SIECCAN Newsletter (in The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, Vol.

19 (3) 2010)

Sieccan Newsletter
Vol. 44, N o . 1-2, 2 0 1 0 (ISSN: 0834-0455)
Editor: Michael Barrett, Ph.D.
Associate Editor: Mary Bissell, Ph.D.

Smooth talking: The phenomenon of pubic hair removal in women

Lenore Riddell^ Hannah Varto^ and Zo G. Hodgson^
' Nurse Practitioner/Senior Practice Leader, BC Women's Hospital and Health Centre, Vancouver, BC
^ Clinical Practice Leader & Famiiy Nurse Practitioner, Child & Youth Program, Vancouver Coastal
Health, Vancouver, BC
3 Women's Health Research Institute, Provincial Health Services Authority, Vancouver, BC
Abstract: This exploratory, descriptive study investigated the motivations and practices behind the
phenomenon of pubic hair removai among women. A nal sample of 660 women aged 16 - 50 years
who had ever removed their pubic hair completed surveys asi<ing about their reasons for, methods of,
and side effects associated with this practice. Based on their usuai practices for areas of hair removai,
bikini iine was reported by about 50% of participants and whole pubic area by about 30%. Shaving,
salon waxing, and trimming with scissors were the most common usuai methods although many more
reported having ever tried more than one of these or other methods. Appearance in a bathing suit was
the most common reason given for pubic hair removal followed by feeling attractive and by the notion
that pubic hair removai is cleaner. Side effects ever experienced were common and included razor
bump and ingrown hairs but also rash, pimples, and cuts among other iess common types of pubic si<in
traumatization. Further research is proposed to better understand the sociai constructs of pubic hair
removai and to develop best practice guidelines for health professionals in relation to this phenomenon.
Acknowledgements: The authors wish to thanl< the Women's Heaith Research Institute for
statistical and conceptual support. Dr. Virginia Hayes was also intgrai to the research process
and we whoieheartediy thank her for her help and support. Authors' disclosure statement:
No competing financial interests exist.

Introduction
Pubic hair removal has become ubiquitous in
mainstream Western society over the past twenty
years. Once restricted to the bikini line or reserved for
certain cultural and religious groups, it has become
the norm for girls and women to remove most or all
of their pubic hair. It is now unusual for clinicians
in the authors' urban setting to examine any woman
under the age of 30 who still has all of her pubic

hair. Atiecdotally, clinicians report more pubic

area rashes, razor burn, wax burns, and generally
irritated pubic skin than ever before. Case reports
are beginning to appear in the medical literature
about more serious consequences of hair removal
such as septicemia (Dendle, et al., 2007), seconddegree burns (Haque & Al-Ghazall, 2004), contact
dermatitis (Quain, Militello, & Crawford, 2007), and
bacterial skin infections (Trger, 2006). Debate about
hair removal on legs and underarms has been part

Correspondence concerning this articie should be addressed to Lenore Riddell, 4500 Oak St., Vancouver, BC, Canada,
V6H 3N1. Email: lriddeli@cw.bc.ca

121

122

SIECCAN Newsletter (in The Canadian Journai of Human Sexuality, Voi. 19 (3) 2010)

of the feminist discourse since the 1960s. However,

there is a noticeable lack of discussion around pubic
hair removal. Concerns about female infantilization,
hygiene obsession, and continued social control
of the female body have been acknowledged, yet
research outlining the practices, complications, and/
or perceived benefits of pubic hair removal has been
limited. The main aim of the present study was to
further our understanding of the phenomenon of
extensive pubic hair removal with a future goal of
developing best practice guidelines for health care
professionals regarding this practice.

continuously shaving and waxing...and of course

buying the necessary products" (p. 895).

Norms of hair removal

Removal of leg and underarm hair has been described
as part of the female beauty norm in Westernized
women (Basow & Braman, 1998; Tiggemann &
Lewis, 2004; Toerien & Wilkinson, 2004). Although
the removal of body hair may be seen as less harmful
than other methods of altering one's body in order
to maintain a societal norm (e.g., plastic surgery
or extreme dieting), the message that females
must change themselves in order to be accepted
is perpetuated. This is emphasized by Basow and
Cultural understanding of pubic hair
Braman's
(1998) study on the phenomenon of leg
Various claims have been made about the evolutionary
and
underann
hair removal in relation to perceived
significance of retention of pubic hair in women. In
The Naked Woman, Morris (2004) theorizes that sexual attractiveness. Women in this study felt that
pubic hair could act as a trap for pheromones, serve hair removal was socially mandated and that to reject
as a visual sign of reproductive maturity, and/or this norm was to risk unfavorable evaluation from
function as a protective pad during intercourse. peers and sexual partners. Men rated women with
While such observations are of interest, evolved leg and underann hair as less attractive, less sociable,
traits do not preclude cultural modifications. Pubic less intelligent, and less hygienic. Toerien and
hair removal has been endorsed by religions in some Wilkinson (2004) also examined this issue in an incultures but, until recently, the practice has not been depth qualitative exploration of the depilation norm
the norm in Westem society. Widespread acceptance among 678 British women. A number of consistent
of the bikini in the mid-1960s led to bikini line hair patterns emerged around the meanings and practices
removal although the majority of pubic hair was of women who remove their body hair, specifically
left untouched. That changed in the mid-1990s. that hairless women were viewed as attractive,
According to popular culture, the removal of pubic feminine, smooth, clean, and tidy. Although these
hair beyond the bikini line was popularized when studies provide a snapshot of women's practices and
seven Brazilian sisters opened a hair salon in New the meanings placed on hair removal, they do not
York City in 1994 (Labre, 2002). The "Brazilian," specifically examine practices and outcomes related
leaving only a small strip of pubic hair or removing to the removal of pubic hair.
all pubic hair, has rapidly become part of the female
personal-grooming repertoire.
Existing literature on pubic hair removal
A review of the literature reveals a paucity of articles
Articles and images abound in tbe popular press outlining practices, attitudes, and behaviours related
and internet on various forms of pubic hairlessness. to pubic hair removal. Only two studies (Toerien,
In addition, a burgeoning industry has developed Wilkinson, & Choi, 2005; Tiggemann & Hodgson,
around the practice. Women are offered a variety 2008) examined the issue of pubic hairlessness. In
of methods for the removal of their pubic hair: Toerien et al.'s study, women were asked about their
plucking and tweezing, shaving, waxing, trimming, pubic hair removal as well as the removal of leg
depilatory creams, electrolysis, and lasers to remove and underarm hair. The majority (85.7%) of female
all or portions of their pubic hair. Promoted by participants reported removal of some or all of their
consumer capitalism and clever marketing, many pubic hair primarily by shaving (64%) or home
women spend a great deal of time and money on waxing (20%). Significantly fewer women over 51
removing their pubic hair. Tiggemann and Hodgson years of age had ever removed their pubic hair in
(2008) note that "the lack of body hair associated with comparison with women younger than 20 years old.
spurious hygiene is a very sure way to keep women Tiggemann and Hodgson found similar findings in

SIECCAN Newsletter (in The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, Vol. 19 (3) 2010)

addition to examining the possible effect of the media

on women's choice, frequency, and method of pubic
hair removal. They reported a relationship between
women's frequency of pubic hair removal and the
amount of pubic hair removed and their reading of
fashion magazines and watching of populartelevision
programs. This study also confirmed the prior finding
that although women recognized the social and
normative pressures on them to remove pubic hair
they were consistently unwilling to identify these
influences as a reason for their own personal choice to
remove their pubic hair (Tiggemann & Kenyon, 1998;
Tiggemann & Lewis, 2004). In addition to the need
for further research on the reasons for and practice of
public hair removal, we also need more information
on women's experience of the side-effects of these
procedures which have been reported to include
rashes, ingrown hairs, microabrasions, folliculitis,
and infections including sexually transmitted
infections (STI) (Dendle et al., 2004; Haque & AlGhazal, 2004; Quain et al., 2007; Trager, 2006).
The present study

Given the lack of research on pubic hair removal, this

exploratory, cross-sectional, descriptive study sought
to document women's reasons for removing some
or all of their public hair, the methods employed,
and the side-effects they experienced and attributed
to their pubic hair removal practices. Our goals
were to stimulate the generation of hypotheses for
future research and to identify issues that might
be considered in the development of best practice
guidelines for health professionals in relation to pubic
hair removal.

aged 16-50 who actually do so. Recruitment took

place through the use of posters in public spaces,
online networks, and dispersal through clinics and
private physician offices. Ethical approval was
obtained from the University of British Columbia's
Behavioural Research Ethics Board. The consent
form described a variety of measures designed to
protect their privacy and also stated that they could
leave any question blank.
Materials and procedures

Participants completed a two-part questionnaire

created by the researchers based on the existing
literature (Tiggemann & Lewis, 2004; Toerien &
Wilkinson, 2004) and on their clinical experience.
The questionnaire was pre-tested and assessed at a
Grade 6 literacy level using the Simplified Measure
of Gobbledygook (SMOG) readability test. Part A had
12 questions that were either open-ended or answered
on a checklist. Questions were designed to elicit
pubic hair removal practices and experiences that
occurred "ever" and "usually" with an invitation to
"check all that apply." The checklist on participants'
reasons for removing "some or all of my pubic hair"
offered 17 brief statements giving possible reasons
for doing so with each item reported on a five point
Likert scale that ranged from strongly disagree (1)
to strongly agree (5). Part B of the questionnaire
gathered demographic information including age,
education, and ethnicity. The study took place over
a three month period (February 1, 2008 to April 30,
2008). Participants had the option of completing
the survey online or on paper and submitting the
completed questionnaire online or at drop-off boxes
that were emptied weekly.

Methods
Data analysis
Recruitment of participants

Women were invited to participate in a study to "leam

about the reasons that women chose to remove some
or all of their pubic hair". Inclusion criteria were:
living in the catchment area of the Lower Mainland
of British Columbia; being aged 16-50 years; and
being able to read and write English. The study was
described as an information seeking questionnaire
about pubic hair removal. Because the description
may have been taken to mean that only women who
practiced pubic hair removal should apply, the sample
cannot be used to infer the percentage of women

The data was entered into Statistical Package for

the Social Sciences, version 15 for Windows (SPSS
15) and exploratory data analysis and descriptive
statistics were performed using SPSS.
Results
Characteristics of the study participants

Among the 806 women who completed the survey,

682 met the criteria of living in the Lower Mainland
of British Columbia, being aged 16-50, and being
able to read and write English. Among these 682

123

124

SIECCAN Newsletter (in The Canadian Journai of Human Sexuality, Vol. 19 (3) 2010)

women, 660 (96.8%) had at some time in their life

removed some or all of their pubic hair at least once
and 22 (3.2%) had never removed any of their pubic
hair. As noted above, the study description may have
implied that potential participants had done so. This
finding cannot be used to infer the actual percentage
of women who had not done pubic hair removal.
The age range of all participants (removers and nonremovers) was 16 to 50 years (mean 32 years) with no
significant difference in age between women who had
ever removed their pubic hair (mean age = 32 years)
compared to the ages of those that had not (mean age
= 36 years; t^,^^, =-2.15, p = 0.43).
This study focuses on the 660 women who had a history
of pubic hair removal or were currently removing some
or all of their pubic hair. Most of these women were
Caucasian (85%), followed by Asian (7%), Indian/
Pakistani (5%), First Nations (2%), and Hispanic (2%)
with only one woman who identified as Black. This
was also a well educated sample with 90% having at
least some college education. Most participants (93%)

Figure 1

identified as heterosexual and reported that they were

in committed relationships (77%).

Removal of pubic hair

Each participant was asked at what age she started
removing her pubic hair, from where she had ever
removed pubic hair, and from where she usually
removes her pubic hair. When asked "how old were
you when you first removed your pubic hair?" the
average age the respondents reported was 18 with
a few starting as young as 9 (Fig. 1). Overall 75%
reported pubic hair removal by the time they were
20 years old and 96% by 32 years old. One woman
reported advent of pubic hair removal at age 39.

Reasons for pubic hair removai

In order to elicit reasons for pubic hair removal,
participants were given 17 brief statements reflecting
possible answers to the statement "I remove some or
all of my pubic hair because... ".
Examples include: "It looks better in a bathing suit";

Age of Rrst removal of pubic hair

10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Results based on respondents (n=660) who had ever removed pubic hair.

SIECCAN Newsletter (in The Canadian Journai of Human Sexuality, Vol. 19 (3) 2010)

"People would look at me funny if I didn't"; "men

prefer women without pubic hair"; "I think it is
cleaner"; "It makes me feel attractive"; "It makes
oral sex feel better"; and " I like the feeling". Fig. 2
shows the number of women who "strongly agreed"
or "agreed" with selected statements that may be
taken to reflect their own strongest reason(s) for
pubic hair removal.

thing to do", suggests social pressure as a reason for

pubic hair removal for some women as was also the
case for "people would look at me funny if I didn't"
and "Women are supposed to do it" (not shown).

Areas of pubic hair removal

In terms of the most common areas of pubic hair
removal "ever tried", the bikini line was most
common experience (about 74%) with approximately
The tnost frequently cited reason was "It looks 64% reporting that they had ever removed hair from
better in a bathing suit" followed by "It makes their whole pubic area (Fig. 3). A sizeable percentage
me feel attractive" (Fig. 2). Liking the feeling and of respondents thus had experience with two or more
feeling "feminine" and "more comfortable" were levels of pubic hair rernoval. About 45% reported
similarly rated and at a similar level as for the "usually" removing bikini line hair with fewer doing
one hygiene-re]ated reason "I think it is cleaner." so for the other areas. All ofthe "usually" responses
Men's preferences ("my partner prefers it" and were lower than "ever". To the extent that "usual"
sexual enhancement ("oral sex feels better" and implies current, it appears that many participants had
"it encourages my partner to do it) were similarly experimented with several options and consolidated
ranked although not in the topfiveamong the reasons to their current practices according to preference
offered. The least subscribed item in Fig. 2, "It's the although this still included usual use of more than
one method in many cases.
Figure 2

Reasons for pubic hair removal

Top reasons given for pubic hair removal

Results are hased on participants (n=660) who had ever removed puhic hair.
Participants indicated their agreement of a five point Likert scale to each of 17 items representing their possible reasons
for pubic hair removal.
Numbers reflect combined "strongly agree" and "agree" responses.

125

SIECCAN Newsietter (in The Canadian Journai of Human Sexuality, Voi. 19 (3) 2010)

Figure 3

Areas of pubic hair removal

Areas of pubic hair removal ever tried

G Areas of usuai pubic hair removai

600

500 -

Number

126

100 0 -1

Biiiini iine

1
1
1 r

More than
my bikini iine
but iess than
my whoie
pubic area

My whole
pubic area

My upper
inner thigiis

Other

Results based on respondents (n==660) who had ever removed pubic hair.
Respondents could and did respond to all options that applied to them.

Figure 4

Numbers of women reporting various methods of pubic hair removal

Results based on participants (n=660) who had ever removed pubic hair.
Participants could reply to all options that applied to them.

None

SIECCAN Newsletter (in The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, Voi. 19 (3) 2010)

Figure 5

Number of women reporting side effects from all methods of pubic hair removal

Respondents (n=660) indicated side effects from their chosen method(s) of pubic hair removal. Respondents could choose
more than one answer.

Methods of hair removal

Among the eight methods of pubic hair removal
presented, the ones that predominated among those
"ever tried" were shaving (reported by the vast
majority), followed by trimming, waxing (home,
salon), and creams and plucking (Fig. 4). A similar
pattem was shown for "usual" methods but at a lower
level than for lifetime experience. A free text box was
provided for women to indicate why they chose their
usual method(s) of pubic hair removal. In this respect,
the majority choice of shaving was considered to be
fast, quick, and/or easy.
Side effects associated with method of
pubic hair removal
When asked "have you ever experienced any of
the following as a result of removing your pubic
hair", the most commonly reported side effects
were ingrown hairs (81%) and razor bumps (80%)
(Fig. 5). Other commonly cited side effects were
rashes, pimples, and cuts with bums cited much
less often. It should be noted that this survey
did not differentiate between shaving with an
electric razor or a blade razor. In addition, because
respondents cited multiple methods either ever used
or usually used, it was not possible to confidently

assign frequency of reported side effects to specific

methods.
Discussion
The present study was predicated on the understanding
that pubic hair removal is now the norm for women in
mainstream Westem society and that more research
should be done to document the social and health
implications of this relatively new phenomenon to
guide professional practice and public education
in this area. The women's reasons for removing
their pubic hair, the methods used, the side effects
experienced and the social implications of this now
common procedure are the focus of the discussion
that follows.
Social construct: Body hair and norms of
female attractiveness
Femininity is generally considered by feminists as
a way of playing out an ideological system where
female bodies react and enact gender roles as
determined by social mores. Removal of leg and
underarm body hair became the female norm between
the World Wars and has been attributed to advertising
campaigns which focused on equating body hair

127

128

SIECCAN Newsletter (in The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, Vol. 19 (3) 2010)

with poor hygiene and ugliness (Lewis, 1987) and

therefore unappealing to the male gaze. Lewis also
argues that removal of body hair is equated with being
feminine, whereas male body hair is synonymous
with masculinity. The fact that bathing suit apparel
was the most common reason cited in the current
study for removal of pubic hair supports the notion
that depilatory practices are influenced, or dictated,
by social mores. In discussing pubic hairlessness,
Trger (2006) noted that showing pubic hair while
wearing a bathing suit is considered an "extreme
fashion faux pas" (p. 118). This is illustrated by
the recent popular movie. Sex and the City (2008),
where one of the female characters is admonished
by her female friends for not maintaining removal
of her pubic hair. Our finding that "It looks better
in a bathing suit" was the most commonly endorsed
reason for pubic hair removal, is consistent with this
fashion expectation.
The socially constructed view that body hair in
women in general is a flaw unfit for public display
has been described by feminist analysts as evidence
of further objectification of the female body. The link
between hair removal and objectification of women
was not clearly evident in our study although some
women did identify the influence of the prevailing
societal context ("It's the thing to do") as their
reason for pubic hair removal. While this was the
least-strongly subscribed among the top 11 reasons
reported, it does appear to reflect an awareness of
social pressure. The observation that women who
are aware of normative pressures may not recognize
the influence of these pressures on their own actions
(Tiggemann & Lewis, 2004; Tiggemann & Hodgson,
2008) thus warrants further exploration as does the
link between social rewards and pubic hair removal.

to that of an earlier developmental stage. To the

extent that Morris (2004) was correct in suggesting
that pubic hair serves as one of the secondary sexual
characteristics that signals reproductive maturity, the
social trend toward its removal by adult women is
of interest.
Sociai construct: Media influences
The feminist discourse on body acceptance has
focused primarily on issues related to body shape,
youthful appearance, and the submissive female.
Few would disagree that the sexualized female
body remains a mainstay of advertising. The fact
that this sexualized female is almost uniformly
smooth and hairless has received little attention.
For example, underarm and leg hair is rarely
seen in current mainstream media, advertising, or
pornography. Compared to pornography from 20
years ago, current pornography rarely includes pubic
hair that has not either been significantly trimmed
or removed altogether. The societal shift towards
pubic hairlessness may be influenced by the current
pornography industry as it complies with demands
for more explicit visual images. Further research on
this theme is required.

Social construct: Body hair as unclean

A number of women in this sample reported removing
their pubic hair "because it is cleaner". This is an
interesting finding considering the lack of evidence
to support pubic hair being dirty or unhygienic.
Lewis (1987), in her discussion on the cultural
significance of body hair in men and women, argues
that the widespread removal of female body hair
for 'cleanliness' is based on a cultural obsession
with cleanliness which may relate to achieving the
"American Dream" of wealth and success. After all,
removal of body hair requires the resources of access
to water, products and time. This concept is reinforced
Developmental stages
The development of pubic hair goes through five by a recent survey (United Press International, 2008)
distinct stages (Tanner stages) with each indicating by an American laser company which indicated that
a stage of sexual maturity. Drawing from his clinical American women spent more than $10,000 over
experience as a pediatrician, Trger (2006) noted that a lifetime and greater than 58.4 days in their lives
younger girls are removing their pubic hair as soon using shaving products in managing unwanted
as pubic hair growth starts. Our study supports this hair. Others, most notably Labre (2002), relate the
finding as some women were as young as nine when obsession with cleanliness to a cultural understanding
they started removing their pubic hair. The removal of women's natural fluids as unclean. Despite the
of some or all pubic hair results in a female pubic lack of evidence that pubic hair is unclean, this belief
area in adult women that has an appearance similar continues to prevail and is promoted in popular

SIECCAN Newsletter (in The Canadian Journai of Human Sexuality, Voi. 19 (3) 2010) 129

media and by businesses invested in hair removal.

Web sites devoted to pubic hair removal reinforce
this notion as Nicole Williams (2010) states in her
blog Hair Removal Haven: "pubic hair in the pubic
region is a hot spot for germs that cause foul odor
and skin irritations. Shaving of the pubic hair will
greatly reduce the likelihood of these problems".
Multi-million dollar companies associated with
hair removal continue to emphasize the cleanliness
factor with the underlying message being that hair
is dirty, and thus, ensure that women continue to
need and use their products. Cleanliness, in itself,
is a powerful construct and one which imparts a
moral duty to perform hygienic measuresin this
casethe removal of pubic hair. Research that
includes questions about women's perceptions of the
cleanliness of their genital area would be beneficial
in adding to the scarce academic literature on pubic
hair removal.
Social construct/affrmation
Given that over half of our participants indicated
that they removed their pubic hair because they
liked the feeling or felt attractive, feminine, or more
comfortable as a result, it would appear that they
viewed these as positive reasons and affirmations of
their practice of pubic hair removal. Enhancement
of sexual activity was mentioned less often but
also appears to be a reason of affirmation. While
these reasons do not appear to reflect the previously
mentioned unrecognized responses to social
pressures and rewards (Tiggemann & Lewis, 2004;
Tiggemann & Hodgson, 2008), further research is
needed to better understand the inter-relationships
among the varied reasons that our participants most
strongly endorsed for their own pubic hair removal.
Side effects and health concerns
The percentage of participants who experienced
side effects such as razor bumps, in-grown hairs,
rashes and cuts is high and worrisome. Several
studies on preoperative genital shaving as compared
to other methods of hair removal have consistently
found increased bacterial infection rates related to
shaving (Kovach, 1990; Basevi & Lavender, 2001;
Kaptanoglu & Duruk, 2005). Unfortunately, as we
only asked about hair removal methods "usually" and
"ever" used, and side effects "ever" experienced, we
are unable to examine which hair removal methods

were associated with specific side effects because

respondents frequently selected more than one
response to each of the questions. Microabrasions,
contact dennatitis, and skin disruption due to methods
of pubic hair removal may also increase the potential
for the transmission of viruses (including HIV,
hepatitis, herpes simplex and human papilloma). This
finding of widespread skin irritation has important
implications for future clinical studies and policy
development. Salons and esthetician services remain
largely unregulated in Canada (and elsewhere) and
little is known about their hygienic practices, training
programs, and the potential for disease transmission.
Further investigation is needed to determine the
link between particular methods of hair removal
and associated side effects. In addition, the relation
between pubic hair removal and the acquisition of
infection warrants further exploration.
Limitations and future research
How women learn about pubic hair removal practices
is unknown and future studies will need to address
this question. Our study indicated that the main
reason women chose shaving as their preferred hair
removal practice was low cost and convenience.
Further, little is known about adolescent pubic hair
removal practices and this study did not reach that
target group despite being available widely online and
through paper surveys available in youth clinics. This
lack of a youth sample may refiect embarrassment
related to the topic or a perceived time management
issue. Alternate formats and venues will need to be
explored to reach this group.
A major limitation of this study is that the
sample was self-selected and few women who
did not remove their pubic hair completed the
survey. The lack of a comparison group limits
broad applicability and may over-represent the
prevalence of pubic hair depilation. The average
age of the women in this study was 32 which
may be reflected in an older average age of onset
removal of pubic hair for this sample. A younger
sample might well provide a different age of
beginning hair removal or differing reasons for
doing so. Further, this was a well-educated,
predominantly Caucasian sample and information
cannot be generalized to other populations. Future
research is needed to explore ethnic and contextual

130

SIECCAN Newsletter (in The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, Voi. 19 (3) 2010)

differences in experience of and reasons for pubic

hair removal in women.

Morris, D. (2004). The Naked Woman. New York, NY: St.

Martin's Press.

Overall, ourfindingssuggest the need for additional

research into the reasons why women remove their
pubic hair, as well as how and why they are using
particular methods. This may lead to a more thorough
understanding of the social constructs of pubic hair
removal and to research-based recommendations
for methods of hair removal that prevent dermatitis
and the spread of infections. This is an important
area for further research because pubic hair removal
niay increase the risk for a variety of dermatological
concerns. As health care professionals, further
information on pubic hair removal behaviours will
enable us to develop best practice guidelines to
prevent negative health outcomes.

Quain, R., Militello, G., & Crawford, G. (2007). Allergic

contact dermatitis caused by colophony in an epilating
product. Dermatitis, 18, 96-98.

References

Tiggemann, M., & Hodgson, S. (2008). The hairless norm

extended: Reasons for and predictors of women's
body hair removal at different body sites. Journal of
Sex Roles, 59, 889-897.
Tiggemann, M., & Lewis, C. (2004). Attitudes toward
women's body hair: Relationship with disgust
sensitivity. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28,
381-387.
Tiggemann, M., & Kenyon, S. (1998). The hairlessness
norm: The removal of body hair in women. Journal
ofSex Roles, 39, 73-SS5.

Toerien, M., Wilkinson, S., & Choi, R (2005). Body hair

Basevi, V., & Lavender, T. (2000). Routine perineal
removal: The 'mundane' production of normative
shaving on admission in labour. Cochrane Database
femininity. Journal of Sex Roles, 52, 399-406.
of Systematic Reviews 2000, 4. Retrieved September
27, 2010, from http://mrw.interscience.wiley.com/ Toerien, M., & Wilkinson, S. (2004). Exploring the
cochrane/clsysrev/articles/CDOO 1236/frame.html
depilation norm: a qualitative questionnaire study of
women's body hair removal. Qualitative Research in
Basow, S.A., & Braman, A.C. (1998). Women and body
Psychology, 1, 69-92.
hair: Social perceptions and attitudes. Psychology of
Women Quarterly, 22, 637-645.
Trger, J. (2006). Pubic hair removalpearls and pitfalls.
Journal of Pdiatrie Adolescent Gynecology, 19,
Dendle, C, Mulvey, S., Pyrlis, F., Grayson, M., & Johnson,
117-123.
P. (2001). Severe complications of a Brazilian bikini
wax. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 45, 29-32.
United Press International. (2008). Women spend up
to $23,000 on hair removal. Retrieved September
Haque, A.,& Al-Ghazal, S. (2004). Burnfromhair removal
27, 2010, from http://www.upi.com/Health_
creama case report. Burns, 30, 866-867.
News/2008/06/24/Women spend up to 23000_to_
remove_hair/UPI-64771214351618/
Kovach, T. (1990). Nip it in the bud: Controlling wound
infection with preoperative shaving. Today's OR Williams, N. (2010). Understanding hair removal.
Nurse, 12, 23-26.
Retrieved September 27, 2010, from http://www.
hairremovalhaven.com/
Kaptanoglu, A.F., & Duruk, N. (2005). Depilatory cream
vs. shaving: Does it influence recurrences of genital
warts? Dermatology Nursing, 17, 202-203.
Labre, M. (2002). The Brazilian wax: New hairlessness
norm for women? Journal ofCommunication Inquiry,
26, 113-132.
Lewis, J. (1987). Caucasian body hair management: A key
to gender and species identification in U.S. culture?
Journal ofAmerican Culture, 10, 7-14.

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality is the property of Sex Information & Education Council of
Canada and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.