I brandish my egalitarian temperament pretty often when I come in contact with feminist views. And then, sometimes, things happen that make me think about what my stance on things really is like. And in this instance, I am talking of hair, or rather, androgenic hair, to be specific. Should it not bother me if a woman is sporting the sprinkles of a moustache? And if it does, does it say I am not as egalitarian as I like to think?
So I dwelt a bit on the matter. The aspect of the natural process briefly... It is alright for some of the vellus to turn androgenic in women once post-menopausal levels of testosterone rise. They still ought not to turn into furry little (or big, as the case may be) things, but I suppose it makes certain amount of visible body hair on them a natural process that can't be much avoided. But that doesn't happen till they get to their mid-40s, not when they are 25.
Then of course, there is the cultural aspect. I know a strangely high number of men now who like to believe that women don't have any body hair, and act surprised and disgusted to find out that they indeed do. ALL of them are west European or American. I know women who spot some armpit hair on another woman and go "yetch". And these are not just west European or American women. It is expected of women, by men and women, to be almost entirely hairless beyond the head. I am not in that camp. Do what you will, it's all good, is what I say.
Which brings me to third aspect... the aesthetic. Of course, it is purely subjective (though in this case, there is overwhelming concurrence across our race in a particular direction, but I am not using the argument of the tyranny of the majority) and I have my own taste. In my own mind, the idea of facial hair is associated with my own sex, since I have been shaving it from my own face for years now. And so, for me, it forms a part of aesthetic qualities associated with males (though I don't have any opinion on men's looks, an attitude which once earned me the opinion of being insecure about my own sexuality, but that's a tale for another time).
All that said, I had never quite seen as many young women walking around anabashedly with facial hair as I have seen here in London. Without making a futile comparison between the pressure to look good in this city and say, Delhi, let us assume for simplicity's sake that it is the same in both cities (because I can't prove one way or the other, neither can anyone else, I think). So I began thinking why this was so. And I came up with two possible reasons.
One, blonde hair, or light coloured hair in general. Maybe some women confuse light coloured hair with it being invisible against their skin. Let me tell you, it is certainly not! And there are obviously more of those in London than in Delhi. Two, feminism. Maybe it is that twisted approach to attain their notion of equality that prompts certain women to not bother about it if they happen to grow a bit of a grizzly. And there are also more feminists here than perhaps all of India put together.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Another reason why more London women sport goatees than Delhi women is the difference in affordability of beauty treatments in the two cities. I say this based on the observation of a few cauc-y relatives of mine who come to India and spend half their vacation getting facials, waxings and whatnots as if they've discovered a free fount of beauty. They tell me that the developed world charges a huge chunk of their money of the kind of stuff most women in India take for granted. So while the average Indian woman can get a facial for Rs. 30, the poor whities have to make do with homemade solutions or sometimes nothing at all. ...And yes aesthetics are culturally defined, take for example the pot-bellied "sexy mamas" of south india who find less takers in the northern part of the country.
hmmm... point about expenses well taken. as for "big women", i remember my english teacher in school telling me once that they were quite desirable in france too.
Post a Comment