From the influence of the devil to overzealous restorers, there are numerous strange reasons and theories behind the conspicuous lack of pubic hair on women depicted in Western art.
  • smeg@feddit.ukEnglish
    37·
    3 months ago

    One medieval writer even went as far as to claim that if you take the hairs of a menstruating woman and bury them in the garden, a snake will grow from the earth. (If any of our dear readers try this at home, please write in to the ABC with your results).

  • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
    251·
    3 months ago

    You might want to read into it some weird sexist agenda, but really, they also had a lot of naked men with realistic penises and no pubes. I’m sure it’s cuz those dudes had to shave to make it look bigger, yeah?

  • Fleur__@lemmy.world
    11·
    3 months ago

    Believe it or not there is actually no shortage of art containing women’s pubic hair if you just google it

  • Nurgus@lemmy.world
    101·
    3 months ago

    One thing the article doesn’t consider is age. What if the ancient artists were intending their subjects to be younger girls than the actual models?

    “Youth” in women being idealised then as now, presumably. I don’t imagine they had the same issues with girls being under age as we do.

  • pseudo@jlai.lu
    5·
    3 months ago

    That question work for both gender and the answer is, it depens on which artistic mouvment. “La liberté guidant le peuple” is famous the have a bit of armpit hair and “l’origine du monde” while been painting with the clear purpose to choc the public is much hairy.

    I never thought restoration have got rid of the hair. If nudity chock you, would you not rather dress people than shaving them? Anyway, restoration even get rid of whole people just because their were not white so…

  • gencha@lemm.ee
    3·
    3 months ago

    I feel like I’ve seen plenty of bush in the galleries. Will have to take a closer look in the future

    • glimse@lemmy.world
      292·
      3 months ago

      (dudes historically obsessing over the existence of body hair on women) women, am I right guys??

      • atro_city@fedia.io
        517·
        3 months ago

        If it had been the other way around (pubes on women and non on men), I bet you this article would’ve complained about that too. It’s just ragebait for feminists looking for a reason to be offended.

        • glimse@lemmy.world
          91·
          3 months ago

          You didn’t even read it, did you?

          There’s more complaining in your comment than in the piece you’re complaining about. Cry more, you’ll show those feminists!

        • Nurgus@lemmy.world
          4·
          3 months ago

          Who on earth do you think is offended? It’s a fairly erudite and interesting exploration of the subject, no one is upset about anything. Except maybe you?