Body hair is deeply stigmatized. Bodies and bodily functions are stigmatized.
It’s the same reason why sanitary pad commercials use clear blue liquid for absorptive demonstrations and not body temperature strawberry preserves. Or heaven forfend actual uterine lining…
Smiling happy women reclining in a bath, shaving off foam to reveal glossy perfect legs, is shorthand for the reality of what actually happens.
Body hair is stigmatised, but bodies in general are not; bodily functions are taboo which is not the same thing.
In modern Western society people don’t really think that women are “unclean” for having their period, no more than they think anyone is a bad person for pooping. (Notably this has not been true in all times and cultures). But talking about periods and shitting is nevertheless taboo and not considered polite. I think it’s an important distinction to realise, because you can try to push back against stigma, but pushing back against taboo is harder (and often pointless).
Speaking for myself I no more want to see actual uterine lining in an advert than I want to see an actual turd - they’re both fairly gross. Advertisers generally want to associate their products with positive feelings, not disgust.
I’d never even thought of this before. Can you explain the difference between taboo and stigmatized? I thought you generally risk being stigmatized any time you break a taboo.
I don’t think I’m using technical terminology, so I’m just explaining how I see two different concepts.
The important difference I’m getting it is that taboo things can have a “proper place” - pooping in the toilet is fine, doing it in the woods is not. You can expect stigma if you violate the taboo by pooping on the woods, but doing do in the right place is fine!
Ahhh so you would say some sexual fetishes are stigmatized rather than taboo? Like if someone walked in on a person doing various sexual acts, the situation would be embarrassing regardless but only certain things would be scandalous.
Dong is also taboo, so it’s not “fine”, but also not disgusting, same with pussy.
Like, there’s a reason why Western societies don’t approve of people just wandering the streets naked. It’s not because anyone thinks there’s something inherently wrong with being naked - pretty much everyone is naked at some point after all. Just that there are certain situations where it’s not considered appropriate.
I hate how hair on a woman has become shameful for the past few decades. When I first saw my now-wife, it was with “hairy” legs because she was done with dating. Hairy like you can see a bit of hair, not like thick or dark. When I asked her out, she came on our date shaved.
She doesn’t care now that we were married. But even she mentions that back then a lot of guys called it out as a problem for her.
Body hair is deeply stigmatized. Bodies and bodily functions are stigmatized.
It’s the same reason why sanitary pad commercials use clear blue liquid for absorptive demonstrations and not body temperature strawberry preserves. Or heaven forfend actual uterine lining…
Smiling happy women reclining in a bath, shaving off foam to reveal glossy perfect legs, is shorthand for the reality of what actually happens.
Body hair is stigmatised, but bodies in general are not; bodily functions are taboo which is not the same thing.
In modern Western society people don’t really think that women are “unclean” for having their period, no more than they think anyone is a bad person for pooping. (Notably this has not been true in all times and cultures). But talking about periods and shitting is nevertheless taboo and not considered polite. I think it’s an important distinction to realise, because you can try to push back against stigma, but pushing back against taboo is harder (and often pointless).
Speaking for myself I no more want to see actual uterine lining in an advert than I want to see an actual turd - they’re both fairly gross. Advertisers generally want to associate their products with positive feelings, not disgust.
I’d never even thought of this before. Can you explain the difference between taboo and stigmatized? I thought you generally risk being stigmatized any time you break a taboo.
I don’t think I’m using technical terminology, so I’m just explaining how I see two different concepts.
The important difference I’m getting it is that taboo things can have a “proper place” - pooping in the toilet is fine, doing it in the woods is not. You can expect stigma if you violate the taboo by pooping on the woods, but doing do in the right place is fine!
I keep wondering if Westerners lug a porta-potty with them when they go camping, or just plug their ass for a day or more.
It’s the plug one
Ahhh so you would say some sexual fetishes are stigmatized rather than taboo? Like if someone walked in on a person doing various sexual acts, the situation would be embarrassing regardless but only certain things would be scandalous.
Yes, I’d after with that
So it should be fine to hang dong, as long as it’s shaved 🤔
Dong is also taboo, so it’s not “fine”, but also not disgusting, same with pussy.
Like, there’s a reason why Western societies don’t approve of people just wandering the streets naked. It’s not because anyone thinks there’s something inherently wrong with being naked - pretty much everyone is naked at some point after all. Just that there are certain situations where it’s not considered appropriate.
I think in most situations it isn’t appropriate
I hate how hair on a woman has become shameful for the past few decades. When I first saw my now-wife, it was with “hairy” legs because she was done with dating. Hairy like you can see a bit of hair, not like thick or dark. When I asked her out, she came on our date shaved.
She doesn’t care now that we were married. But even she mentions that back then a lot of guys called it out as a problem for her.