Gals and Body Hair in the U. S. Freakin-A

Do you know how hard it is to avoid removing the tiny little dark hairs above my lip and on the bottom side (and in between both) of my eyebrows?  It takes a very conscious effort of self-love and respect for the state of my healthy body to refrain from plucking out these very natural pieces of my physiognomy every time I become aware of them.  The worst part of this battle between convention and social pressure and subtle scorn is my own mental and emotional cruxes. I am aware of a very deep self-loathing acquired within myself.  These feelings are followed by a near constant attempt at admonition for my boldness. What I mean is, growing up as a Mexican American in Northern California, I have somehow come to the conclusion somewhere deep inside of me where “culture” is propagated that facial hair on women is undesirable, unattractive, non-feminine, ugly; shows a lack of self-respect/common decency, a lack of healthy-conformity to social convention, and a disregard for the accepted personal hygiene, and just about any other way that someone might choose to decree something as “bad.”

It is speculated that the growth of thicker and darker hair anywhere on the face and neck, chest, nipples, legs, forearms, underarms, nipples, fingers, toes, the back of the hands, and the tops of feet is associated with higher levels of testosterone in human beings.  In fact, the appearance of hair in any location other than the top of the head seems to be largely regarded by those engaged unconsciously in the generality of droning American culture as undesirable – particularly when they appear on a female – and certainly, therefore, as “un-beautiful” on a female.  This being said, it is also widely known, among those who have heard and are familiar with, that the terms “testosterone” and males are to be inexplicably connected; likewise, females and “estrogen.”  It would seem to follow then, that “testosterone’ is synonymous and indicative of “masculinity; and if “testosterone” is immutably linked with “masculinity” and “testosterone” is linked with increased instances of hair growth on the body, then it seems reasonable to also believe that higher levels of hair growth on a “female” body would suggest higher levels of testosterone. Does this, however, mean that a female who chooses not to alter or remove her natural hair placements is in fact any LESS “feminine” than one who does not?

You know what, guys? I realized that this could really just be phase 4 of my project! 😀

Phase one: Blind conformity (adhering to social normalcy without even being conscious of an alternative path.)

Connect With Me

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s