By: Vania Pagniello
Good, not-so-ol’fashioned DIY feminism, friends and fun at the Hamilton Feminist Zine Fair this Saturday.
On Nov. 11, Hamilton will be celebrating its third annual Feminist Zine Fair. With double the amount of artists who sold their work in the first year, the event is now being hosted on the fourth floor of the Hamilton Public Library from 11 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., in order to accommodate the increasing number participants.
The free-of-charge event is hosted by the Sexual Assault Centre (Hamilton Area), an organization dedicated to supporting survivors of sexual assault and gender-based violence. SACHA’s intention for the event is to create a safe space for marginalized voices to be heard and to deepen individuals’ understandings of feminisms through discussion and art.
A zine is a self-published miniature magazine. Topics of zines range from political narratives to fan fiction to illustrations. They typically sell for between $2 and $5.
In the case of the Hamilton Feminist Zine Fair, the connecting theme underlying all zine topics is feminism. Promisingly, there will be a variety of topics mirroring the diversity of human experiences and expression.
Zinesters are deeply embedded within the workings of this event. They will be seated behind the tables that showcase their zines and sometimes other purchasable items like stickers, pins, t-shirts, and treats too.
As necessary as the transaction of money is for the artists, they are not just vendors. Many welcome discussions keeping in mind the ultimate objective of the fair: the exchanging of ideas.
An enjoyable experience is easy here. Along with the selling of items and opportunity for discussion, there will also be a “four-hour zine challenge”; a themed zine made during the day that anyone at the fair can contribute to. The theme of the assembled zine this year focuses on supportive messages to survivors of sexual assault. At they end of the day, it will be distributed, displaying everyone’s unique contributions of content.
Although there will be plenty of zines to browse and buy for a small fee, SACHA’s main intention for the fair is to create a space for marginalized people to tell their own stories.
Amy Egerdeen, SACHA volunteer and HFZF coordinator, speaks to this intention.
“We put out a call for people who make zines and do their own kinds of publications who are definitely coming from feminist angle. I also had people that I contacted because we really wanted to prioritize trans* folks and people of colour. So we did some seeking out for people we thought would be a good fit… that’s kind of where we are coming from and what we want to make sure is a really big part of the zine fair.”
Also noteworthy is the way feminist politics and zine publications complement each other. DIY self-publication is a useful tool for activists to disseminate their ideas without having to censor them in order to get approval from a mainstream source.
“[Feminist zinesters] do a lot of work that is personal and that isn’t the traditional stuff that gets published. Its a great way for people to get their voices out there in a way that doesn’t have to be okayed by a big publisher or okayed by a mainstream magazine,” Egerdeen explained.
Ultimately, HFZF adds vibrancy to Hamilton through its DIY art activism.
“[The HFZF] is really growing in the community. We are just watching it become its own kind of thing! So that’s pretty exciting… there’s been a lot more zine activity happening in Hamilton since [it started]… I think it’s really cool what’s happening here,” said Egerdeen.
In its entirety, the HFZF is a marketplace for feminist literature and art. Naturally, its materialization is temporary, but the ideas shared here still transcend their brief presentation.
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
By: Emily Current
When we take part in a group discussion we pay so much attention to what people are saying that we don’t really think about who is speaking. It wasn’t until I talked to a classmate of mine one day about classroom dynamics that I noticed that our tutorial often ended up being male dominated.
One of the reasons why it can be so difficult to see how gender dynamics play into classroom discussions is because these sort of interactions play into all aspects of our lives. Girls are taught from a young age that we should remain silent if we’re unsure of what we have to say. And when we are sure of what we have to say and do assert our thoughts, we often get criticized for doing so. Our society sends the message to girls and women that we are not welcome to say what we think, and this message has translated into university classroom discussions.
I’ve started to pay more attention to the way gender dynamics play out in class discussions and I’ve noticed that, overall, men seem more confident speaking in this sort of setting than women. I’ve noticed that men are more assertive when they contribute, and respond more confidently when another student argues with what they have said. While guys will simply assert their thoughts, girls seem to couch what they have to say with phrases like “I don’t know but…” or “this may just be my opinion…” adding an element of uncertainty to what they’re saying. Not only do men speak more confidently, they also speak more frequently. In one tutorial I took a tally of how frequently class members of different genders spoke, and found that there were similar numbers of girls and guys that spoke during the discussion. While this initially makes it seem like there is no issue, in the class there are twice as many girls as there are guys, meaning that in my tutorial, female students were speaking half as often as their male counterparts. Granted, I only tallied up one tutorial, but it is indicative of a larger problem.
Clearly these ideas are based on generalizations, because there are of course girls who do speak up in conversations and who make their claims confidently, just as I’m sure there are guys who don’t feel so confident speaking up. I think that it is important to be aware of our classroom dynamics regardless. There is no easy way to address the way that gender dynamics play into classroom discussions; therefore, it is crucial that at the very least we recognize the impact that they have. Even if nothing else can immediately be done, we should at least aim for an increased awareness of the space we take up in class discussions, and ask why we might participate the way we do.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
By: Lauren Beals
When she was a student, Hoda ElMaraghy ventured where no woman had before. In 1976, she became the first woman to earn a PhD in mechanical engineering at McMaster. What followed was an esteemed career laced with achievement and novelty. This includes becoming the first woman to be appointed as faculty member in mechanical engineering at McMaster, and the first woman to hold the position of Dean of Engineering when she joined the University of Windsor in 1994.
She has since published over 380 papers in professional journals, holds a Tier I Canada Research Chair in Manufacturing Systems and is currently a fellow of the Canadian Society of Mechanical Engineers, Society of Manufacturing Engineers, and the International Academy for Production Engineering.
On Jan. 20 her incredible achievements were recognized as one of 25 Order of Ontario recipients, the highest honors in the province. ElMaraghy was the only engineer recognized amongst this year’s recipients.
“I was indeed thrilled,” said ElMaraghy. “It was great to have my work and leadership acknowledged […] being invested in the Order of Ontario is one of my proudest moments.”
Like any true pioneer, ElMaraghy was left to navigate a challenging field in a time when there were very few females in engineering. “At the beginning of my career there were very few women engineers, and being the first [PhD and faculty] was certainly a novelty. There was a great pressure to prove one’s abilities.”
Despite the odds, ElMaraghy overcame preconceptions by demonstrating excellence in her abilities, going on to become the founding director of the Flexible Manufacturing Systems here at McMaster and establishing herself as a powerhouse in manufacturing and systems design.
Named Hamilton’s Woman of the Year in the Workplace in 1990, ElMaraghy has seen the positive influence women leaders can have across genders. “Women role models in academia and in the corporate world are very important not only for women but also for men who are expected to work with and sometimes be supervised by women,” said ElMaraghy.
When she was a student, Hoda ElMaraghy ventured where no woman had before. In 1976, she became the woman graduate to earn a PhD in mechanical engineering at McMaster. What followed was an esteemed career laced with achievement and novelty.
Right now, she serves as a faculty member as an engineering professor at the University of Windsor and is a collaborator with the Canadian government. ElMaraghy thinks should play a crucial role in the advancement of women in academia and the workplace. “Universities and employers must put in place measures to remove clear and hidden barriers for women’s progress in these fields and promote equal pay for work of equal value,” she said. “They must offer them leadership training and opportunities for progress.”
Looking ahead, ElMaraghy is confident that women can continue to succeed in emerging STEM fields but deserve the right blend of advocacy.
“Women are capable of tackling many challenges in engineering but they need more support, encouragement and recognition,” she said.
Photo Credit: University of Windsor
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
“I’m not a feminist.”
I was shocked to hear the words leave her mouth; I almost didn’t even believe it.
“I can’t tell, are you joking right now?” I asked.
“No. That’s just never a word I would use to describe myself.”
Hearing my mom tell me she didn’t relate to the term “feminist” was a blow to my whole understanding of society. For my entire life she has been the driving force that has taught me that women deserve equal rights when compared to their male counterparts and that I should always take care of myself and never rely on a man — or anyone else for that matter. And she is the one that is always the most disturbed and angry when she finds out I’ve faced sexism in the workplace. Yet for some reason, she wouldn’t call herself a feminist.
My parents, like many other students’, grew up in Canada in the ‘60s and the ‘70s. While they are both racialized individuals and these decades of their youth made headway for movements in civil rights, their greater understanding of things like gender and women’s rights, on the other hand, is slightly tainted with memories of what would have then been considered extremist activism.
Second-wave feminism was sweeping the nation at the time, and if youth were not actively involved in the movement (for a variety of reasons), they were often taught that this was something negative and over the top. Especially for people that were already being treated as pariahs for their skin colour, going into the street and talking about abortion and marital rape just brought up more opportunities for people to mock and abuse them.
The pivotal moments in my parents’ youth were restrained for various socio-political reasons. And because of these reasons, they now struggle with grasping the meaning of these terms in our modern society.
The actual semantics of the word “feminist” have gotten a horrible reputation over the years. And contrary to many a belief, some sampling in a Beyoncé song isn’t going to change everyone’s minds. Often I feel that my mission as a feminist is to overthrow the opinions of the people closest to me in age range, because they “are the future” and we should be focusing our time on them. But the harder mission may be to work with the people who raised me, and to educate people that I feel already know what’s going on, but don’t quite have the history to know what it means in our day and age.
The pivotal moments in my parents’ youth were restrained for various socio-political reasons. And because of these reasons, they now struggle with grasping the meaning of these terms in our modern society.
When trying to create a society that is truly intersectional, I often forget the important role that age plays. While there are many older citizens who do not stand up in arms in our present-day activism simply because they’re assholes, there are also many who weren’t raised to have the same knowledge and understanding that is being promoted to us today.
When we’re looking to talk to people and to promote diverse causes, it’s important to remember that age is also a point of privilege and the terms and ideas we’re bringing up may take more effort to understand. My mom is a feminist, but she refuses to call herself one because of the time she grew up in. Here’s to hoping our current efforts towards education in feminist activism can start to turn back time.
Photo Credit: Diana Davies
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
By: Lauren Beals
The newly formed DeGroote Women’s Professional Network wants to tap into the potential of bringing like-minded women together to work towards a common goal.
A collective of female leaders in the McMaster and DeGroote communities, the network is committed to bringing together passionate students, alumni, academics and local corporate partners to advance women in business and society.
Evolved from a breakfast series on women in business, the network was formally launched on Jan. 19 to a crowd of 200 attendees at the Burlington Ron Joyce Center.
Linda Morgan, President of the Clic Effect Inc., offered an exciting perspective on change management in a keynote address that included a four-step framework for change assessment and plenty of audience participation.
“It was a lot of fun,” said event coordinator and DeGroote School of Business Advancement Officer Kristine Leadbetter. “She looked at the different takes of people in the workplace and how they adapt to change. She also had the surprise element of dancing to demonstrate how when people are moving it is impossible to determine where they will go next and that unless you have a clear set of objectives you can lose focus from your ultimate goal.”
On a larger scale, the network hopes to tackle broader issues faced by women in professional settings through education and mentorship, laying to rest the storied “old boys’ club” of the corporate world. Encouraging woman to pursue leadership positions and nurturing ambition are also high priorities.
“[The network] is opening up the doors to have those conversations without needing a meeting with someone per say, that will hopefully encourage all woman to go for whatever it is that they want to do,” said Leadbetter.
On a larger scale, the network hopes to tackle broader issues faced by women in professional settings through education and mentorship.
More often than men, women must juggle to prioritize education, work and family, a balance Leadbetter is confident mentorship will help create. “Being a part of the network means finding like-minded women. Whether you are in the time of your life when priorities are close to home or are solely focused on your career it is great to talk to women who are going through the same situation and see if they have solutions, tips or advice. Even just running ideas off of someone outside your core group of friends can be helpful.”
Leadbetter was also quick to specify that despite the network’s name, the events are not offered exclusively to women. “We do have men that attend our events which is totally fine. It is great to have men that support our initiative, it is a very important part of it actually.”
In addition to the launch event, a wide range of opportunities to become involved are currently available, including a “Knowledge@DeGroote” lecture series with industry leaders and cocktail networking evenings. Students are offered free event registration and are encouraged to attend not only for employment connections but also for career advice and exposure to seasoned perspectives. They can also connect with the network through social media and professionally online through LinkedIn.
However, for women in business the path to equality is still paved with many obstacles.
“We still have a way to go … a lot of initiatives right now are showing that there is change, but also that change is still needed,” said Leadbetter.
Photo Credit: Mike Lalich
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
I’ll let you in on a little secret: feminists are sometimes very angry people. We hold signs at rallies, we swear at catcallers, and sometimes we publish aggressive opinions pieces. Often we are accused of focusing on issues that are too small. Are you moaning about the lack of female MSU presidential candidates? What about the environment! Are you upset about the wage gap? What about genocide? Missing and murdered Indigenous women? Think about world hunger.
Over the years I’ve learned that no issue is too small. Telling people that their grievances are unimportant is to misunderstand the nature of social change. Our societal flaws do not exist in a vacuum, but instead are part of a larger web of systematic barriers that feminists have simply labeled “patriarchy.” Nothing is a small issue because it is always part of a larger one. A casual sexist joke in the office contributes to the devaluing of women in the workplace. Brushing off a Pocahontas costume at Halloween is a dismissal of the contemporary impact of colonialism. A friend who insists on hugging you despite your complaints is ignoring the importance of consent. Speaking up about these “small” issues is absolutely worth your time, and acknowledging these legitimate grievances is very important.
Getting involved with small-scale issues can also function as a form of “gateway activism.” No one begins their activist career with a global campaign for social reform. Instead most people start by making changes locally, or advocating for themselves on a small scale. Furthermore, issues such as racism, sexism, and homophobia are complex, and require time and effort to understand. If everyone who wanted to commit to social change began by trying to solve an entire “ism,” the process would become immediately overwhelming. Instead of trying to bite off more than you can chew, starting small means that you can learn as you work, both from others and from past mistakes.
It is also perfectly valid to not graduate onto “bigger” issues. Not everyone is destined to become a contemporary Martin Luther King. Equally important are the people who strive to make meaningful changes to their own environments, be it their interpersonal relationships, or how they feel about themselves. Not everyone has to do great things to make a big difference.
By focusing exclusively on larger issues we can also often lose sight of the impact of the “smaller” things. Sure, one food bank may not alleviate poverty and hunger globally, but even if the larger systematic issues remain unsolved, then at least it has made a difference in the immediate lives of its clients. A little work is better than no work, especially when the problem you are trying to tackle is multi-faceted.
Often the person who tells you that there are bigger fish to fry are not frying any fish themselves. My advice to those aspiring to bring about meaningful change in this world is to sweat the small stuff. It may seem like the hydra grows too many heads, but large or small, you need to chop them off one at a time.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
Disclaimer: I hate wearing jeans. I also don’t have a boyfriend. However, I promise that I am not just being bitter when I say that I dislike the new trend in denim of “boyfriend jeans” for women.
Sharing clothing with someone you are dating is intimate. It implies shared property ownership, or at the very least, the promise that you will see that person again before laundry day. Maybe it is something you wear to remind you of your partner throughout the day, or maybe it has been borrowed after spending the night; either way, this romantic exchange of clothing is something that the fashion industry has decided to cash in on. The benefit is that these jeans — and all the associations that come along with them — can be purchased without the prerequisite of an actual boyfriend.
So what exactly is the issue with this trend? Jeans cycle through fads faster than our wardrobes can keep up, meaning that this style isn’t guaranteed to stick around. Other trends such as bellbottoms or boot cuts were perfectly innocuous, so why should we care about this one in particular?
The reason is the gender dynamics that have been explicitly incorporated into your clothing. Since these pants are not marketed as “men’s slouchy jeans for women” but as “boyfriend” jeans, they assume certain things about their audience, primarily that they are heterosexual. The sharing of clothing is also not reciprocal. I have never seen a “girlfriend jean” for men, or any other form of female clothing designed for boyfriends, meaning that the denim industry is only comfortable with cross-dressing when it can’t in any way be construed as emasculation or in any way disturb the gender binary.
These jeans also dictate what your relationship should look like. The design leads us to believe that girlfriends are supposed to be physically smaller — both shorter and skinnier — than their boyfriends. The jeans are intended to be baggy with a rolled up cuff, since your imaginary boyfriend ought to physically outstrip you. Standing at five foot ten, I promise you that none of my previous boyfriends’ jeans would have fit me at all, let alone in an artistically baggy fashion. I can’t help but feel I’m somehow the “wrong” size when these jeans are just a small part of a larger message to women that we are supposed to shrink ourselves to fit into our interpersonal relationships.
Perhaps more concerning about the boyfriend jean is its function as a sartorial “no homo.” As of late, women’s fashion trends have been embracing what were previously seen as men’s styles. By labelling a jean as a “boyfriend” cut, you allay the fears of the heterosexual female shopper worried about venturing into “butch” territory. Worried that people might assume you are gay based on your pant selection? Don’t worry, your jeans are just as heterosexual as you are!
In keeping with traditional gender dynamics and inequalities, it should not shock you that your boyfriend jeans can cost you more than your actual boyfriend’s jeans. The cheapest pair on the Levi’s website clocked in at 98 dollars, while the male counterpart cost ten bucks less. (I for one resent the fact that men’s jeans were not only cheaper, but also free of stylized holes.) While this may not seem like much, when every piece of clothing that you are buying is around ten percent more expensive, it starts to add up.
It’s not news that the fashion industry has its problems, but while there has been a push in the past decade for the industry to do away with some of the more blatant issues, the banal ones remain. Do I think abolishing this style of jean will singlehandedly bring about gender equality? Not at all. But do I think this fashion trend is symptomatic of larger issues to do with heteronormativity and body expectations? Absolutely. Break out the ice cream and Netflix, because it is time for us to dump our boyfriend jeans.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
There are few people in the world who can liken their 12-year-old selves to “a middle school Hare Krishna,” and make you go, “yeah, sure, I could see that.”
Mindy Kaling is one of these people. On the first page of her sophomore novel, Why Not Me?, Kaling begins to tell the story of her early life by describing her childhood attempts to please everyone around her (“I brought a family-size bag of Skittles to homeroom”) — a trait that has followed her into her adult career. The book of essays by the actress, writer and your dream best friend, is a fun, informative and hilarious tell-all about her personal life, the world of celebrity and Kaling’s early adventures manoeuvring through Hollywood.
Although styled similar to her first novel, Is Everyone Hanging Out Without Me (And Other Concerns), the book is still a unique treasure trove of stories told with her iconic blunt and self-deprecating humour.
The book jumps into her stories head-on with details about her relationships (both high and low-profile), lists chronicling double standards in Hollywood, and even includes a detailed collection of imagined emails that would exist if she didn’t go into television and instead became a high school Latin teacher.
With Kaling’s removal of the self-censorship that causes many celebrities to hold back details in their autobiographies, the novel is full of relatable anecdotes and honest experiences that address the question so many of us ask ourselves in terms of careers and relationships, “Why not me?”
After The Mindy Project was cancelled by FOX and received some mixed feedback from fans, I thought Why Not Me? May have been Kaling’s comedic swansong. Lucky for us, the show got picked up by Hulu (with hilarious new cast members and uncut Internet humour) and the book is far from the last we’ll be hearing from this talented actress. Kaling has already signed a $7.5 million deal for a third book that she will be writing alongside former The Office co-star and ex-boyfriend, B.J. Novak. The book will detail their failed romantic relationship, once again asking “Why not me” in the most lucrative way possible.
Overall the book is an entertaining read that can get most readers laughing. Kaling’s trials and tribulations make for good feminist fun and capture real-life emotions and challenges with a light-heartedness that she pulls off perfectly.
Last week, a video about body image appeared on my Twitter feed. “Fact: 97 percent of women have an ‘I hate my body moment’ every day” begins the clip. “That’s a lot of women looking in the mirror, wanting to change something.” The film goes on to call for women to love themselves, a message that I can get behind. Here is the issue: the video was an ad for Special K cereal.
In the past few years I’ve noticed a rise of “corporate feminism”—the use of feminist rhetoric in an attempt at marketing. Despite the potentially positive messages contained within this media, it should not be mistaken for legitimate feminist activism.
One of the most well known examples of corporate feminism is the Dove “Real Beauty TM” campaign. In one video, the ad tackles the way women view themselves. Sketched by an artist, women can see that they are more beautiful than they had previously thought. The video is moving, and as a woman who has struggled with my body image, it had an effect on me. So what exactly is the problem?
The short answer is that corporate feminism doesn’t care about you or me, it only cares about our money. This marketing may be powerful, but in the end it is still an ad, with the end goal not being self-acceptance, but purchases. Dove would be very displeased at the prospect of universal self-acceptance because satisfaction does not sell beauty products. For example, the company is owned by Unilever, which also sells “Fair and Lovely,” a skin-bleaching cream, which capitalizes on white supremacy in the beauty industry. Our ability to love our bodies without the assistance of cosmetics and soaps is Unilever’s worst-case scenario. If we were to whole-heartedly love our bodies, then why would we need shampoo to help manage our split ends?
At this point you may be thinking that it is not news that corporations aren’t perfect. Maybe if the ads are not entirely sincere, then at least they are promoting discussion. Perhaps some change can come out of questionable content if consumers take a moment to think about feminist issues when purchasing breakfast cereal, or a bar of soap. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The problem lies with corporate feminism’s lack of diversity—not just in its media, which mostly features white, able-bodied women—but in its choice of topics. Bonafide feminism is as diverse as its membership; it encompasses everything from conception, to race, to occupation. Corporate feminism instead focuses solely on ideas that can make money, mostly sanitized messages about body image. These are concepts which everyone can comfortably support, but do not address the root of the problem. While great change can come from diverse feminist dialogue, corporate feminism instead fosters a conversational monoculture, one which is not intended to produce anything other than sales.
Furthermore, corporate feminism often misses the point or leads us astray when it comes to meaningful social change. The Dove “Real Beauty TM” video focused on acceptance through appearance, not holistic self-love. The advertisement for Special K cereal had women throwing off the bonds of the patriarchy through physical fitness, which is not an option for many women with disabilities, nor should it be the sole path to self-acceptance. Both campaigns put the onus on women to change, not questioning the societal structures that make us feel the way we do about our bodies. Corporate feminism’s “solution”—through the magic of retail therapy—is also inaccessible to those who cannot buy their way in. It reduces a movement that is meant to be inclusive to one that is only available to those with disposable income.
At its core, corporate feminism is emotional manipulation wielded to divest you from your cash. Somewhere during the production of the ad for Special K, someone in marketing turned around and said, “The majority of women feel badly about themselves. How can we use this to sell cereal?” I don’t believe that self-acceptance is going to come tucked in with my breakfast food, and neither should you.
Photo Credit: Harry Carr
As I was scrolling through Tumblr, I came across photos of a new, rather strange, fashion trend far more unusual than the “far-out there trends.” Some women are dyeing their armpit hair, sometimes to match the colour of the hair on their head. Media outlets such as the Washington Post and Huffington Post have speculated as to whether this bizarre trend is a fashion fad or a new radical demonstration of modern feminism. Whether fad or feminist movement, dyed armpit hair serves a purpose to enlighten North American culture to be skeptical of the beauty standards the media tout as necessities of living, and what are simply commercialized cosmetics.
Recently, one of my male friends said that women and men have neutral equality in our North American society and that there is no more need for new radical demonstrations of feminist movements to exist. I objected to the statement he made, as there are extreme physical beauty requirements placed on women, which I consider to be sexist. North American beauty standards are seen as a basic necessity for women, but places such as Europe see them to be obscure. Take shaving armpits for example. The social standard for women to shave their armpit hair is of North American cultural standards only. It is seen in our culture to accept shaving armpit hair as an essential part of hygiene and rather distasteful to let our bodies exhibit their natural tendencies. It is also only “gross” for women to have armpit hair, while it is perfectly acceptable for men to let theirs grow out.
Dyed armpit hair exposes the conformity women follow by, in contrast, appropriating the fashion alternative of women growing out their armpit hair and dying it. By women making dyed armpit hair a fashion statement, it allows for North American society to become more comfortable with the fact that women naturally grow armpit hair just like men. Neon pink armpit hair can remind people of the sexist beauty standards placed on women and question whether it is actually “gross” for women to let their hair naturally grow on any part of their body. Many people in North American societies need to get used to the notion that women shouldn’t have to uphold unrealistic and expensive beauty standards, especially the ones that men aren’t expected to follow.
I don’t see myself growing out and dying my armpit hair, but I wouldn’t choose to wear a religious symbol around my neck or a political party button on my jacket either. I do, however, associate myself as supporter of feminist movements, like the 1968 Bra Burning Miss America Protest. Many of the women following the movement did not burn their bras, but instead decided they are not needed for them to conform to the high expectations of idealistic beauty set for them.
Dyed armpit hair can act as a physical symbol of how women shouldn’t have to feel compelled to consume the cosmetic products advertised to them as the daily essentials. Instead it can exist as a fashion fad while also expressing an underlying tone of feminist movements as a suggestion to re-evaluate what is essential to our cleanliness and what is really an added cosmetic.
