldiscussionsaboutgender,bodies,power,social control,invisibilityofpatriarchy,thefusionsbetweenhetero- sexismandsexism(seenvividlyinmen’sandfamilymem- bers’reactionstowomen’sbodyhair),andoverlapsamong classism,racism,ageism,homophobia,andsexism.Inthe classroom,bodyhairopensdoorstorichdiscussionsabout intersectionality(e.g.,‘‘MymothertellsmeI’ma‘dirtyMex- ican’whenIhaveleghair’’),privilege(‘‘Myhairisblond, yoursisblack,sowe’realreadydealingwithdifferentthings atstake’’),misogyny(‘‘MyboyfriendsaidIneedhispermis- siontogrowmybodyhair’’),power(‘‘HowcanIbearadical ifIcan’tevengrowbodyhair?’’),andtheinternalizationof oppression(‘‘Eventhoughnoonesaysanything,Ifeeldis- gustingwhenIhavearmpithair’’).Conversationsaboutbody hairholdupamirrortootherwiseunseenaspectsofgender andsexuality,makingtheseeminglybenign(‘‘fluffytufts,’’ ‘‘fuzzypatches’’)suddenlyendowedwiththepowertounset- tleandtransform. Acknowledgment SpecialthankstoJaquelineGonzalez,MarisaLoiacono,Adrielle Munger,StephanieRobinson-Cestaro,andEricSwankfortheircon- tributionstothismanuscript. DeclarationofConflictingInterests Theauthor(s)declarednopotentialconflictsofinterestwithrespect totheresearch,authorship,and/orpublicationofthisarticle. Funding Theauthor(s)receivednofinancialsupportfortheresearch,author- ship,and/orpublicationofthisarticle. References Anderson,S.C.,&Holliday,M.(2004).Normativepassingin lesbiancommunity:Anexploratorystudy. JournalofGay&Les- bianSocialServices:IssuesinPractice,Policy,&Research , 17 , 25–38. Aronin,D.(Producer&Director).(Forthcoming). Pitstache [Film]. Unreleased. Basow,S.A.(1991).Thehairlessideal:Womenandtheirbodyhair. PsychologyofWomenQuarterly , 15 ,83–96. Basow,S.A,&Braman,A.(1998).Womenandbodyhair:Social perceptionsandattitudes. PsychologyofWomenQuarterly , 22 , 637–645. Basow,S.A.,&Willis,J.(2001).PerceptionsofbodyhaironWhite women:Effectsoflabeling. PsychologicalReports , 89 ,571–576. Boroughs,M.,Cafri,G.,&Thompson,J.K.(2005).Malebodydepi- lation:Prevalenceandassociatedfeaturesofbodyhairremoval. SexRoles , 52 ,637–644. Braun,V.(2009).‘‘Thewomenaredoingitforthemselves’’:The rhetoricofchoiceandagencyaroundfemalegenital‘‘cosmetic surgery.’’ AustralianFeministStudies , 24 ,233–249. Braun,V.,&Clarke,V.(2006).Usingthematicanalysisinpsychol- ogy. QualitativeResearchinPsychology , 3 ,77–101. Braun,V.,Tricklebank,G.,&Clarke,V.(2013).‘‘Itshouldn’tstick outfromyourbikiniatthebeach’’:Meaning,gender,andthe hairy/hairlessbody. PsychologyofWomenQuarterly , 37 , 478–493. Button,S.B.(2004).Identitymanagementstrategiesutilizedbyles- bianandgayemployees:Aquantitativeinvestigation. Group& OrganizationManagement , 29 ,470–494. Byrd,A.,&Solomon,A.(2005). Naked:Blackwomenbareall abouttheirskin,hair,lips,andotherparts .NewYork,NY: Penguin. Carter,S.K.(2010).Beyondcontrol:Bodyandselfinwomen’s childbearingnarratives. SociologyofHealth&Illness , 32 , 993–1009. Chapkis,W.(1986). Beautysecrets:Womenandthepoliticsof appearance .Boston,MA:SouthEndPress. Chrisler,J.(2011).Leaks,lumps,andlines:Stigmaandwomen’s bodies. PsychologyofWomenQuarterly , 35 ,202–214. Cooper,W.(1971). Hair:Sex,society,symbolism .London,Eng- land:AldusBooks. Crompvoets,S.(2006).Comfort,control,orconformity:Women whochoosebreastreconstructionfollowingmastectomy. Health CareforWomenInternational , 27 ,75–93. Dault,M.(2011).Thelasttriangle:Sex,money,andthepoliticsof pubichair. TheLastTriangle .Retrievedfromhttp://www.the- lasttriangle.com Davis,K.(1995). Reshapingthefemalebody:Thedilemmaofcos- meticsurgery .NewYork,NY:Routledge. Dixon,A.F.,Halliwell,G.,East,R.,Wignarajah,P.,&Anderson, M.J.(2003).Masculinesomatotypeandhirsutenessasdetermi- nantsofsexualattractivenesstowomen. ArchivesofSexual Behavior , 32 ,29–39. Draper,J.(2003).Blurring,moving,andbrokenboundaries:Men’s encounterswiththepregnantbody. SociologyofHealthandIll- ness , 25 ,743–767. Duesterhaus,M.,Grauerholz,L.,Weichsel,R.,&Guittar,N.A. (2011).Thecostofdoingfemininity:Gendereddisparitiesin pricingofpersonalcareproductsandservices. GenderIssues , 28 ,175–191. Duits,L.,&vanZoonen,L.(2006).Headscarvesandporno-chic. EuropeanJournalofWomen’sStudies , 13 ,103–117. Dworkin,S.L.,&Wachs,F.L.(2004).‘‘Gettingyourbodyback’’: Postindustrialfitmotherhoodin ShapeFit pregnancymagazine. Gender&Society , 18 ,610–624. Eriksen,S.,&Goering,S.(2011).Atestoftheagencyhypothesisin women’scosmeticsurgeryusage. SexRoles , 64 ,888–901. 178 PsychologyofWomenQuarterly38(2) Evans,A.,Riley,S.,&Shankar,A.(2010).Technologiesofsexi- ness:Theorizingwomen’sengagementinthesexualizationof culture. Feminism&Psychology , 20 ,114–131. Fahs,B.(2011a). Performingsex:Themakingandunmakingof women’seroticlives .Albany,NY:StateUniversityofNewYork Press. Fahs,B.(2011b).Dreaded‘‘Otherness’’:Heteronormativepatrol- linginwomen’sbodyhairrebellions. Gender&Society , 25 , 451–472. Fahs,B.(2012).Breakingbodyhairboundaries:Classroomexer- cisesforchallengingsocialconstructionsofthebodyandsexu- ality. Feminism&Psychology , 22 ,482–506. Fahs,B.(2013).Shavingitalloff:Examiningsocialnormsofbody hairamongcollegemeninawomen’sstudiescourse. Women’s Studies:AnInter-disciplinaryJournal , 42 ,559–577. Fahs,B.,&Delgado,D.A.(2011).Thespecterofexcess:Race, class,andgenderinwomen’sbodyhairnarratives.InC.Bobel &S.Kwan(Eds.), Embodiedresistance:Breakingtherules, challengingthenorms (pp.13–25).Nashville,TN:Vanderbilt UniversityPress. Gagne ´,P.,&McGaughey,D.(2002).Designingwomen:Cultural hegemonyandtheexerciseofpoweramongwomenwhohave undergoneelectivemammoplasty. Gender&Society , 16 , 814–838. Gimlin,D.(2007).Whatis‘‘bodywork’’?Areviewoftheliterature. SociologyCompass , 1 ,353–370. Hakim,C.(2010).Eroticcapital. SociologicalReview , 26 ,499–518. Hausman,B.L.(2004).Thefeministpoliticsofbreastfeeding. Aus- tralianFeministStudies , 19 ,273–285. Herbenick,D.,Schick,V.,Reece,M.,Sanders,S.,&Fortenberry,D. (2010).PubichairremovalamongwomenintheUnitedStates: Prevalence,methods,andcharacteristics. TheJournalofSexual Medicine , 7 ,3322–3330. Hodgson,S.,&Tiggemann,M.(2008).Thehairlessnessnorm extended:Reasonsforandpredictorsofwomen’sbodyhair removalatdifferentbodysites. SexRoles , 59 ,889–897. Hope,C.(1982).CaucasianfemalebodyhairandAmericanculture. TheJournalofAmericanCulture , 5 ,93–99. Huxley,C.J.,Clarke,V.,&Halliwell,E.(2011).‘‘It’sacomparison thing,isn’tit?’’Lesbianandbisexualwomen’saccountsofhow partnerrelationshipsshapetheirfeelingsabouttheirbodyand appearance. PsychologyofWomenQuarterly , 35 ,415–427. Hyde,A.,Nee,J.,Howlett,E.,Butler,M.,&Drennan,J.(2011). Theendingofmenstruation:Perspectivesandexperiencesof lesbianandheterosexualwomen. JournalofWomen&Aging , 23 ,160–176. Jagose,A.(2010).Counterfeitpleasures:Fakeorgasmandqueer agency. TextualPractice , 24 ,517–539. KeganGardiner,J.(1995).CanMs.Prozactalkback?Feminism, drugs,andsocialconstructionism. FeministStudies , 21 ,501–517. Kenway,J.,&Modra,H.(1992).Feministpedagogyandemancipa- torypossibilities.InC.Luke&J.Gore(Eds.), Feminismsand criticalpedagogy (pp.138–167).NewYork,NY:Routledge. Kenyon,S.,&Tiggemann,M.(1998).Thehairlessnessnorm:The removalofbodyhairinwomen. SexRoles , 39 ,873–885. Kirkland,A.,&Tong,R.(1996).Workingwithincontradiction:The possibilityoffeministcosmeticsurgery. JournalofClinical Ethics , 7 ,151–159. Komter,A.(1989).Hiddenpowerinmarriage. Gender&Society , 3 , 187–216. Kwan,S.,&Trautner,M.N.(2009).Beautywork:Individualand institutionalrewards,thereproductionofgender,andquestions ofagency. SociologyCompass , 3 ,49–71. Lewis,C.,&Tiggemann,M.(2004).Attitudestowardwomen’s bodyhair:Relationshipanddisgustsensitivity. Psychologyof WomenQuarterly , 28 ,381–387. Mandziuk,R.M.(2010).‘‘Endingwomen’sgreatesthygienicmis- take’’:ModernityandthemortificationofmenstruationinKotex advertising,1921-1926. Women’sStudiesQuarterly , 38 ,42–62. Miles,M.,&Huberman,A.(1994). Qualitativedataanalysis: Asourcebook (2nded.).ThousandOaks,CA:Sage. Patton,T.O.(2006).‘‘Heygirl,amImorethanmyhair?’’African Americanwomenandtheirstruggleswithbeauty,bodyimage, andhair. NWSAJournal , 18 ,24–51. Pitts,V.(1999).Bodymodification,self-mutilation,andagencyin mediaaccountsofasubculture. BodyandSociety , 5 ,291–303. Ramsey,S.,Sweeney,C.,Fraser,M.,&Oades,G.(2009).Pubichair andsexuality:Areview. TheJournalofSexualMedicine , 6 , 2102–2110. Reilly,A.,&Rudd,N.A.(2009).Socialanxietyaspredictorofper- sonalaestheticamongwomen. ClothingandTextilesResearch Journal , 27 ,227–239. Rich,A.(1980).Compulsoryheterosexualityandthelesbianexis- tence. Signs , 5 ,631–660. Rosenfeld,D.(2009).Heteronormativityandhomonormativityas practicalandmoralresources:Thecaseofgayandlesbianelders. Gender&Society , 23 ,617–638. Sa’ar,A.,&Gooldin,S.(2009).Intenseengagement:Youngwomen inIsraelforgingfeministsubjectivities. Women’sStudiesInter- nationalForum , 32 ,179–188. Schick,V.R.,Calabrese,S.K.,Rima,B.N.,&Zucker,A.N. (2010).Genitalappearancedissatisfaction:Implicationsfor women’sgenitalimageself-consciousness,sexualesteem,sex- ualsatisfaction,andsexualrisk. PsychologyofWomenQuar- terly , 34 ,394–404. Schick,V.R.,Rima,B.N.,&Calabrese,S.K.(2011).Evulvalution: Theportrayalofwomen’sexternalgenitaliaandphysiqueacross timeandthecurrentBarbiedollideals. JournalofSexResearch , 48 ,74–81. Schilt,K.,&Westbrook,L.(2009).Doinggender,doinghetero- normativity:‘‘Gendernormal,’’transgenderpeople,andthe socialmaintenanceofheterosexuality. Gender&Society , 23 , 440–464. Shildrick,M.(1997). Leakybodiesandboundaries:Feminism,post- modernism,and(bio)ethics .London,England:Routledge. Smolak,L.,&Murnen,S.K.(2011).Gender,self-objectification, andpubichairremoval. SexRoles , 65 ,506–517. Stubbs,M.L.,&Costos,D.(2004).Negativeattitudestowardmen- struation:Implicationsfordisconnectionwithingirlsand betweenwomen. Women&Therapy , 27 ,37–54. Fahs 179 Swim,J.K.,&Cohen,L.L.(1997).Overt,covert,andsubtle sexism:Acomparisonbetweenattitudestowardwomenand modernsexismscales. PsychologyofWomenQuarterly , 21 , 103–118. Thompson,B.Y.(2011).Myself,covered.InC.Bobel&S.Kwan (Eds.), Embodiedresistance:Breakingtherules,challengingthe norms (pp.222–224).Nashville,TN:VanderbiltUniversityPress. Toerien,M.,&Wilkinson,S.(2003).Genderandbodyhair:Con- structingthefemininewoman. Women’sStudiesInternational Forum , 26 ,333–344. Toerien,M.,&Wilkinson,S.(2004).Exploringthedepilationnorm: Aqualitativequestionnairestudyofwomen’sbodyhairremoval. QualitativeResearchinPsychology1 ,69–92. Toerien,M.,Wilkinson,S.,&Choi,P.Y.L.(2005).Bodyhair removal:The‘‘mundane’’productionofnormativefemininity. SexRoles , 52 ,399–406. vandenBerg,P.A.,Mond,J.,Eisenberg,M.,Ackard,D.,&Neu- mark-Sztainer,D.(2010).Thelinkbetweenbodydissatisfaction andself-esteeminadolescents:Similaritiesacrossgender,age, weightstatus,race/ethnicity,andsocioeconomicstatus. Journal ofAdolescentHealth , 47 ,290–296. Warren,S.,&Brewis,J.(2004).Matterovermind?Examiningthe experienceofpregnancy. Sociology , 38 ,219–236. West,C.,&Zimmerman,D.H.(1987).Doinggender. Gender& Society , 1 ,125–151. Whelehan,I.(2000). Overloaded:Popularcultureandthefutureof feminism .London,England:Women’sPress. Zita,J.N.(1988).Thepremenstrualsyndrome:‘‘Dis-easing’’the femalecycle. Hypatia:AJournalofFeministPhilosophy , 3 ,77–99. Zita,J.N.(1998).Prozacfeminism.InJ.N.Zita(Ed.), Bodytalk: Philosophicalreflectionsonsexandgender (pp.61–79).New York,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress. 180 PsychologyofWomenQuarterly38(2)