The Daily Mail had this lovely snippet of friendly advice today; ‘Every woman knows that if you’re going to go stocking-free, then your legs must be silky smooth.’

Thanks for that – now fuck off. The reason behind their comment is that Natalia Vodianova dared to leave the house without shaving her legs. Because obviously she should be hiding her hideous-ness from the world, shamed and embarrassed. Thank god the Daily Mail were there to highlight her ‘fashion faux pas.’

I know, I can barely see any hair either. The part that gets me so mad is the words that the Mail chose to use – ‘But maybe she hadn’t realised that she was in a need of a trim, as she openly flashed her legs and waved her long golden dress around on the dance floor at the event.’ Or could it be that she doesnt give a fuck? Why should she shave her legs if she doesnt want to? Why does it have to be a ‘mistake’ or an ‘oversight?’ Is it so unbelievable that she wants her legs that way? Showing us that women do not have to conform to society’s expectations all the time?

‘Apart from her grooming mishap, she looked stunning in the floor-length gown that was sexily slashed right up her thigh, as she got her groove on on the dance floor.’ So apart from her hairy legs she looked stunning? It is so ridiculous. Think back to the hysteria when Julia Roberts dared to grace the red carpet without shaving her armpits. You’d think she had actively walked up to a stranger and pissed on their children the way the media reacted. Obviously as women we should all be as hairless as chihuahuas except for the hair on our heads which should be long please. It fucking does my head in that the media feels the need to pull women apart like this. If Natalia wants to go out with hairy legs then why the hell should we question that. Just like if any girl wants to go out with hairy armpits or legs or heaven forbid, a hairy upper lip – they should be allowed without question. I know I wouldn’t be brave enough to try it so I massively applaud anyone who can stick two fingers up at societal pressures like that.

The fact is, we are so accustomed to women conforming and fitting a certain mould, especially in the public eye, that it is a shock when we see someone resisting that ideal form. However, shouldnt we be congratulating them for their bravery? Their ability to face the glare and stare of people judging them for rebelling against social norms? It makes me so angry that by writing that article, The Daily Mail has made it harder for women. In one rubbish article they are enforcing gender stereotypes in so many ways – apart from the hairy legs she looked stunning – ok so hairy legs are out, and being thin, decked in revealing clothing is clearly in from that. What is worse is that she was at a charity event, being honoured for the work she does for deprived children in Russia and Britain and yet oh, we don’t give a shit about that. Her hairy legs are the talking point, not the fact that she does so much to help children in need.

Interestingly enough, it works both ways this time. David Beckham is being ridiculed for having smooth, hair free legs. Because men should be hairy and masculine damn it.

Apparently David can now boast that ‘he’s added shaving his legs to his list of girly goings on. ‘ Again – well done with the twofold enforcing of gender roles – shaving legs is a girly act that is not considered a masculine thing to do. David has been caught ‘exposing his feminine side’ with ‘suspiciously’ smooth legs. Fuck off with those generalisations please, it is so damaging when influential publications like this make such sweeping statements about what men and women should and should not be doing. Also why do they feel the need to use a script from a bad CSI movie? ‘Suspiciously,’ ‘caught out,’ and ‘suspected’ – as if the people in question were trying to con us in some way, trying to pull the wool over our eyes with their hairy legs and silky smooth pins. Thankfully we have tabloid newspapers to present their flaws and wrongdoings to us.

Perhaps I should stop looking at the mailonline because they have pissed me off a few times today. Every day they spit out some half researched and bollocks articles about how Daybreak, the ITV morning show is doomed for failure. Today they took it to a whole new level with their comments. ‘The Northern Irish presenter, 31, turned on the sex appeal in a rather saucy get-up, perhaps in the hope that her alluring display may appeal to viewers who are switching off in their droves.’

Right, ok. This manages to be insulting to so many people – well done. Firstly by insinuating that all Christine Bleakley has to offer is her cleavage. Secondly by implying that women wearing ‘saucy get-ups’ are alluring, thus sending out very clear signals about what men should find attractive, and what women should be emulating. Lastly though, for saying that the viewers are shallow enough to only be interested in a programme for the attractive host. Whilst I admit that that is a pretty well supported argument as most female hosts tend to err on the side of being ‘socially attractive’ and successful implying that one led to the other, it does seem to suggest that viewers are passive monkeys who would only watch Daybreak for a flash of a bra strap or hint of cleavage.

– In other news, I had a pretty stressful Sociology lesson today with my year 12s. We are looking at sexuality and a few students were very homophobic. It hurts my heart to hear them being so rude and disrespectful – especially when the students in question are normally quite lovely. I just don’t understand this irrational process of hating on people who are gay. Shouldn’t we be celebrating their bravery for coming out in a world where ignorant people still walk around spouting their homophobic views? I think that love is a beautiful thing and should not matter if it is between a man and a woman, or a woman and a woman or a man and a man. Feeling that content, that happy and that supported should be encouraged, not pulled apart. As for saying that homosexuals are ‘wrong,’ ‘weird’ and ‘fucked up’ – that just makes my blood boil. I have no idea how I am supposed to teach this class the things they need to know when the lesson is punctuated by comments like that.

– I am super stressed. I don’t think I have felt this stressed in a long long time; probably back when I was doing my PGCE actually. School is insanely hard – Ofsted are still expected any minute and yet never seem to actually materialise so it is like living on tenterhooks. Any day could be the day so everything needs to be planned, written up and perfect and it kind of ruins it a bit? Teaching is normally amazing and exciting but when every lesson is prepared like a military operation it takes the spark out of it.

Category: Discussion, Feminism
  • Steph

    I often go out with furry legs. I’d like to say it’s a feminist statement but that’s not really my intention. I go to the gym every day and only wear shorts so as if I’m going to waste my precious time depilating to conform to a pointless ‘ideal’.

    • em

      im glad you do that – it is only by subverting or resisting these feminine ideals that we can smash them up and get rid of them! im impressed you go the gym every day; im way too lazy! xxx