Sex Roles (2008) 59:889–897 DOI 10.1007/s11199-008-9494-3 ORIGINAL ARTICLE The Hairlessness Norm Extended: Reasons for and Predictors of Women’s Body Hair Removal at Different Body Sites Marika Tiggemann & Suzanna Hodgson Published online: 18 June 2008 # Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008 Abstract The study aimed to explore the motivations prescription renders many women not only perpetually behind and predictors of the practice of body hair removal dissatisfied with their bodies (Rodin et al. 1985), but also among women. A sample of 235 Australian female highly motivated to alter their bodies to match the ideal, as undergraduate students completed questionnaires asking illustrated by the existence of multi-million dollar diet, about the frequency and reasons for body hair removal, as exercise, cosmetic and cosmetic surgery industries. well as measures of media exposure. It was confirmed that One particular aspect of the ideal that has received the vast majority (approximately 96%) regularly remove relatively little research attention or theorizing is the their leg and underarm hair, most frequently by shaving, prescription for smooth hairless skin. This is most likely and attribute this to femininity and attractiveness reasons. A because the practice of removing unwanted body hair is so sizeable proportion (60%) also removed at least some of normative in Western cultures as to go unremarked. By far their pubic hair, with 48% removing most or all of it. Here the majority of women in the USA (Basow 1991), UK the attributions were relatively more to sexual attractiveness (Toerien et al. 2005) and Australia (Tiggemann and Kenyon and self-enhancement. Further, having a partner and 1998; Tiggemann and Lewis 2004) remove their leg and exposure to particular forms of media predicted pubic hair underarm hair. Indeed, shaving their legs or underarms is removal. It was concluded that pubic hair removal is one concrete way in which women can act to bring their currently different in connotation from leg or underarm body closer to the ideal. Over time, these actions have come hair, but is likely to be on the increase. It can only further to be accepted as everyday and commonplace behaviours the belief that women’s bodies are unacceptable the way that form a “natural” part of good grooming and go they are. unquestioned. Challenging this conceptualisation, Hope (1982) has Keywords Body hair . Hairlessness norm . Hair removal . pointed out that, far from being trivial, it is the very Pubic hair behaviours that are most taken for granted within a culture that are the most revealing for understanding that culture. Body hair is in fact an indicator of sexual maturity for both Introduction men and women, and its removal is not universal across cultures. But for women in Western societies, “femininity” There is no doubt that current Western ideals of beauty for is somewhat paradoxically associated with a lack of body women promote a youthful appearance: a slim long-legged hair. Toerien and Wilkinson (2003) argue that such body, with firm high breasts, and smooth and perfect skin (e.g., hairlessness serves to contrast the feminine with the Thompson et al. 1999;Wolf1991). The impossibility of this masculine and thereby contributes to the social construction of a “tamed”,and“less than fully adult”, femininity, although it needs to be noted that there is an emerging * : M. Tiggemann ( ) S. Hodgson trend for men to also engage in some body hair depilation School of Psychology, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide 5001, South Australia (Boroughs et al. 2005). More generally, given its biological e-mail: [email protected] significance, the normative removal of body hair by women 890 Sex Roles (2008) 59:889–897 provides a compelling illustration that a woman’s body is commented about their visible body hair, using words like not acceptable the way it naturally is (Chapkis 1986; “gross”, “disgusting” and “repulsive”. This level of intensity Ussher 1989). and vehemence of feelings about body hair implies that its Over the last decade and a half, there have only been connotations are anything but trivial and also suggests a four surveys and two experimental studies investigating the good deal of emotional involvement. In support, Tiggemann removal of women’s body hair. This in itself probably and Lewis (2004) found that negative attitudes toward body reflects that researchers share the assumption that body hair hair and women’s level of personal commitment to hair removal is a trivial and unimportant behaviour. In her removal were linked to feelings of disgust. seminal work, Basow (1991) showed that more than 80% The previous studies, with the exception of the most of her sample of professional women in the USA removed recent (Toerien et al. 2005), have been limited to the study their leg and underarm hair at least occasionally. Although of leg hair and underarm hair. Of the participants of Toerien feminists and lesbians were less likely to do so, the majority et al. (2005), 86% also reported having ever depilated their still removed their body hair. Somewhat later, Tiggemann groin area, particularly their “bikini line”, 82% eyebrows, and Kenyon (1998) reported that 92% of their Australian and 41% face, with smaller numbers for nipples/breast, university sample removed their leg and underarm hair. stomach, arms and toes. Further, the previous studies Those women who did not remove their body hair were investigating reasons for hair removal (Basow 1991; characterized by higher global self-esteem. These high rates Tiggemann and Kenyon 1998; Tiggemann and Lewis of body hair removal have been confirmed in more recent 2004) have supplied only one list of possible reasons for Australian (97%, Tiggemann and Lewis 2004) and UK leg and underarm hair combined, on the assumption that samples (over 90%; Toerien et al. 2005). reasons would be shared. However, hair in different regions In all of these studies (Basow 1991; Tiggemann and of the body likely signifies different meanings. In particular, Kenyon 1998; Tiggemann and Lewis 2004), women underarm hair is a secondary sexual characteristic of all identified reasons to do with femininity and attractiveness sexually mature women. In contrast, there is greater as the most important in their hair removal practice. This variability in texture and colour of leg hair, with some has been confirmed in the qualitative accounts of Toerien women having very little. Thus the ‘need’ to shave legs will and Wilkinson (2004). However, social normative reasons differ between women, while all women will ‘need’ to shave were much more important in their initial starting (Basow their armpits. Conversely, no woman needs to pretend she 1991) and in their attributions for other women (Tiggemann has no hair under her arms, but women can pretend they and Lewis 2004). Tiggemann and Kenyon (1998) have have naturally hairless legs. “Bikini line” hair is similarly argued that women can recognise the normative pressures variable, and hence women may like to present themselves on them in general to shave, but are unwilling to accept as having none. these as the rationale for their own specific behaviour. The In the years since the previous studies, anecdotal evidence available evidence indicates that the attitudes and practices suggests that the practice of removing some or all of the surrounding body hair removal are very similar across the pubic hair has increased. In South Australia, a prominent cultural contexts of the United States, United Kingdom and beauty salon started television advertising for triple x (xxx) Australia. waxing (removal of all pubic hair) in 2000. Women’sfashion In the first experimental study, Basow and Braman magazines have run articles on various styles of pubic hair (1998) investigated US college students’ perceptions of a and removal (e.g., “Brazilian or boho?”, Cleo, January 2003; woman with and without visible body hair as presented in “The smart girl’s guide to grooming”, Cleo, June 2005). two short videos. Consistent with the authors’ predictions, Perhaps sadly, the topic has reached magazines targeted at both men and women reported that the woman with body younger girls (e.g., “Bald or bushy”, Dolly, September hair was seen as less sexually attractive, sociable and 2004), and there exist a number of teenage websites where intelligent, and more masculine, than the same woman girls raise the plaintive question as to whether they are without body hair. In a follow-up experiment, Basow and “supposed to” shave off their pubic hair. In addition to Willis (2001) replicated these findings regardless of the fashion magazines, discussions about pubic hair removal explanation for the body hair (feminism vs. medical also feature in episodes of television programs like Sex and condition). Thus having a hairless body carries positive the City, and reality shows like Big Brother. social connotations, and conversely, not removing body Historical analysis by Hope (1982)demonstratesa hair carries negative social consequences. strong relationship between media advertising and women The strength and power of the hairlessness norm is beginning to remove leg and underarm hair. Thus we would illustrated by the intense negative social reaction to any expect the demonstrated media interest in pubic hair and its violation of this norm. The women in Toerien and removal to both reflect, and contribute to, increasing rates Wilkinson’s(2004) qualitative study report that others had of hair removal. This is particularly likely among young Sex Roles (2008) 59:889–897 891 women who are the primary targets of these media. Hypothesis 3 The removal of pubic hair will be related to However, to the extent that the removal of pubic hair is having a partner, being younger, and to not yet normative, this presents a very opportune time to exposure to particular forms of popular investigate its predictors.