Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Are Pubes Making A Comeback?

Fosco has made clear his policy on pubic hair (hint: he likes it animal style). Whether it's women or men, Fosco just can't understand why anyone would want (to have or to touch) the genitals of a ten-year-old. Maybe I'm abnormal, but I like having sex with people who look like adults. And no, the irony that Fosco Lives! is the Google destination-of-choice for Koreans searching for "pubic hair shave" is not lost on him. But last week, for just a few days, it finally looked like someone may have gotten Fosco's message.

That's because, as you probably heard, New Jersey was considering a ban on Brazilian bikini waxing. Granted the ban would have been for health reasons, after two NJ women were hospitalized for infections from Brazilian waxes. And, in a sense, it wouldn't have been a new ban so much as enforcement against an already prohibited practice (genital waxing was never actually explicitly allowed in NJ, but regulators tended to look the other way). But still, it would clearly have been a victory for the forces of follicular rationality.

Of course, this is the kind of story that bad newspapers live for. And so naturally, Rupert Murdoch's New York Post had an early Christmas party. Here are some choice excerpts from their story:

The Garden State may be extra lush this summer.
[...]
Two women were recently hospitalized for infections stemming from no-follicle-left-behind procedure
[...]
But New Jersey spa owners say officials have no business legislating what women do with their Pine Barrens.
Now that's classy journalism! Why do I suspect that there were some pretty sexist lines in the original draft of this article? Because anything that has to do with female genitalia is inherently funny! Women have different genitals! Teehee! Actually, I'll admit I kinda laughed at the "Pine Barrens" line.

But terrible jokes about lady parts aren't the only examples of regrettable rhetoric that appeared in articles about this ban. Consider how cosmetologists, waxers, spa owners, etc. (who, by all accounts, would have lost huge sums of money under the ban) decided to cast the potential effects of the ban on their clients (as per this AP article):
"It's huge," [a salon owner] said, adding that her customers don't think their bikini lines are anyone's business but their own. "It's just not right."

She said many customers would likely travel across state lines to get it and some might even try to wax themselves.
Sound familiar? Yes, standard pro-choice abortion rhetoric has been redeployed to conjure up images of back-alley waxing and home waxes gone awry. Of course, Fosco is entirely sympathetic to this rhetoric when it's applied to abortion; however, there is something about using this argument to talk about bikini waxing that seems a bit trivializing--especially since this is not government telling women what to do with their pubic hair, but rather, the regulation of a specific voluntary hygienic procedure which may, under certain circumstances, be dangerous. Women are free to wax, pluck, or shave themselves however they want; this ban would only affect practitioners who charge for a certain kind of service. In Fosco's eyes, this ban has more in common with the regulation of tattoo parlors than it does with the regulation of a woman's right to choose abortion.

But alas, in the face of opposition from the powerful salon and spa lobby, the NJ ban is dead. We can all rest assured that women in NJ are still allowed to pay people to pull out all their pubic hair by the roots! Hooray! This is a fine day for feminism. Well, except for that part where Fosco suspects that Brazilian bikini waxing is one big male fantasy (and not a very savory one) in the first place.


[Actually, to be honest, Fosco didn't really understand the difference between Brazilian and other styles of bikini waxing until he researched for this post. Shouldn't he have learned all about that in health class? Luckily, Wikipedia has pictures!]

Image Credits. Fosco actually had fun picking out the images for this post. They are
  • The album cover to Amorica by The Black Crowes.
  • Treasure Trail (2003) by fabulous American artist Marilyn Minter.
  • Bad Boy (1981) by the occasionally hilarious Eric Fischl. And yeah, that's probably like his mom.


submit to reddit
submit to reddit

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

"And, in a sense, it wouldn't have been a new ban so much as enforcement against an already prohibited practice (genital waxing was never actually explicitly allowed in NJ...

I'm no expert on New Jersey law OR Brazilian waxing unfortunately. ("Unfortunately" refers to the waxing, not New Jersey law) But just because something isn't explicitly (hey, there's that word again!) allowed in law does not necessarily mean it is prohibited.

'Course I may not understand your use of the word "explicit." Care to define what you mean by explicit?

:)

The BeeMaster

FOSCO said...

That's a good question, BeeMaster. I'm certainly no expert on law (or waxing either). I wonder if certain types of law (like those regulating cosmetology) actually work differently, such that anything not explicitly allowed is automatically prohibited. Or perhaps the entire basis of cosmetology law in NJ is limited to non-genital areas and consequently would prohibit genital waxing implicitly. A very interesting issue, suprisingly... Good work!

Anonymous said...

I still snicker at the Drive 'n' Shine sign in Mishawaka that says, "Hand wax - 30 minutes." That's gotta hurt after a while...

The BeeMaster

Word Verify: resin
What the south is doing again.