2014 Exploring The Depilation Norm

This article was downloaded by: [Korea University]
On: 29 December 2014, At: 16:32

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Qualitative Research in Psychology

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uqrp20
Exploring the depilation norm: a

qualitative questionnaire study of
women's body hair removal
a b a c
Merran Toerien PhD & Sue Wilkinson
a
Social Sciences Loughborough Unibersity , Loughborough,
UK
b
Department of Sociology , The University of York , York, UK
c
Department of Women's Studies , Simon Fraser University ,
Vancouver, Canada
Published online: 21 Jul 2008.
To cite this article: Merran Toerien PhD & Sue Wilkinson (2004) Exploring the depilation norm:
a qualitative questionnaire study of women's body hair removal, Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 1:1, 69-92
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088704qp006oa
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information
(the Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor
& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties
whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and
views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The
accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently
verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable
for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/
page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [Korea University] at 16:32 29 December 2014
www.QualResearchPsych.com Qualitative Research in Psychology 2004; 1: 69 /92
Exploring the depilation norm: a

qualitative questionnaire study of
womens body hair removal
Merran Toeriena and Sue Wilkinson b
Social Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
Womens body hair removal is highly normative across contemporary

western cultures. Nevertheless, little is known about the production and
maintenance of this norm. Drawing on qualitative survey data from 678
women in the UK, this study offers two explanations: First, hairlessness
and hairiness are predominantly constructed as positive and negative
alternatives, respectively. Consequently, the options to depilate, or not,
are unequally weighted. Second, should a woman fail to depilate, she is
likely to be subject to interactional sanctions. These exact a social price for
being hairy, and serve to enforce the depilation norm. Depilation is, then,
shown to be a matter not merely of personal preference, but of conforming
to a social norm reecting an imperative to improve the body. Taking a
feminist perspective, this study understands the depilation norm as an
instance of the policing of womens bodies within a narrow ideal of social
acceptability. Qualitative Research in Psychology 2004; 1: 69 /92
Key words: feminism; qualitative survey analysis; social norms; womens

body hair removal
Introduction socially normative has to go unquestioned

(Tiggemann & Kenyon, 1998: 874), and part
Womens body hair1 removal was termed a of the bodily ideal for contemporary Wes-
social convention over 70 years ago (Hope, tern women (Whelehan, 2000). Neverthe-
1982: 96). Today, depilation is understood less, while some research has investigated
as taken-for-granted (Hope, 1982: 93), so so-called excess hair growth in women (e.g.,
Correspondence: Merran Toerien, Department of Sociology, The University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD,
UK.
E-mail: mgt100@york.ac.uk
a
Merran Toerien is now at the Department of Sociology, The University of York, York, UK.
b
Sue Wilkinson is now at the Department of Womens Studies, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada.
# Arnold 2004 10.1191/1478088704qp006oa

70 M Toerien and S Wilkinson
Barth et al ., 1993; Ferrante, 1988; Ferriman found that [t]he UK hair-removing market
& Gallwey, 1961; Kitzinger & Willmott, was worth 120m [about $188,650,000] in
2002; Lunde & Grttum, 1984; Rabinowitz 1999, including disposable razors, creams
et al ., 1983; Shah, 1957), there is very little and waxes. . . And. . . is predicted to grow to
empirical work on the norm for hairlessness 170m [about $267,250,000] by 2003 (Gill-
as it applies to women more generally. The ette pins hopes, 2000). Furthermore, over
present study is part of the first British 630m [about $990,500,000] was spent glob-
social scientific survey of womens hair ally in 1999 on shaving materials alone
removal. It is also the first study ever to (ibid. ).
provide qualitative questionnaire data on Despite such strong evidence for the
womens experiences of their body hair. normativity of womens hair removal, few
A small pool of quantitative evidence studies have sought to explain the norm.
strongly supports an understanding of wo- The present survey study / using a self-
mens hair removal as normative. Almost administered questionnaire, including a
93% of the present British sample reported number of open-ended questions / ad-
removing their underarm hair, and over dresses womens own experiences of their
88% their leg hair (Toerien et al ., forth- body hair, and explores ways in which the
coming). An overwhelming 99.7% of parti- norm for depilation may be produced and
cipants also reported removing hair from at maintained.
least one body region at some time in their The survey method is an unusual one for
lives (ibid. ). These results are commensu- collecting qualitative data. Some users
rate with those of other studies. Research guides to research methods entirely exclude
conducted in the 1960s found that 98% of self-administered surveys from discussions
North American women aged 15 /44 re- of qualitative methods (e.g., Flick, 2002), or
moved some body hair, while 70% of those present survey studies as an alternative to
over 44 did so (cited in Hope, 1982). More qualitative research (e.g., Frankfort-Nach-
recently, over 80% of a sample of profes- mias & Nachmias, 1996; Morse & Richards,
sional North American women was found to 2002; Silverman, 2001). Similarly, guides to
remove their leg and/or underarm hair survey analysis may explain only analytic
(Basow, 1991). In Australia, 93% of a uni- procedures / predominantly statistical
versity student sample reported removing ones / for use with quantitative data (e.g.,
their underarm hair, and over 91% their leg Fink, 1995; Weisberg et al ., 1996).
hair (Tiggemann & Kenyon, 1998). The same Nevertheless, we chose to collect qualita-
study found similar results for a group of tive data by means of a survey because our
Australian high school students: more than research aims seemed particularly fitted to
91% reported removing their underarm hair the survey method in two key ways: First,
and 92% their leg hair. Industry reports given our aim to understand a widespread
provide similarly high statistics (Hope, norm, we wanted to obtain a wide-angle
1982). Chapkis (1986), for example, cites picture of womens body hair-related ex-
the Epilator 2700 estimate that between periences. Through the use of open-ended
85% and 90% of women have body hair questions, surveys make possible the collec-
they would prefer to be rid of. These figures tion of qualitative data from a much larger
translate into big business for depilatory sample than is generally practicable when
producers. Research carried out by Gillette using other qualitative methods (see Rob-
Exploring the depilation norm 71
son, 1993): the present study, for instance, to be key to participants reasons for hair
analyses data from almost 700 British wo- removal. These authors agree that, as least
men. Surveys are thus well suited to pro- for white, heterosexual women, reasons for
viding breadth in new areas of removing hair coincide with the claims
investigation, such as the present one. made in most depilatory advertisements,
Second, we wanted to explore the possibi- and maintain the presumption that a wo-
lity of cultural commonplaces with respect mans body is unacceptable if unaltered.
to women and body hair. Self-administered Unlike Basows (1991) and Tiggemann
questionnaires standardise the data collec- and Kenyons (1998) questionnaire, the pre-
tion procedure (Robson, 1993) in a way that sent study does not ask women why they
is practically impossible to do when using remove their body hair. To do so is (as
semi-structured interviews or focus groups. Basow herself acknowledges) to make the
Survey data thus strongly lend themselves problematic assumptions that women know,
to cross-question analysis, allowing the and are able to say, why they depilate. In an
researcher to investigate themes that might effort to avoid these assumptions, the pre-
be common to the responses of a wide range sent study asks participants not to explain
of participants (Bell, 1993). Moreover, sur- their hair removal, but (more generally) to
vey responses are not produced in interac- report their experience of body hair and
tion with a researcher (as in interview depilation, and others reactions to their
methods) or with other participants (as in body hair and/or its absence. In asking
focus groups) (Robson, 1993). Therefore, to open-ended questions, the questionnaire
find that survey participants use the same avoids offering a pre-determined list of
terms in their responses is to provide reasons for participants to rate according
compelling evidence for culturally shared to their purported importance. Instead, the
understandings of the issue under research. women are able to offer their own accounts
Two previous survey studies / one con- in their own words. These twin shifts in
ducted in the US (Basow, 1991), one in research strategy / not asking why and not
Australia (Tiggemann & Kenyon, 1998) / using rating scales / make it possible to
have asked women why they remove their investigate the culturally dominant ways in
body hair. Unlike the present study, how- which the women themselves construct
ever, both provided a closed list of reasons what it means to be hairy/hairless, and
for hair removal, which participants were (from the womens own perspectives) how
asked to rate using a 5-point Likert scale, others react to their hairy/hairless bodies.
ranging from (1) not at all to (5) major From a feminist viewpoint, these investiga-
reason (Basow, 1991: 87). Using factor tions are important because they take ser-
analysis, Basow found two key factors iously womens own experiences of one of
accounting for womens hair removal: factor the most statistically common body-altering
1 related mainly to femininity and sexual practices (Tiggemann & Kenyon, 1998).
attractiveness reasons, while factor 2 related They are important also because, in explor-
mainly to social norms. Tiggemann and ing womens hairlessness as a norm requir-
Kenyon used Basows questionnaire with ing social production and maintenance, this
the addition of four items. Overall, their study refuses an understanding of depila-
findings support Basows: femininity/attrac- tion as simply a matter of individual choice.
tiveness and social norms were also found As such, the study calls into question a
taken-for-granted instance of the policing Materials

of womens bodies (Chapkis, 1986; Freed- Each participant completed a self-adminis-
man, 1986). tered, 31-item questionnaire, which was
developed following an extensive literature
review, and refined via a pilot study (n /
33). The questionnaire, entitled Body Hair:
A Survey for Women, consisted of five
Method sections. The first three sections (totalling
16 items) asked predominantly closed ques-
Participants tions regarding womens hair removal prac-
A questionnaire was distributed to partici- tices, including from which body regions (if
pants from student and nonstudent popula- any) they removed hair, what hair removal
tions across the UK. The final sample methods they used, and on which body
totalled 678. This figure reflects a return regions they used these. A quantitative
rate of 43.4% (the norm is around 30% for analysis of these data is to be reported
mail questionnaires, Schweigert, 1994), and elsewhere (Toerien et al ., forthcoming).
may well be a conservative estimate; given The focus here will be on the section of
that many of the questionnaires were dis- the questionnaire consisting of nine predo-
tributed in bulk, the number that actually minantly open-ended questions about wo-
reached participants is unknown. Efforts mens experiences of body hair and its
were made to obtain as diverse a sample removal, and others reactions to their hair
as possible within the confines of a small- and/or its absence.
scale study, including older women, mem- For each of the following questions, par-
bers of ethnic minorities, and lesbians. ticipants were asked to write their answer in
About half the participants were in full- a box, which was provided:
time education, and about half were in full-
or part-time paid employment, or otherwise . If you DO remove your body hair, what,
occupied (e.g., as full-time homemakers or for you, are the BEST things about doing
volunteers). Participants ranged in age from so?
under 16 years to over 70 years, with around . If you DO NOT remove your body hair,
what, for you, are the BEST things about
40% of the sample over 30 years of age.
not doing so?
More than 80% of participants identified as
. If you DO remove your body hair, what,
white, reflecting the composition of the
for you, are the WORST things about
British population: only around 7% of
doing so?
people living in Britain are from an ethnic
. If you DO NOT remove your body hair,
minority group (Great Britain Central Sta- what, for you, are the WORST things
tistical Office and Great Britain Office for about not doing so?
National Statistics, 2002: 30). Similarly, . What would make you change your
over 90% identified as heterosexual, again current practices to do with your body
reflecting the composition of the British hair?
population: a 1990s UK national survey
found that only 3.4% of women reported For each of the following questions, par-
some same-sex experience in their lifetime ticipants were asked to tick either yes or
(Gay and lesbian information, 2002). no. If they ticked yes, they were asked to
explain further in a box, which was pro- prior theory or research (Boyatzis, 1998, and
vided: see also Potter & Wetherell, 1987). The
themes were refined through repeated in-
. Have you had any NEGATIVE reactions vestigation both of patterns of commonality,
from other people to your body hair and/ and of anomalous examples (Potter &
or your lack of body hair? Wetherell, 1987). Direct quotes from the
. Have you had any POSITIVE reactions data were grouped under the thematic head-
from other people to your body hair and/ ings (see Breakwell, 1995), providing both a
or your lack of body hair? clear illustration of each theme / in parti-
. Has anyone ever suggested that you cipants own words / and also some in-
SHOULD remove your body hair? dication of the number of participants who
. Has anyone ever suggested that you addressed each theme. These frequencies
SHOULD NOT remove your body hair? are provided throughout the results sec-
tions, below. While frequency is not neces-
Procedure sarily a measure of significance, it offers a
The questionnaire was distributed to parti- sense of the extent to which a particular
cipants through contact persons (e.g., lec- construct/experience was common across
turers and womens centre managers), by responses, and hence the extent to which
mail, and through advertisements accompa- it might be understood as more broadly
nied by copies of the questionnaire. Com- shared.
pleted questionnaires were returned by We have organised the dominant themes
mail, or posted in a box placed alongside that arose out of our analysis into an over-
the advertisement. Where bulk return was arching framework, comprised of: 1) the
not possible, stamped envelopes were pro- social construction of the depilation norm;
vided to individual participants. and 2) the enforcement of the depilation
norm. These are presented, respectively, in
Data analysis the two main results sections, below. This
Thematic analysis was used to identify framework offers a way of understanding
recurrent themes in the data. This analysis the themes that is informed by a feminist
was done across questions, rather than for perspective on womens body hair / that
each open-ended question individually, in hair removal, rather than being simply a
order to identify commonalities running matter of individual choice, is a norm
through the data as a whole. Working from requiring social production and mainte-
a feminist perspective, we were concerned nance.
to balance two (sometimes conflicting)
goals: to remain as faithful as possible to
womens own accounts of their experiences
(see Wilkinson, 1986), and to offer a poli- Results
tical reading of the apparently personal
practices of hair removal (see Weedon, Constructing the depilation norm:
1997). In an effort to address the former dominant systems of sense-making
concern, we began inductively: repeated This section of the results addresses the
rounds of reading and categorising the question of how the depilation norm is
data made it possible to derive the themes constructed by women themselves, and by
from the data themselves, rather than from others in their social world. It identifies, as
themes, hair removal as related to: 1) attrac- Participants described body hair in terms
tiveness; 2) smoothness; 3) hygiene and that contrasted strikingly with descriptions
neatness; 4) femininity. The presentation of hairlessness as attractive: body hair was
of each theme displays the dominant sys- unsightly (15 participants), unattractive
tems of sense-making: a dichotomous con- (ten participants) and ugly (nine partici-
struction of hairlessness (as positive) and pants), making one look awful (P532, 535),
hairiness (as negative). and disgusting (P82 and P510). I find
underarm hair unattractive (P119), com-
Attractiveness (attractive versus mented one participant. I think that excess
unattractive). pubic hair looks unsightly (P323), asserted
As part of the beauty ritual (P4632 ), depila- another. When I played a lot of volleyball,
tion was described as necessary for the sake wrote another woman, I made sure my legs
of appearance (28 participants), aes- were shaven, to stop myself looking dis-
thetics (six participants) and beauty (four gusting (P82). Participants also attributed
participants). Participants reported that to claims that hairiness was unattractive to
be hairless was to look good (nine partici- others: one woman recalled being informed
pants), look nice (12 participants), be by a boy at school that it was ugly to have
attractive (three participants), pretty (p. hairy legs (P135); anothers son described
374), and beautiful (P610 and P664), her underarm hair as unsightly (P212),
aesthetically pleasing (P345) and pleasant while another commented that: my leg
to behold (P460). A hairless body was also hairs poked through my tights at school
depicted as an improved body / indeed, a (black tights, shiny blondish hairs) and an
substantial number of participants sponta- acquaintance told me it looked disgusting
neously reported hairlessness not as (P510). One woman summed it up thus:
merely attractive, but as more attractive there is general agreement in female com-
(57 participants), making a woman look pany that hairy legs, armpits, upper lips are
better (78 participants), nicer (24 partici- not attractive (P408).
pants) and prettier (six participants) (em- The emotional intensity of terms like
phasis added). Hair removal was thus said ugly and disgusting was further evident
to be a way of producing the preferred look in the claim to hate the look of hairy legs/
(five participants) or the desired image armpits (P366, emphasis added). If I met a
(P262). Participants attributed these claims man that didnt mind the hair on my
both to themselves and to others, reporting, stomach I would stop removing it / thats
for example, that: I feel my body looks more what I most hate removing, wrote one
attractive without the extra hair (P60) and: woman. But, she went on, I most hate
When I pluck my eyebrows, people have how it looks! (P675). Furthermore, hairi-
stated that they look better (P113). Some ness was associated with a departure from
also attributed the equation of attractiveness civilised society, making one look wild or
and hairlessness especially to men, claim- even like an animal. As one woman re-
ing that hairlessness is about attractiveness called: When travelling in India I stopped
to the opposite sex (P290), that other shaving my legs and underarms. A fellow
people (importantly lads) think it looks traveller once asked me if I had always been
better (P117), and that hairlessness is part a hairy wild woman in a very negative
of a male idea of beauty (P595). tone! (P394). Other participants asserted
that body hair made a woman look like a Participants therefore considered dark,
cave man (P147) or look animal-like thick or coarse body hair / understood as
(P176): like a gorilla (three participants), more visible than light, thin or fine hair / to
a monkey (three participants), an ape be particularly unattractive and in need of
(P647), a chimpanzee (P1), or a yeti removal. As one woman put it: I am quite
(P267). To be hairy then, was not only to hairy and my hair is quite dark so my legs/
look unattractive compared to hairless wo- face look better for removing it (P375).
men, but even to look not properly human. Another womans hair was considered
Participants considered it especially im- very dark and unsightly (P127) by fellow
portant to achieve the hairless look if their pupils when she was a schoolgirl, and
body was to be publicly visible due to anothers flatmates taught her to pluck her
revealing clothing (three participants). In eyebrows because: they said they were
particular, a large number of women were bushy and spoilt my features (P10). One
concerned not to appear hairy when wear- participant had been complimented on her
ing a swimming costume (52 participants), a lack of dark facial hair [as such hair] can be
skirt/dress (33 participants), a sleeveless seen as unattractive (P251), while others
garment (18 participants), tights/stockings had been told they were lucky to have
(13 participants) / through which hair light, thin or fine hair (13 participants), as it
should not poke (P510 and P414), stick meant their hair was not too noticeable
(P250 and P323), or show (P445 and P641) (P9), and didnt show (P485). Deemed
/ shorts (ten participants), or brief under- unattractive, visible body hair was, in other
wear (P323 and P396). Indeed, many wo- words, thought to require either depilation
men reported feeling unable to wear such (or reduction in the case of eyebrows) or
clothes if their bodies were hairy (30 parti- concealment under less revealing clothing.
cipants), even if, as one participant put it, In short, then, hairiness and attractive-
[you were] on holiday. . . it was a really hot ness were depicted as incompatible / a
day. . . [and] you dont know anybody (P45). point succinctly made by one participants
One of the best things about hair removal aphorism: attractiveness as opposed to
was therefore said to be that one could wear hairiness (P665). As another participant
revealing clothes without feeling con- summed it up: hairlessness, in a nutshell,
scious (P136), and without trouble is about looking good (P349).
(P521). Conversely, one participant com-
mented that she stopped removing her hair Smoothness (smooth versus stubbly).
when she stopped wearing sleeveless Almost a third of the sample spontaneously
dresses, so the hair didnt show anyway described a hairless body as smooth (199
(P368), and others noted that they shaved participants), or having the quality of
less when their bodies were covered up smoothness (18 participants). In related
(P2 and P422), particularly in winter (17 terms, others described hairlessness as
participants). In other words, the public soft (20 participants) and silky (seven
visibility of a body part was reported to participants). I like the smoothness of it
play an important role in the decision to [hairless skin] (P37) wrote one woman, and
depilate: visible body hair, deemed unat- others reported that one of the best things
tractive, was especially thought to require about hair removal was: feeling smooth
removal. (P673), being smooth (P287), and the
smoothness of my legs when I have done it Participants also linked the preference for
(P571). As when describing hairlessness as smoothness to tactile pleasures. Describing
more attractive, participants also depicted body hair as horrible to touch (P384),
hairlessness as an improved bodily state participants considered depilation a means
with respect to smoothness: hairless skin of becoming appealing to touch (P145) and
was said to be smoother (20 participants), nicer to touch (P91). One woman commen-
softer (three participants) and silkier ted that: it is nice to run my hands over
(P523) (emphasis added). A large number smooth legs after hair removal (P245).
of women reported receiving positive com- Others wrote: feels nice (e.g., shaved legs
/ smooth, nice when wearing trousers, the
ments about their smooth legs (46 partici-
pants). As one participant put it: Hairless feel against them) (P10); I much prefer the
legs are smoother/silkier, therefore partner sensation of being stubble free (P208); I
appreciates it (spontaneously when newly like the feel of shaved or rather bristle-free
done) (P523). Men especially were said to legs (P554); and Friends say smooth legs
respond positively to smooth legs (P366) feel better (P566). Participants also re-
and to prefer smooth women rather than ported that others enjoyed touching their
hairy women (P623). smooth legs: Partners find my skin soft,
Again, participants described body hair smooth and pleasant to touch (P434); Just
in opposite terms to hairlessness; while after shaving when my legs are silky smooth
hairlessness was depicted positively, body people love to touch them (P248); Ive
hair was described in negative terms, as: received comments such as you feel nice,
lovely and smooth. People want to touch
stubbly (21 participants), prickly (13 par-
my legs (P257). Conversely, participants
ticipants), spiky (five participants),
wrote that: Friends dont like my prickly
bristly (four participants), rough (P234,
legs on them if we stay at each others
618) and stubby (P438), causing one to
houses and share a bed (P199), and I
have hedgehog legs (P219). Participants
would not be happy with someone touching
reported that failure to depilate made ones
my legs when they were not shaved (P286).
legs feel rough (P234) and resulted in
Although smoothness / equated with
stubby sharp hair under your arms
hairlessness / was understood as a product
(P438). Several also attributed the depiction of depilation, participants also noted a flip
of hair as stubbly to others, and (male) side to hair removal: stubble is itself
partners in particular were said not to like caused by removing hair: if left to grow,
stubble (eight participants). One womans hair has a tapered tip; if removed (especially
partner said something like Oh I nearly got by shaving), that tip is squared off, leaving it
splinters in my hand (P143). Another com- prickly. One woman reported that she
mented that: My boyfriend wasnt im- would not remove her arm hair because: I
pressed by my stubbly armpits (P153), dont want stubbly arms (P85). For others,
and a third reported that: In summer, if one of the worst things about hair removal
legs were stubbly, my ex-boyfriend liked to was getting prickly legs when hair grows
let me know (P333). Hair removal was thus back after shaving (P263) and stubbly re-
depicted as a means of making ones legs growth (three participants). Well over a
bristle-free (P554) and less prickly (P271), third of participants thus spontaneously
resulting in no stubble at the end (P44). described the maintenance of smoothness
(328) as a time-consuming (272 partici- ing hair removal to cleanliness in a range of

pants) process. Similarly a large number ways; hot weather, pelvic examinations,
reported hair removal to be repetitive (103 sport and religion were all, for instance,
participants) or even never ending (P331): implicated: Shorter body hair can feel
a bit like housework / never completed cleaner especially in hot weather and if
(P28), or, like gardening / nature keeps on doing sweaty activities (P369); I started to
working, grass and hair grow / constant remove mine [pubic hair] when I was
nurturing, trimming, cultivation (P518). having problems with my womb etc. As I
Nevertheless, participants asserted, you had to have a lot of examinations it felt
have to keep doing it as the hairs become better, easier and cleaner (P672); [Hair
bristly when they grow back (P651), you removal is] hygienic [if one plays a] lot of
cant not do it (P55). sport (P362); and My religion states that it
Hairiness / as well as stubble, the pro- is a hygienic practice to remove body hair as
duct of hair removal itself / was depicted, diseases can be transmitted through it etc.
in other words, as incompatible with This applies to pubic hair in particular
smoothness. Repeated hair removal was (P413).
therefore deemed necessary in order to As implied by the use of comparatives
attain a smooth skin (and the associated like cleaner, more hygienic and fresher,
tactile pleasures) and avoid the contrastive participants again used contrasting terms to
state of feeling stubbly. As one woman describe the absence and presence of hair.
summed it up: I just feel good about being In opposition to the depiction of hairless-
so smooth (P371). ness as clean, body hair was said to be
unhygienic (four participants), dirty (four
participants), grubby (P274 and P554), and
Cleanliness and tidiness (clean and tidy
unclean (P173 and P221). Would feel dirty
versus unclean and untidy).
if I didnt remove hair (P7), commented one
A substantial number of participants also
participant. I feel a bit grubby when my
spontaneously described hair removal as a
underarm hair gets longer than stubble
means of being clean (57 participants) or, length (P274), wrote another. I remove
indeed, cleaner (83 participants), fresh long, dark hairs from my upper lip, asserted
(13 participants) or fresher (eight partici- another woman, as they tend to make the
pants), hygienic (11 participants) or more area look dirty/grubby (P554). Participants
hygienic (11 participants) and not so also attributed the assumption that body
yucky (P59). Put another way, participants hair was unclean to others: When I did not
saw hair removal as a matter of hygiene (33 shave underarm or leg hair from 16 to 19
participants) or cleanliness (19 partici- years of age, had very negative reactions
pants). I think [hair removal] reflects per- from best friend who thought it was dirty
sonal hygiene, something that is very (P635); and Boyfriends complain about
important as its one of the first things you hairiness as a lack of personal hygiene
notice about a person (P226), wrote one (P334). One woman recalled a particularly
participant. After hair removal, my body emotive experience:
looks cleaner (P481), reported another. For
many others the main concern was with People at work, when a discussion came up
feel[ing] cleaner (48 participants, empha- about the subject [of body hair], thought it was
sis added). Participants accounted for link- disgusting, especially when I showed them my
underarm, saying I must stink. They shivered, (nine participants) or presented (three
stuck their tongue out whilst pulling a face. I felt participants), and of looking like one takes
like the unclean (P221).
care of oneself (four participants). To be
hairless was to be neat (ten participants) or
The link between hairlessness and clean- neater (eight participants), and tidy (nine
liness was closely related to participants participants) or tidier (ten participants). I
concerns about sweat and body odour: feel a lot better about myself if my pubic
participants reported that being hairless hair is tidy, even though nobody but my
caused less perspiration (three partici- boyfriend sees it (P46), wrote one partici-
pants), made one less sweaty (13 participant. Others had been told that, following
pants), reduce[d] sweat (P657 and P677), hair removal: my eyebrows look neat and
ease[d] sweating (P84), or even avoid[ed] frame my face (P597), and that [I have a]
sweating (four participants). By contrast, neat bikini line (P257). Body hair was, by
participants reported, hair would trap contrast, said to look ungroomed (three
(P324 and P628), hold (P300) or collect participants), untidy (P325 and P487),
(p. 566) sweat, making one sweaty (three scruffy (P366), unruly (P201), or strag-
participants), sweat more (four partici- gerly (P386). Being hairy, asserted one
pants) or sweatier (P161). Since I sweat a
participant, makes you feel untidy (P487).
great deal, wrote one participant, and in
Others boyfriends had suggested: tidying
kickboxing a lot of physical contact is
up my pubic area (P530), and that: my
involved, therefore I think its hygienic to
pubic hair was too wild and needs to be
remove body hair (P251). For another wo-
neater (P608). As another woman put it:
man, keeping it [pubic hair] trimmed feels
Dont want to appear to be ungroomed, or,
like Im less sweaty down there and this
as an older woman, to have let myself go
may help control thrush (P197). Further-
(P168).
more, the association between sweat and
Hair removal was, then, constructed as a
body odour (three participants) meant that
matter of hygiene and neatness. Failure to
participants considered body hair (espe-
depilate was depicted in contrastive terms:
cially underarm hair) to be smelly (four
as making one dirty, sweaty, smelly and un-
participants), to smell (P271 and P487), to
smell bad (P324), and to stink (P221). groomed. As one woman put it when asked
Participants thus advocated hair removal as what would make her change her practices
a way of cutting down (P325) or stamping to do with her body hair: Nothing really, as
out (P332) odours (six participants). As I feel it is a hygienic practice (P69).
several women put it: I remove underarm
hair in summer, purely because it is easier Femininity (feminine versus masculine).
to remain unsweaty/unsmelly. Otherwise I A sizeable number of participants asserted
would not bother (P531); I feel its more that hairlessness was feminine (27 partici-
hygienic (i.e., less smelly!!) to shave your pants), more feminine (34 participants),
armpits (P344); and If you run around, you and even extra feminine (P180) or much
sweat therefore smell if youve got under- more feminine (P253). Some also described
arm hair (P271). the hairless body as womanly (five parti-
Participants also reported depilation to be cipants), more ladylike (P62 and P76) and
a matter of neatness (P319 and P390) or more female (P158). As one woman put it:
tidiness (P549) / of being well groomed Men (not boyfriends) who had been dis-
gusted at me for not shaving my underarms sideburns (P250 and P529) and goatee
thought it to be much more pleasant/femi- (P466) / implying that to have such hair is
nine when I started to shave them (P335). to be not properly feminine. Participants
Yet again, hairlessness and hairiness were thus understood the use of such terms to
depicted as opposites. In this case, however, describe their facial hair as problematic: I
the opposition was not simply one of recall overhearing someone describe me as
positive as opposed to negative evalua- having a beard, which was very hurtful
tion. Rather, it mapped onto a common- (P543); At school in my teens people
sense understanding of femininity and commented on my having a moustache
masculinity as dichotomous. Given an as- and since then I have always bleached it
sumption that the feminine is unmasculine (P374); and / reported as a negative reac-
and vice versa (Hope, 1982), the equation of tion from others to her body hair / In my
hairlessness and femininity meant that to be teens males commented on me having

hairy was to be unfeminine/masculine. better sideburns than they have (P529).
Participants associated being hairy, in A substantial number of participants also
other words, with being like a man (eight saw body hair removal as a gendered prac-
participants), masculine (four partici- tice, in the sense that they considered the
pants), manly (P634), male (P113 and norm for hairlessness to apply specifically
P599), not feminine (three participants), to women (44 participants). One partici-
unfeminine (P182 and P356) or less fem- pant, for example, recalled having a discus-
inine (P354), not womanly (P498), and sion at college. . . about why women are
unladylike (P453). Participants also re- expected to remove body hair whilst men
ported that having body hair made them dont (P556). Others had been explicitly
feel like a man (P211 and P487, emphasis informed that women in particular should
added); that their religion (Islam) requires be hairless: I have been told that women
women to remove hair from arms, legs, face should have smooth legs and underarms at
so as to not resemble a man (P450); and that all times; Ladies shouldnt have hairy legs
others had likened them to men because of I was told (P438); and I remember being
being hairy. I am quite hairy on my upper told that adult women always do this [shave
lip, commented one woman, and men will under the arms] (P544). In various ways,
often remark about me looking like a man participants also depicted hairlessness as a
(P221). Another participant had been told social norm, to which women in particular
that her arms were too hairy for a girl were expected to conform. Society dictates
(P540), and a third was likened to Liam women should not have moustaches or
Gallagher [male singer/songwriter] (P524) beards or long thick eyebrows, as well as
because of having hair in the middle of her hairy legs and underarms (P678), wrote one
eyebrows (P524). Anothers boyfriend had participant. As another put it: It was con-
said she looked like a footballer when she sidered the done thing when I was growing
allowed her leg hair to grow long enough to up for young women to remove underarm
wax (P339). Furthermore, the very terms hair / family, friends, womens mags rein-
used to describe facial hair are ones that are forced this. Eyebrow plucking similarly was
typically associated with men (Kitzinger & reinforced by womens mags (P455). Others
Willmott, 2002) / for example, beard (nine referred to the depilation norm as: The
participants), moustache (20 participants), social ideal of the hairless woman (P292);
The dominant conception of women in Being able to grow my facial hair and to
West as one who shaves, bleaches, and in shape it as men do / and not be made to feel
various ways / beautifies herself (P554); like a freak (P466).
and The British cultural bias for less hairy In short, hairiness was understood as
women i.e., neat bikini line, smooth legs incompatible with femininity: to be hairy
(P369). was to be unfeminine/masculine. Hair re-
Participants also referred explicitly to moval was thus understood as a gendered
social expectations (P556) that women practice, both in the sense that depilation
should be hairless when writing about their was necessary for femininity, and in the
personal hair removal practices: As it is not sense that participants reported a socio-
socially accepted and approved for women cultural norm for hairlessness applied spe-
to be hairy, I feel much happier removing it cifically to women. As one woman put it: I
(P132); and My body hair shows more [due associate body hair as a male thing (P113).
to Polycystic Ovary Syndrome] and I feel as Hair removal thus becomes, as another
if I have to remove it as it wouldnt be suggested, a way of: maintaining my femi-
acceptable in our society for women to walk ninity to others, and to myself (P678).
around with facial hair (P113). As another To sum up, then, the above four themes,
participant put it: taken together, construct hairlessness and
hairiness as contrastive bodily states: the
I go swimming a lot and I really feel that, as a depilated woman is attractive, smooth,
woman, I have no choice when it comes to clean and tidy, and feminine; the hairy
removing body hair. I have now started wearing woman is unattractive, stubbly, unclean
mens speedo shorts, instead of a swimsuit, so I and untidy, and masculine. Clearly the
dont have to do my bikini line constantly (it
brings me out in a painful rash) (P333). options to depilate or not to depilate do
not carry equal symbolic weight; con-
structed as dichotomous, hairlessness and
Another woman commented that the hairiness are also contrastively valued, with
worst thing about removing body hair was: hairlessness overwhelmingly understood in
only doing it because social pressures positive terms, and hairiness in negative
dictate that women should do so (P292). ones.
For another, ceasing to remove her hair
meant: Freedom from the tyranny of femi- Enforcing the depilation norm:
ninity. . . I am now me for me and no-one interactional sanctions against body hair
else, I do not conform to patriarchal con- This section of the results addresses the
structs of femininity and I have better things question of how the depilation norm may be
to do with my time! (P128). Others ex- enforced in everyday social interaction. It
plained that they would only consider identifies, as themes, various types of inter-
ceasing to remove their hair if there were: actional sanctions against the hairy woman:
different societal attitudes. If there wasnt 1) suggestions, injunctions and pressure; 2)
an expectation that hair free meant femi- complaints, criticisms and comments; 3)
nine (P463); If you saw more women on TV jokes, teases and nicknames; 4) looks, stares
etc. with hair on stomachs, legs, etc. (P413); and noticings. Substantial numbers of
If every other woman didnt bother remov- participants spontaneously attributed these
ing their hair (P476); and if there were: A sanctions to a wide range of others: relatives
better attitude to women with facial hair. (65 participants), especially mothers, sisters
and brothers; sexual partners (96 partici- more extensively (P162), or look after
pants); friends and colleagues (59 partici- myself more (P374), while others (15 par-
pants); professionals (nine participants), ticipants) commented that their partners
such as beauticians and doctors; and even had specifically suggested removing more
strangers (three participants). As one parti- of pubic hair (P284), or suggested removal
cipant put it: it seems that anyone who sees of hair from whole pubic region (P38).
my body hair (with very few exceptions) Other people had also informed partici-
feels they have the right to tell me off or tell pants that they needed (14 participants) to
me to shave (P441). remove their hair / a term that bolsters the
directive to depilate by suggesting that hair-
Suggestions, injunctions and pressure. lessness is not a choice/preference, but a
Suggestions, injunctions and pressure necessity. At the pub watching a football
work by explicitly telling a woman to match, wrote one woman, a man at my

remove her hair. In that sense, they are the table who I didnt know well said to me
most up front of the sanctions reported God you need to shave your armpits.
here: if a woman fails to meet the depilation Although I only had slight stubble (P493).
norm, overt efforts are made to counteract Others reported: when kissing aunt, she
that failure. A sizeable number of partici- said, oh, I think youve a nasty hair, that
pants reported that others had suggested needs plucking (P194); and: [I was told
(41 participants), advised (three partici- that my] pubic hair needs shaving off
pants) or told (17 participants) them to (P471). Injunctions and suggestions were
/ or that they should (31 participants) / also supported by gifts or offers of the tools
remove their hair. Friends and my mother for hair removal. My mother suggested
have suggested, wrote one woman, that I electrolysis and bought electrolysis system
shave my legs and underarms to get a man for me (P563), wrote one woman. An aunty
(P374). Another participant had had her I had only met once got out her waxing kit
arms waxed for a wedding / it was sug- and suggested I had a go, reported another.
gested to the three bridesmaids and bride She also told my mum she should too
(P126). Others recalled experiences from (upper lip hair) (P254). Others commented:
their school days: When I was 13 a boy my older sister offered her hair removal
advised me to shave my legs. . . For the first cream for armpits when I was about 14
time of my life, Ive been ashamed of my (P140); and My mother offered to get me a
body (P135); When a teenager, a boy told Ladyshave several Christmases in a row
me I had hairy legs / and should shave (P625).
them / made me a bit obsessive about Participants also reported experiencing
removing every single hair (P331); and overt pressure (22 participants) to remove
Im quite dark, therefore Im quite hairy, their hair. I didnt used to shave my legs,
and in secondary school between about year wrote one woman, but pressure was put on
8 /10 they said I should shave more than me by my partner to do so (P303). Another
just my legs and underarms. They said I commented: My sister put pressure on me
should shave my arms, upper lip and pluck to shave my underarms to go to Centre
my eyebrows (P45). Other women reported Parcs, where I would be walking around in
being told generally to shave more often a swimming costume. I did do it but after-
(four participants), more regularly (P388), wards I realised Id done it for her, rather
than myself (P379). As another woman put one woman who works in a sports environ-
it when asked to list the best things about ment. For another, feeling that my body
hair removal: There are no best things conforms to the expected norm [is one of the
really. I only do it because of societys best things about hair removal]. Therefore
pressure. That is, as a nation we frown am not judged as being lacking (P456).
upon body hair. If it was acceptable to be A substantial number of participants also
hairy I wouldnt bother with hair removal reported that others simply had made com-
(P293). ments (48 participants) about their body
The requirement to be hairless was, in hair. These often contained strongly nega-
other words, often spelled out to partici- tive descriptors of womens body hair.
pants / both when they first began produ- Participants had been told, for instance,
cing (more) body hair as teenagers, and if that their hair was gross (P653), abhorrent
they failed to conform to the norm as adults. (P441), disgusting (six participants), hor-
This theme, encompassing outright sugges- rible (P471), repulsive (P374) and nasty
tions, injunctions and even pressure on (P194). Some participants also noted that
women to depilate, represents an overt others conveyed their disapproval by com-
form of sanction against womens hairiness. menting in, for example, an appalled tone
(P356), or in disgust (P395). However, even
Complaints, criticisms and comments. when the comments were not explicitly so,
Complaints, criticisms and comments they were clearly understood by the women
work somewhat differently from sugges- to be negative, for they were reported in
tions, injunctions and pressure in that response to the questions: Have you had
they do not overtly assert that a woman any negative reactions from other people to
should/needs to remove her hair. Rather, your body hair and/or your lack of body
some form of negative reaction to the pre- hair? and Has anyone ever suggested that
sence of hair on a womans body is used to you should remove your body hair? Parti-
imply the requirement to be hairless. Parti- cipants reported, for example, that: Friends
cipants commented that people com- have commented on the amount of facial
plained (nine participants), moaned (P87 hair I have (P448); An ex-boyfriend once
and P160) or caused hassle (P441) when commented that I had a hairy stomach
they did not remove their body hair. Others (P176); and [Ive received] comments from
reported being criticised (P212 and P356), mother [and] strangers can make comments
castigated (P127), [told] off (P441), (when they think you cant hear) (P334). As
judg[ed] (P333 and P456), and tormen- another put it: If you dont shave legs
t[ed] (P546). My brother moans about my friends comment on hairy legs because
underarm hair (P87), wrote one woman. within our social group its the norm to
My daughter (four years old) complains shave your legs (P639).
about my prickly legs! (P145), commented Participants also drew a direct link be-
another. I was castigated by other female tween others comments and their decision
pupils for not having started getting rid of it to start removing their hair. When I was at
(P127), recalled a third. Hair removal was school I had people comment on my arms,
thus understood as a means of avoiding because they were really hairy plus having
public disapprobation (P455). I cant take black hair made it more visible. But, that
the hassle if I leave it to grow (P441), wrote stopped after I removed the hair using hair
removing cream (Immac) (P226); At (11 participants), laughed at (five partici-

school, fellow students made comments pants), mocked (three participants), ridic-
about my leg hair. This is why I started uled (three participants), or jeered at
shaving my legs (P323); and, Peers would (P648) about the presence of hair on their
point out my hairy legs and say it was bodies. Others wrote that jokes/joking
disgusting / I was 11. I had never noticed comments (nine participants) had been
things like hairy legs and not realised that made, and that others would take the
everyone else at school shaved etc. I mick3 (three participants), make fun of
promptly started shaving (P480). Moreover, them (three participants), take the piss
participants understood their present re- (P246 and P522), or give them stick
moval practices to be a means of avoiding (P175) about their body hair. One woman,
comment. Indeed, for one woman, the worst who did not remove her hair, reported
thing about not removing hair would be receiving general moronic hairy woman
somebody commenting on it (P223). If I type jibes (P622).
didnt remove my face/body hair, wrote For some, experiences of laughter and
another woman, I am absolutely certain I teasing occurred in childhood: When I
would get negative comments. Luckily I was a young teenager I was teased for
have never had any because I remove my having hairy legs (P430); When I was 13,
face/body hair so no one sees it (P678). a boy in class who fancied me, used to tease
And, as another put it: me about my nonexistent moustache. So I
used cream to get rid of it, and have had to
I do prefer to leave body hair and have received continue ever since (P393); When I was
comments about leg/underarm hair being long
since I have left it. The comments are almost about 12, friends laughed at my eyebrows so
always from other women who say it is repulsive I cut them (P529). Laughter and teasing
and that men would find it off putting. Because were clearly not limited to childhood
of this in the summer I shave my armpits to avoid taunts, however. Participants reported being
comments (P374).
laughed at in the pub for having hairy legs
(P197), being teased by one former boss
Sanctions clearly do not, then, consist (P45), and ridiculed by male colleagues at
only of actual directives to women to work (P334). Another woman recalled first
remove their hair. Being criticised, judged, removing her pubic hair when training on a
moaned at, or subject to (negative) comment skydiving team: [I] wore swimming cos-
regarding their hair, demonstrates to women tumes all the time [and] was worried about
not only that there is a norm for hairless- mocking from others to my hairiness
ness, but also that there is a social price to (P647). Others reported teasing by male
pay for failing to observe it. partners for having bushy eyebrows and
pubic hair (P403) and for not shaving
Jokes, teases and nicknames. much (P41). Hair removal was thus under-
Jokes, teases and nicknames all share at stood as a means of feeling more at ease
least a veneer of non-seriousness or hu- socially as womens hairy legs are ridiculed
mour, although, crucially / and this is in jokes (P548).
why they may be understood as sanctions Some participants pointed out the appar-
/ the joke is at the expense of the hairy ent non-serious intentions behind com-
woman. Participants reported being teased ments made about their body hair: I was
told (intended as a joke) that I needed a It is clear, then, that although teases,
shave because I get a few dark hairs on my jokes, laughter and name-calling may all
chin (from ex-boyfriend) (P363); Only as a be considered just a bit of fun, such fun is
joke / shave off all pubic hair! Husband! to be had at the expense of the hairy woman.
(P378); Mostly as a joke, but mum, brother, These sanctions communicate the message
boyfriend [have commented] (P566). How- that hair is out of place / indeed funny, or
ever, as one participant made clear, it is not laughable / on a womans body.
always easy to laugh along:
Looks, stares and noticings.
I have had people (mostly men) pointing out the Looks, stares and noticings work non-
darker hair on my upper lip and making jokes /
verbally. In that sense, they may be consid-
usually it is only for fun and I can sometimes
ered the least overt of the sanctions reported
laugh along (e.g., with my brothers) but it does

make me very self-conscious that it must be here; not only is the woman not told
visible (P371). explicitly to remove her hair, but nothing
is actually said. However, since noticing is
For another, the laughter was understood typically reserved for the unusual or un-
as a front: expected, the socially abnormal (Heath,
1988), making body hair a focus of attention
when I waxed then you have to leave the hair to underscores the norm for hairlessness. Par-
grow to at least a centimetre / it was a horrible ticipants reported receiving stares (six
period of time and very unattractive. I did it with participants) and looks (six participants)
friends and we all laughed at each other / it was when they had not removed their body hair.
a negative response to the hair and the laughter
I really have to weigh up when it is and
was more about covering the embarrassment
(P248). isnt worth the hassle of exposing my legs,
wrote one participant, as I find it increas-
ingly difficult to go out and be relaxed
Other participants had been called
without being stared at (P625). Other wo-
names (five participants) as a result of
men commented: If others get to see [my
having body hair, such as Hairy Spice, underarm hair], they stare, curl their nose
The Carpet and Gorilla (P45). To have up, (P221); Sometimes I see people notice
body hair was also to risk being called
the hair on my legs without saying anything
lesbian (P333) / indeed, one woman was
to me (P197); and [The worst thing about
told by friends that she should shave more
hair removal is] having to do it daily / to
extensively (P162) if she wanted to avoid feel good about going out into the world /
such a label. The presence of body hair was having to do it because I worry about being
also associated with looking too like a
stared at (P466). Participants also reported
European person (P536); failure to shave,
that their hair became a focal point: people
then, could result in a woman being called:
tend to stare or focus on facial hairs (P599);
German etc. because of the stereotypical
and, as one participant explained:
views that Germans dont shave (P639).
Others reported comparisons being made
between their body hair and forests (P194); I am quite hairy on my upper lip and. . . people
look at it as they talk to me, therefore I bleach it
friends say things like timber, reported to make it less noticeable... I am very hairy in my
one participant, like when you are felling a pubic region and again it becomes a fixation
tree (P185). point for men, which makes me feel very un-
comfortable / i.e., if on a beach. . . Sport has got powerful social norm for depilation.
me to shave/wax again / I like to swim, but hate Further, it is not only the dominant negative
men staring at my bikini line if hairy. So at times
when I go swimming I will wax. If I go on certain
comments (castigating the hairy woman as
types of holiday I will do the same / if to be unattractive, stubbly, dirty/untidy and mas-
surrounded by men say on a beach (P221). culine), but also the positive comments
(affirming the hairless woman as attractive,
smooth, clean/tidy, and feminine), which
For one woman, who also reported re- help to produce and maintain the norm for
ceiving looks of disgust about re-growth of hairlessness.
facial hair, one of the best things about
removing her hair was: To be able to wear a
swim suit without feeling a freak or having
people stare at me (P191). For others it was Discussion and conclusion

that: I dont get funny looks when I wear a
skirt (P591), and, Removing facial hair / I In sum, this study shows that the meanings
feel less paranoid about people staring at and practices surrounding the removal of
me (P67). Hair removal was, in other body hair construct the hairless woman as
words, understood as a way of not drawing attractive, smooth, clean and tidy, and
attention (P376 and P408) to oneself, of feminine. In contrast, the hairy woman is
fitting in (four participants), and avoiding constructed as unattractive, stubbly, un-
being thought of as odd (P322), the odd clean and untidy, and masculine. In other
one out (P356), a freak (P191 and P466) or words, these dominant systems for making
a freak of nature (P498). As another sense of what it means to be hairless or
woman put it: I can get on as normal / hairy construct the hairless and hairy wo-
no-one questions me (P127). Asked to list man in dichotomous terms. The options to
the best things about hair removal, another depilate / or not / are clearly unequally
woman asserted that: There are none. I weighted because of this contrastive valua-
dont know why I do it. Oh yes, you get tion: hairlessness is constructed in entirely
looked at if you dont (P538). positive terms, hairiness in entirely nega-
Even without the use of words, then, tive ones. Depilation is, then, not merely a
others can enforce the normativity of hair- matter of personal preference / such as a
lessness; to be hairy is to be noticeable and liking for apples rather than oranges / but a
hence contra the norm / at risk of becoming matter of conforming to a social norm
a focus of (negative) attention. reflecting an imperative to improve the
To sum up, these results suggest that the body. Should a woman fail to depilate, the
hairy woman is subject to a range of inter- present study indicates that she is likely to
actional sanctions, which work together to be subject to a range of interactional sanc-
enforce the depilation norm / sometimes tions, including: suggestions, injunctions
by explicit injunction, sometimes by more and pressure; complaints, criticisms and
implicit forms of (negative) reaction to the comments; jokes, teases and nicknames;
presence of hair on a womans body. Serving looks, stares and noticings. These sanc-
to police deviations from hairlessness, the tions serve, in more or less overt ways, to
sanctions offer clear evidence that hairless- enforce the depilation norm. As such, they
ness is not merely a matter of individual represent ways in which the contrastive
choice, but a matter of conformity to a meanings attributed to hairlessness and
hairiness have real world effects: there is, (Chapkis, 1986). Moreover, since beauty
potentially, a heavy social price to pay for may act as a currency in the heterosexual
being hairy. Further, the contrastive mean- relationship market, failure to meet the
ings themselves have social and material requirements of attractiveness can mean a
implications: as such, they too are part of loss of sexual intimacy for the heterosexual
the explanation for the power of the depila- woman, and, potentially, loss of a share in a
tion norm. mans income (Bartky, 1998). Indeed, the
assumption that what is beautiful is good
The depilation norm: dominant systems of (see Dion et al ., 1972; Eagly et al ., 1991) is
sense-making thought to influence perceptions of attrac-
tive people, resulting in the belief that they
Attractiveness.
possess a wide variety of positive personal
Both in the present study, and in others

investigating different populations, the as- qualities (Eagly et al ., 1991: 109) not
sociation between attractiveness and hair- assumed to be present in unattractive peo-
lessness is clearly pervasive. Attractiveness ple. This phenomenon has been linked to
was a key reason for hair removal in various positive outcomes, both socially
previous survey studies in the US (Basow, (e.g., Langlois et al ., 2000; Reis et al .,
1991) and Australia (Tiggemann & Kenyon, 1980) and in the workplace (e.g., Harper,
1998). A US experimental study also found 2000; Pfann et al ., 2000, and see also Wolf,
that, assigned randomly to watch a video of 1991), such that, in general, it is argued that
a woman with or without body hair, parti- the more physically attractive an indivi-
cipants judged the woman as less attractive dual is. . . the more successful is the persons
when hairy than when hairless (Basow & personal and professional life (Patzer, 1985:
Braman, 1998). Moreover, participants with 1). Depilation is therefore highly advanta-
so-called excess body hair described their geous for women within cultures that view
own hair as unsightly (Kitzinger & Will- body hair as a beauty flaw, and which
mott, 2002: 353). Disfiguring and un- reward flawless women accordingly.
sightly were also the two most common
words used to describe body hair in depi-
Smoothness.
latory advertisements appearing in Vogue
Over a third of the present study associated
magazine between 1901 and 1986 (Fer-
hairlessness with being/feeling smooth. The
rante, 1988: 227). While attractiveness may
contrastive experience of body hair as
be valued in itself, its power as a reason to
stubbly was reported also by women with
depilate lies in far more than an indivi-
duals vanity. There is a high social value so-called excess hair; they described their
placed on looking good / and hairlessness hair as prickly, bristly and stubby (Kit-
is a key component of the attractiveness zinger & Willmott, 2002), and reported
aesthetic. Further, in a culture in which experiencing being touched as especially
meeting societal standards of beauty has problematic, for fear that others might feel
become a moral obligation (Kitzinger & the stubble (Kitzinger & Willmott, 2002:
Willmott, 2002: 354) as well as an aesthetic 354). Similarly, a German study found that
one, to fail to do so is to risk being labelled hirsute participants tended to avoid such
lazy (Bartky, 1998; Freedman, 1986), and physical contacts as hugging, kissing or
even to have failed at being a proper woman caressing (Ferrante, 1988: 223, citing the
work of Zerssen & Meyer, 1960). However, in which a YMCA employee, fired for
the present study suggests that these con- refusing to remove excessive hair growth
cerns are shared by women with so-called (quoted in Synnott, 1993: 119), was told by
normal hair growth. Not only socially deva- her employers that it was a matter of good
lued, but also understood as physically grooming. Just as all women are expected to
unpleasant to the touch, body hair may pursue prevailing social norms of beauty, all
therefore become an obstacle to physical are expected to / and, for the sake of
(typically heterosexual) intimacy. economic mobility, typically do (Bartky,
1998) / pursue prevailing social norms of
Cleanliness and tidiness. grooming.
The idea of body hair as dirty is long-
standing (and possibly widespread): for Femininity.
example, Ancient Egyptian women and The association of hairlessness with femi-
men reportedly removed body hair for ninity / and, by contrast, hairiness with
hygiene reasons (Cooper, 1971; Hope, masculinity / is particularly pervasive,
1982). And, discussing what he calls the evident both in the present study and else-
human fantasy. . . that the body. . . [is a] where. Femininity was a key reason for hair
mobile dirt factory, Kubie (1937: 391) removal in previous survey studies in the
asserts that it is almost a universal assump- US (Basow, 1991) and Australia (Tiggemann
tion that hairiness is dirtier than hairless- & Kenyon, 1998). And, for women with
ness. Moreover, the experience of body hair Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome, excess hair
as dirty is evident in both the present growth was found to be a major factor in
results and in the study of women with their sense of themselves as unfeminine
excess hair (Kitzinger & Willmott, 2002). In (Kitzinger & Willmott, 2002: 353). Indeed,
a culture in which individuals can be held depilatory advertisements often claim that
accountable for illness if they fail to keep hair removal will restore a womans femi-
dirt at bay (Lupton, 1995 and see Craw- ninity (Ferrante, 1988). Further, the contras-
ford, 1984), hygiene is a powerful construct. tive association between body hair and
Like beauty, cleanliness has become a moral masculinity has been highlighted by others
duty (Crawford, 1984; Lupton, 1995; and examining the depilation norm (see Basow,
see Schaler, 2002); to be unclean is to be 1991; Basow & Braman, 1998; Ferrante,
lazy or slovenly, and even to risk disease 1988; Firth, 1973; Freedman, 1986; Greer,
and the pollution of others (see Douglas, 1970; Hope, 1982; Simpson, 1986; Synnott,
1966; De Ras & Grace, 1997). 1993; Tiggemann & Kenyon, 1998). This is
Further, the relevance of hair removal to also evident in the mythology of various
workplace success (discussed above) may cultures:
lie not only in the link between hairlessness
and attractiveness, but in the understanding
of depilation as a matter of good grooming / the fierce, the frightening, or the abnormally
evident in participants understanding of strong. . . have all been hairy. The Biblical Sam-
the depilated woman as neat and tidy. Like son, the Assyrian Gilgamesh, the Phoenician
Melkarth, and the Greek Hercules. . . are all
attractiveness, bodily neatness has been emanations of the same hairy myth. . . all were
linked to decisions to hire, promote, and men of prodigious strength, and all are repre-
even fire women. Synnott (1993) cites a case sented in their different cultures in the same
basic way, as powerful, hirsute, and bearded The depilation norm: enforcement
(Cooper, 1971: 43, emphasis added). through sanctions
Of course no system of sense-making is
monolithic; although overwhelmingly nor-
Since masculinity is constructed in Wes- mative, hair removal is not practised by all
tern cultures as the opposite of femininity women all of the time. In failing to police
(Hope, 1982), and body hair is seen as herself, however, the hairy woman may
masculine, feminine hairiness becomes an
become subject to policing by others, in
oxymoron. Hair removal may act, then, as a
more or less overt attempts to enforce the
structuring device (Ferrante, 1988: 220),
depilation norm. The interactional sanc-
symbolically distinguishing women from
tions identified in this study offer, then, a
men, feminine from masculine. Womens
further powerful explanation for the persis-
documented distress at producing excess

hair may thus reflect their sense of having tence and strength of the norm for hair-
bridged a symbolic boundary between fem- lessness. And yet, while depilatory
ininity and masculinity (Ferrante, 1988). advertisements were found commonly to
Even a small amount of hair growth may depict ridicule, social rejection [and] em-
be understood as a threat to femininity: as barrassment as consequences of failure to
the present study makes clear, this concern depilate (Ferrante, 1988: 228), no previous
is not limited to those medically definable research has documented womens own
as hirsute. As Ferrante (1988) puts it: a reports of others (negative) reactions to
woman never knows when she may have their body hair.
crossed the boundary (p. 231). In a society Compared with more obvious forms of
where the sexes are polarised as dichoto- policing / such as the imaginary scenario of
mous, where one can be only as male or being marched off for electrolysis at gun-
female (Bartky, 1998: 39, emphasis in ori- point (Bartky, 1998: 37) / interactional
ginal), any evidence of blurred gender sanctions are subtle: they are not used to
boundaries may threaten a womans very physically force women to depilate. Yet
sense of herself as an existing individual their power is pervasive, working in three
(ibid. ); hence, practices that construct a key ways: First, they assert or imply that a
woman as feminine have a special power. woman should remove her hair. As such,
In sum, if the socially approved (i.e., they act as a means of informing (or remind-
hairless) woman is seen as attractive, ing) women of the depilation norm. While
smooth, clean/tidy and feminine, depilation these informings may be resisted, partici-
becomes necessary in the pursuit of social
pants themselves reported removing their
ideals of beauty, as an (erotic) inducement
hair because of others negative reactions.
to touch, as evidence of appropriate stan-
Second, the sanctions demand a social price
dards of hygiene/grooming, and as a (defini-
from those who deviate from the norm. For
tional) prerequisite for femininity. In this
way, the dominant systems of sense-making those who resist, this acts as a kind of
examined in this study may be understood mundane punishment. For others, as parti-
to help account for why almost 100% of the cipants themselves reported, the hassle of
sample reported removing some body hair dealing with negative reactions makes it not
at some time in their lives (Toerien et al ., worth remaining hairy: rather depilate than
forthcoming). continue to be hassled. Indeed, to experi-
ence oneself as being at risk of comment, Conclusion

criticism, ridicule, looks of disgust or some
other form of negative reaction on a regular As the first British social scientific survey of
basis / from such diverse sources as in- womens experiences of the depilation
timates, colleagues and strangers / makes a norm, this study offers a wide-angle pic-
minefield out of everyday interaction. And ture of a largely new area of investigation.
third, the sanctions produce body hair as Unusually for a qualitative project, this
noticeable. Be it through comment, a stare, study, by using the survey method, reports
or some other type of negative reaction, the findings from a large, diverse sample of
sanctions all make body hair a focus of women; unusually for a survey project, by
attention. In so doing, they underscore the using open-ended questions, the study re-
norm for hairlessness, for (at least in Wes- ports womens own experiences in their
tern cultures) being noticeable and being own words. As such, the themes identified
/ reflecting the spontaneous use of common
deviant seem intimately related (Sacks,
terms by many individuals / offer powerful
1972, cited in Heath, 1988: 143). Noticing
evidence of shared systems for making
is typically reserved for the unusual or
sense of what it means to be a hairless or
unexpected, the socially abnormal. Thus,
hairy woman in the UK today. Moreover,
as the noticeable bodily state, hairiness reports of commonly experienced negative
becomes the deviant bodily state / and reactions to body hair suggest shared prac-
hence, the bodily state to be avoided. tices for enforcing womens hairlessness.
As such, just the fear of being seen to be This study, then, offers qualitative evidence
hairy may provide / as participants them- for an understanding of depilation as a
selves reported / sufficient reason to depi- powerful social norm, enforced through a
late. range of social and material rewards and
To say the depilation norm is a social sanctions. Further, it not only adds another
construction is thus not to say it lacks voice to the feminist assertion that womens
power. Rather, the opposite: social construc- body-altering practices are a political, rather
tions have concrete effects on our lives, than a merely personal issue (e.g., see
opening up (and closing down) possibilities Chapkis, 1986; Freedman, 1986; Greer,
for the types of practices that are conceiva- 1970; Morgan, 1995; Ussher, 1997; Wolf,
ble and appropriate in our society, as well as 1991), it also provides evidence that this is
for the types of people that we might so. As such, this study provides new sub-
conceivably and appropriately be (Weedon, stance to the feminist critique of the (het-
1997). While the depilated woman may not ero)patriarchal control of womens bodies.
be the product of physical force, nor is she
the product of pure voluntarism. Hairless-
Acknowledgements
ness is the expected default bodily state for
women / and those who fail to conform are This research was funded by the Emma
reminded of the norm in a myriad every- Smith Overseas Scholarship, administered
day ways, and (sometimes) explicitly sanc- by the University of Natal, Durban, South
tioned for failing to observe it. Little Africa. The authors would like to acknowl-
wonder, then, that depilation is a wide- edge Precilla Chois helpful contributions to
spread and normative practice. earlier rounds of analysis on the data
reported here. They would also like to thank Breakwell, G.M. 1995: Interviewing. In Break-
Celia Kitzinger and Victoria Clarke, as well well, G.M., Hammond, S. and Fife-Shaw, C.,
as the Reviewers / Hannah Frith and Sarah editors, Research methods in psychology.
Riley / and Editors of QRP for their useful London: Sage.
comments on earlier drafts of this paper. Chapkis, W. 1986: Beauty secrets: women and the
politics of appearance . Boston, MA: South
End Press.
Notes Cooper, W. 1971: Hair: sex society symbolism .
London: Aldus Books.
1. For the purposes of this study, body hair is
dened as any hair growth / current or past / on Crawford, R. 1984. A cultural account of health:
a participants body (including the face), other control, release and the social body. In
than that of the head. McKinlay, J., editor, Issues in the political
2. For quotations specic to one or two economy of health care . New York: Tavi-
participants, the participant reference numbers stock.
/ P (number) / are given. Where more than two De Ras, M. and Grace, V. 1997: Bodily bound-
participants used the same word or phrase, total aries, sexualised genders and medical dis-
numbers of participants are reported. courses. Palmerston North: The Dunmore
3. To take the mickey/mick, take the piss, Press.
or give stick are slang terms meaning, roughly,
Dion, K.K., Berscheid, E. and Walster, E. 1972:
to tease or to mock.
What is beautiful is good. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology 24, 285 /90.
References Douglas, M. 1966: Purity and danger: an analysis
of concepts of pollution and taboo . London:
Barth, J.H., Catalan, J., Cherry, C.A. and Day A. Routledge and Kegan Paul.
1993: Psychological morbidity in women Eagly, A.H., Ashmore, R.D., Makhijani, M.G. and
referred for treatment of hirsutism. Journal Longo, L.C. 1991: What is beautiful is good,
of Psychosomatic Research 37, 615 /19. but. . .: a meta-analytic review of research on
Bartky, S.L. 1998: Foucault, femininity, and the the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psy-
modernization of patriarchal power. In chological Bulletin 110, 109 /28.
Weitz, R., editor, The politics of women s Ferrante, J. 1988: Biomedical versus cultural
bodies: sexuality, appearance and behavior. constructions of abnormality: the case of
New York, NY: Oxford University Press. idiopathic hirsutism in the United States.
Basow, S.A. 1991: The hairless ideal: women and Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 12, 219 /
their body hair. Psychology of Women Quar- 38.
terly 15, 83 /96.
Ferriman, D. and Gallwey, J.D. 1961: Clinical
Basow, S.A. and Braman, A.C. 1998: Women and assessment of body hair growth in women.
body hair: social perceptions and attitudes. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Meta-
Psychology of Women Quarterly 22, 637 /45. bolism 21, 1440 /47.
Bell, J. 1993: Doing your research project: a guide Fink, A. 1995: How to analyze survey data .
for rst-time researchers in education and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
social science, second edition. Buckingham:
Open University Press. Firth, R. 1973: Symbols public and private .
London: George Allen and Unwin.
Boyatzis, R.E. 1998: Transforming qualitative
information: thematic analysis and code Flick, U. 2002: An introduction to qualitative
development . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. research, second edition. London: Sage.
Frankfort-Nachmias, C. and Nachmias, D. 1996: Lupton, D. 1995: The imperative of health: public
Research methods in the social sciences, health and the regulated body. London:
fth edition. London: Arnold. Sage.
Freedman, R. 1986: Beauty bound . Lexington, Morgan, K.P. 1995: Women and the knife: cos-
MA and Toronto: Lexington Books. metic surgery and the colonization of wo-
Gay and lesbian information 2002. Retrieved 7 mens bodies. In Bushnell D.E., editor,
December, 2002, from http://www.avert.org/ Nagging questions: feminist ethics in every-
hsexu1.htm day life . Lanham: Rowman and Littleeld.
Gillette pins hopes on its new Venus womens Morse, J.M. and Richards, L. 2002: Readme rst
shaving system, 2000, November 11. Re- for a users guide to qualitative methods .
trieved 10 June, 2002, from http://reports. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
mintel.com/sinatra/mintel/ databases Patzer, G.L. 1985: The physical attractiveness
Great Britain Central Statistical Ofce and Great phenomena . New York: Plenum.
Britain Ofce for National Statistics 2002: Pfann, G.A., Biddle, J.E., Hamermesh, D.S. and
Social trends (32) . London, UK: HMSO. Bosman, C.M. 2000: Business success and
Greer, G. 1970: The female eunuch . London: businesses beauty capital. Economics Let-
MacGibbon and Kee. ters 67, 201 /207.
Harper, B. 2000: Beauty, stature and the labour Potter, J. and Wetherell, M. 1987: Discourse and
market: a British cohort study. Oxford Bulle- social psychology: beyond attitudes and
tin of Economics and Statistics 62, 771 /800. behaviour. London: Sage.
Heath, C. 1988: Embarrassment and interactional Rabinowitz, S., Cohen, R. and Le Roith, D. 1983:
organization. In Drew, P. and Wootton, Anxiety and hirsutism. Psychological Re-
A., editors, Erving Goffman: exploring ports 53, 827 /30.
the interaction order. Cambridge, Polity Reis, H.T., Nezlek, J. and Wheeler, L. 1980:
Press. Physical attractiveness in social interaction.
Hope, C. 1982: Caucasian female body hair and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
American culture. The Journal of American 38, 604 /17.
Culture 5, 93 /99. Robson, C. 1993: Real world research: a resource
Kitzinger, C. and Willmott, J. 2002: The thief of for social scientists and practitioner-re-
womanhood: womens experience of poly- searchers. Oxford: Blackwell.
cystic ovarian Syndrome. Social Science and Schaler, J.A. 2002: Moral hygiene. Culture and
Medicine 54, 349 /61. Society May/June, 63 /69.
Kubie, L.S. 1937: The fantasy of dirt. Psycho- Schweigert, W.A. 1994: Research methods and
analytic Quarterly 6, 388 /425. statistics for psychology. Pacic Grove, CA:
Langlois, J.H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A.J., Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Larson, A., Hallam, M. and Smoot, M. 2000: Shah, P.N. 1957: Human body hair / a quantita-
Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic tive study. American Journal of Obstetrics
and theoretical review. Psychological Bulle- and Gynaecology 73, 1255 /65.
tin 126, 390 /423. Silverman, D. 2001: Interpreting qualitative data:
Lunde, O. and Grttum, P. 1984: Body hair methods for analysing talk, text and inter-
growth in women: normal or hirsute. Amer- action , second edition. London: Sage.
ican Journal of Physical Anthropology 64, Simpson, N. 1986: Unwanted hair. British Med-
307 /13. ical Journal 293, 348 /49.
Synnott, A. 1993: The body social: symbolism, polling, and data analysis , third edition.
self and society. London and New York, NY: Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Routledge. Whelehan, I. 2000: Overloaded: popular culture
Tiggemann, M. and Kenyon, S.J. 1998: The hair- and the future of feminism . London: The
lessness norm: the removal of body hair in Womens Press.
women. Sex Roles , 39, 873 /885. Wilkinson, S. 1986: Sighting possibilities: diver-
Ussher, J.M. 1997: Fantasies of femininity: re- sity and commonality in feminist research.
framing the boundaries of sex. New Bruns- In Wilkinson, S., editor, Feminist social
wick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. psychology: developing theory and practice .
Weedon, C. 1997: Feminist practice and post- Milton Keynes and Philadelphia: Open Uni-
structuralist theory, second edition. Oxford: versity Press.
Blackwell. Wolf, N. 1991: The beauty myth: how images of
Weisberg, H.F., Krosnick, J.A. and Bowen, B.D. beauty are used against women . New York,
1996: An introduction to survey research, NY: Anchor Books, Doubleday
About the authors

M ERRA N TO E RIEN is writing up her PhD in the Department of Sociology at The University of
York. Her PhD explores womens practices and experiences to do with their body hair. She
is particularly interested in the construction of femininity, dilemmas of free choice/social
control, qualitative methods, and unsettling the taken-for-granted.
SU E WILKIN SO N is the Ruth Wynn Woodward Endowed Professor of Womens Studies at
Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada. She is the founding and current Editor of
Feminism & Psychology: An International Journal, and has published six books and more
than 80 articles on gender and feminist issues. Her current research interests are in
womens health, particularly breast cancer, and in conversation analysis.

2014 Exploring The Depilation Norm

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

2014 Exploring The Depilation Norm

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

This article was downloaded by: [Korea University]

On: 29 December 2014, At: 16:32

Qualitative Research in Psychology

Exploring the depilation norm: a

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088704qp006oa

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Exploring the depilation norm: a

Womens body hair removal is highly normative across contemporary

Key words: feminism; qualitative survey analysis; social norms; womens

Introduction socially normative has to go unquestioned

# Arnold 2004 10.1191/1478088704qp006oa

taken-for-granted instance of the policing Materials

(328) as a time-consuming (272 partici- ing hair removal to cleanliness in a range of

hairlessness and femininity meant that to be teens males commented on me having

work by explicitly telling a woman to match, wrote one woman, a man at my

removing cream (Immac) (P226); At (11 participants), laughed at (five partici-

laugh along (e.g., with my brothers) but it does

people stare at me (P191). For others it was Discussion and conclusion

Both in the present study, and in others

documented distress at producing excess

ence oneself as being at risk of comment, Conclusion

About the authors

Potrebbero piacerti anche