--- "B." <docile_body at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well, I wasn't really asking for list members'
> personal pube preferences, just what might have caused
> the social trend. But okay! =)
>
Lol, actually I was being facetious, but seriously, I have to say that I have seen (er, ah heard, mostly) a trend among younger lesbian women from the post-70's and 80's feminism movements (20-30 year olds and younger) in which the women are very experimental with their bodies, running the gamut from hair to bare to pristine to body modifications 'R us. I think an older view, gestated in the very theories and social morays posted previously by others in this thread, may still associate various sexual symbologies to the shaved look, but my point is that not everyone, and in particular, those of younger generations agree with that assessment and would scoff at the idea as being too enslaved to patriarchal predictions about what women can and can't do with their bodies.
> A [somewhat] similar example I can think of is
> moustaches. One hundred years ago, a twenty two year
> old male with a finely groomed moustache would have
> been considered quite handsome. Now a 22 yr old male
> with a sporty moustache would be laughable;
That's a new one to me. Is this a new thing? Hmmm. That might explain my aversion to my boss. Ha!
> In a similar [?] note, I read an article recently that
> cited more and more young women are going to strip
> clubs to "hang out," whether with other men their age
> or in solely female groups. By that I mean strip
> joints that feature female dancers, that only men have
> traditionally frequented. ("More women visiting strip
> clubs" -
Again, I can only cite what I know from lesbian communities (often erroneously thought to be the ultimate bastion of feminism - hardly!), and this is true, though I've heard that this trend is developing across female sexual orientation lines and including married couples and young professional women, as well, but I haven't heard of transgendered females (male to female) joining the trend.
It's not surprising, is it, considering how long male strip clubs have been in existence. The question becomes, I guess, are women who go to the strip clubs objectifying women just as the men are? Is this a double standard? And my suggestion would be that this is a half-full or half-empty perspective. If one assumes that all visual, aural and tactile interaction with sexual overtones with scantily clad strangers is objectifying them, then that is a negative progression according to feminists. But if one sees the same experience as the further liberation of women's sexuality, then it is a progressive movement for feminism.
I see it as a progression, because it forces feminism to deal with the larger issue, which is gender and gender expression and not just sexuality. Focusing on sexuality alone contains the feminist perspective to the same patriarchal box of limited definition, but expanding the view to the diversity of gender expression allows a greater understanding, and eventually, a greater freedom, for everyone at large.
- Deborah R.
=====