Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Body Hair

In some cultures, the presence or absence of body hair differentiates between men and women and reflects social codes and expectations to which men and women are expected to adhere. Though biologically hair is important as a part and extension of the skin that covers almost all of the human body, the distinct cultural meanings of body and head hair have become more important than biological functions. Whereas people tend to celebrate and adorn head hair, they more often remove or hide body hair to reflect gender and cultural norms. When people speak of body hair—itself a rare occurrence—they often apply one of four (contradictory) interpretations: body hair as a problematic excess, as a monstrosity (or as evidence of monstrousness), as a trivial matter, or as a form of political protest.

Freud's essay “The Medusa's Head” provides the most famous critical reading of body hair. Freud suggested that the Medusa's snakes symbolize female pubic hair. Much anthropological writing on the subject of hair begins with Freud's essay, although Freud focuses on head hair while ignoring the significance of body hair.

Removal and Modification

Though some may consider the study of hair to be merely trivial, its position in the marketplace suggests otherwise. For instance, it has been estimated that hair removal in Britain alone is annually worth £280 million. The removal of women's body hair has replaced body hair as a fetishistic discourse that must be reiterated; such a reiteration is good news for those who sell hair removal products. Where body hair has a cultural presence, it is almost always concerned with body modification practices, including its removal or alteration. Indeed, until the recent publication of The Last Taboo: Women and Body Hair, edited by Karin Lesnik-Oberstein, contemporary writing on body hair has been almost exclusively about its removal.

Sarah Hildebrandt's detailed account of normative body hair practices among North American women builds on the work of Michel Foucault and suggests that for men as well as women, certain parts of the body become available for public display through the modification of body hair. Therefore, body hair is never so much evident as is its removal. When head hair has a historical presence, as in The History of Hair: The First Five Thousand Years, by Richard Corson, for instance, this history concerns its modification or a crisis produced by a problem associated with it: Hair in general becomes that which is modified or in need of modification.

As a review of the literature demonstrates, much current writing on body hair focuses on hair modification by women, or rather the production of “woman” and “women's bodies” via body hair modification. In such formulations, the modification of hair somehow defines what a woman might be. Research into the production of the male body challenges notions of that body as somehow stable and assumptions of a simplistic heterosexist dyad. A recent experiment by Michael Boroughs, documented in the paper “Male Body Depilation: Prevalence and Associated Features of Body Hair Removal,” further complicates the issue, demonstrating that so-called normative female responses to body hair can also be understood as male behaviors and that depilation itself can be read as that which blurs the boundaries between what is considered male and female. All the same, one can see historically reiterated a trope that seeks to give a presence to certain kinds of male body hair and to make invisible certain kinds of female body hair. Such a trope functions not only to differentiate between men and women but also as a political device.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading