Shaved legs

[30th IL]

Re: Shaved legs

Posting this thread I was really kind of hoping there would be a more definitive answer. I have e-mailed and text-msg many others and posted this same question on other websites; the answers and comments seem to be the same. no one is sure. This seems a bit peculiar that a something like historical personal hygiene is such an enigma. Sure, I know, people didn't openly talk about such things but EVERYBODY pretty much practiced it. I am not even going to mention what did people do before the Sears catalog say, in New York City...there are not enough trees (especially in the winter) but I digress. I would not necessarily censor the humorous posts...this type of thread, I have to admit, sort of invites it. I think these comments are made in a fashion as to actually pose a question in the readers mind(s) that may tinder further discourse. After all, where IS this seemingly rudimentary knowledge of human hygiene? No one really seems to know. It seems strange to us (from a 21st century point of view) to court a women and when things become intimate, finding your date has more hair than you :-) Is this what our grandparents and their grandparents experienced? Robert E. and Mary Anna Lee? Ulysses and Julia Grant?
Personalizing and realizing these possibilities there has to be chuckles and groans at no fault to the contributing authors to this thread
I humbly and respectivelly submit this reply.

[ElizabethClark]

Re: Shaved legs

Depending on the amounts of red/yellow in the facial hair, it will "read" with mid-century photography, as will brunette hair. That's a bonus for fellows with pale attempts at facial splendor, and a down-side for the downy-yet-blonde German lady--in the which case, the recommendations on powdering blonde hair would apply to powdering blonde facial hair to lessen the "pick up" in a period image.

Information HAS been shared here, regarding how body hair was handled mid-century, why it may or may not pick up in original images, how the impact of unwanted body hair was handled for photography... actual, documentable information. In a few cases, it's going to require the inquirant to actually go read something from a real book--and the sources for such information was shared, should anyone want to gain that information for their own collection of knowledge.

On the modern pornography jokes--well, were this in the Sinks, I'd leave 'em. But this isn't the Sinks. This is the Citizen's Authenticity Discussion area, and Citizens deserve the same amount of respect for their serious pursuit of historic information as Soldiers receive here. Since most mid-century men would have at least a passing understanding of the toilette habits of their female relatives or intimate acquaintances, it's a legitimate area to explore. There's no reason that exploration has to include modern jokes about modern pornography, or suggestive comments about notable women of the mid-century (I recommend the OTB for such fun). Similar comments wouldn't be tolerated in the Military research area. There's no reason at all for them to be tolerated in the Citizen's sections.

[30th IL]

Re: Shaved legs

On the modern pornography jokes--well, were this in the Sinks, I'd leave 'em. But this isn't the Sinks. This is the Citizen's Authenticity Discussion area, and Citizens deserve the same amount of respect for their serious pursuit of historic information as Soldiers receive here. Since most mid-century men would have at least a passing understanding of the toilette habits of their female relatives or intimate acquaintances, it's a legitimate area to explore. There's no reason that exploration has to include modern jokes about modern pornography, or suggestive comments about notable women of the mid-century (I recommend the OTB for such fun). Similar comments wouldn't be tolerated in the Military research area. There's no reason at all for them to be tolerated in the Citizen's sections.

Elizabeth. Point taken and understood.
However, is there any source for the basic necessities of a man and women? There seems to be endless discussion as to what bayonet is correct, what fruit was/was not present during the civil war era but really no one seems to have knowledge about the basic human biological functions much less of social hygiene of the era such as shaved legs and the such. Is this subject so taboo as not to have been documented? So much so that strict reenactors seem to have little to no knowledge? Realizing this is a sensitive subject I await further insightful comments.
Very respectively yours,

[Becky Morgan]

Re: Shaved legs

There seems to be endless discussion as to what bayonet is correct, what fruit was/was not present during the civil war era but really no one seems to have knowledge about the basic human biological functions much less of social hygiene of the era such as shaved legs and the such. Is this subject so taboo as not to have been documented?

If I may...
This is one topic severely affected by the essential dichotomy of the age. On one hand, Victorian custom professed horror at fleshly matters; on the other, a whole lot of folks were farmers and therefore well acquainted with intimate acts among the livestock. The few period health or marriage manuals I've seen are exceedingly delicate, to the point that some portions need a thorough re-reading before you figure out what in the Sam Hill they're talking about. I wish I could find one of them to quote.

I would imagine, but cannot yet prove, that most hygiene practices were transmitted from parent to child or, in the case of young men and women, friend to friend, in the way that much street-corner knowledge still travels. We have a great many explicit manuals describing every facet of self-care, but a lot of our routine basis comes about because we were taught to do this or that as children or adolescents. Think about your own experience, and realize that people taught their kids to do or avoid certain things because, uh, well, because that's how it's done. Then, as now, celebrity habiots "decent" enough to make it into print made an impact, viz. the number of women willing to use analgesia during childbirth because Queen Victoria did with her last.

The adoption of toilet paper, toothbrushing, different styles of razors, etc. probably weren't overnight phenomena. More likely, research will reveal adoption of a product or grooming method over a period of a few years as word of mouth combined with advertising, then parents taught children. Now and then, some famous person's endorsement of a product or adoption of a way of grooming would make a startling jump.

I agree with you; it's a serious subject worthy of consideration. By its very nature (because we're all still human!) any discussion of sexuality, related hygiene practices or products leads itself to raunchy thoughts and worse jokes. If we're going to talk about and try to undertand these things, we have to behave ourselves.

[Carolann Schmitt]

Re: Shaved legs

However, is there any source for the basic necessities of a man and women? There seems to be endless discussion as to what bayonet is correct, what fruit was/was not present during the civil war era but really no one seems to have knowledge about the basic human biological functions much less of social hygiene of the era such as shaved legs and the such. Is this subject so taboo as not to have been documented? So much so that strict reenactors seem to have little to no knowledge? Realizing this is a sensitive subject I await further insightful comments.
Very respectively yours,

Matt -
If you have not already done so, I heartily second the recommendations to read Virginia Mescher's Painted, Powdered and Perfumed mentioned in earlier posts. Although focused on female hygiene and beauty, the primary sources used and listed by the author may would be an excellent starting point to find additional information on both male and female hygiene and grooming. Virginia will also be doing a workshop on this topic at the 2008 Ladies & Gentlemen of the 1860s Conference.

In her post, Virgina said: There was no mention, in any 19th century source, of hair removal for legs and underarms. Virginia is an exhaustive researcher and found ample documentation for many other aspects of personal hygiene. The absence of any source material on the issue is not necessarily an indication that the topic was taboo; it can be a pretty good indication a practice simply did not occur during the time and place in question (mid-19th century America).

And Elizabeth mentioned:
Information HAS been shared here, regarding how body hair was handled mid-century, why it may or may not pick up in original images, how the impact of unwanted body hair was handled for photography... actual, documentable information. In a few cases, it's going to require the inquirant to actually go read something from a real book--and the sources for such information was shared, should anyone want to gain that information for their own collection of knowledge.

I think the comments posted are fairly clear:
- The topic merits further research and discussion.
- There are numerous primary sources on this topic.
- There is at least one very good secondary source that provides information on the topic and also provides information on some of the primary sources.
- Research involves more than sending emails, text messages, or posting questions on various discussion groups.

I look forward to hearing the results of your research and to any new material you or anyone else may uncover.

Regards,

[ElizabethClark]

Re: Shaved legs

You'll also find some good "personal hygeine" type advice in manuals aimed at helping the "lower classes" better themselves, or aimed at helping the working classes use their resources more fruitfully. Specifics like the shaving of underarms may not be mentioned, but household hygeine arrangements and furnishings are, which is helpful. It's just one source type to be combined with others.

(And thanks to all who've been so cooperative in getting the thread on a good research track!)

[bizzilizzit]

Re: Shaved legs

Not exactly sure how relevant this would be to American women, but British art critic John Ruskin was frightened and appalled by women's body hair. He married the beautiful Effie Gray in 1848 but couldn't do his marital duties by her because he was terrified of her ... non-smoothness. Until his marriage he had only seen marble statues of women and apparently he believed that all women looked like that under their crinolines. Effie ran off with my favorite artist, Millais, some time in the mid-1850s. Not that I condone infidelity, but you sort of see her point. The Ruskin marriage was annulled on the count of "incurable impotency."

Hope I haven't offended anyone ... !

Actually, it wasn't Effie's leg hair that offended Mr. Ruskin. Wasn't her armpit hair, either. Since their marriage was never consummated, it was annulled and Effie was married properly to Millais. There was no running off. However, Mr. Ruskin did later have some scandalous affair with a pre-pubescent girl...
Elizabeth Topping

[30th IL]

Re: Shaved legs

As a side thought. Women portrayed in magazines such as Cosmopolitan, Elle, Playboy, etc., tend to show women very much attractive and desirable. I would doubt (unless it is a special article or for shock value that it would be different). Does anyone know of such era publications, advertisements, but more probably "nudie" photos. No, that would tend to show what women may want to look like but may not be practical in truth. Perhaps only the wealthy and social elite practiced these hygienics. Just another thought.

Carolann, you wrote,

I think the comments posted are fairly clear:
- The topic merits further research and discussion.
I agree.

- There are numerous primary sources on this topic.
I am glad that this is being discovered. I have thought that this was too overlooked by reenactors. It really does touch on everyday 19th century lifestyle(s)

- There is at least one very good secondary source that provides information on the topic and also provides information on some of the primary sources.
(See above)

- Research involves more than sending emails, text messages, or posting questions on various discussion groups.
As far as I am concerned this has nothing to do with research. I am a simple person asking...well basic questions about basic hygiene of the civil war era in which I find...not a lot is known to reenactors unless they have specifically gone out of their way and learned this.

I suppose what I have learned to appreciate from this discussion(s) is a new appreciation for toilet paper (and the such) and the invention of the safety razor!

[Becky Morgan]

Re: Shaved legs

It would also be interesting to know how much regional differences changed as a result of the war, and how much influence they had to begin with. One would assume--and there's that dirty word again, assume--that, especially in late war and in areas where troops with varied origins camped together, parcels from home would draw a lot of interest if one man's family sent articles very different from what others were used to. One would think--and once again, it's just a thought at the moment--men's habits would change more than women's because the men were thrown together for such an extended period.

If we look at the experiences of World War II veterans, we can see a similarity and perhaps make some inferences. Dad (born and died in small towns, 1916-1985) served in the Pacific on an LST from 1943-45. He had shipmates from all over the country, city, country and everything in between, of several religions and races. Once they all escaped basic and got out to sea, they all began to express their usual preferences in hair and beard growth and grooming, use of different soaps, frequency of tooth brushing, etc. Every time they went ashore, they had to try the local delicacies... some of which were indelicate, but that was and is also part of history. If we consider "public" matters only, Dad brought home flip-flops, which he liked wearing for the rest of his life. He grew a beard for the first and last time. He used shaving soap and a different kind of razor because he couldn't get what he normally used. The issued underwear wasn't what he was used to. He had to get used to carrying not his familiar pocket knife but a rigger's knife, which he always did thereafter.

Now consider that the majority of CW troops were also civilians who hadn't been in the habit of traveling a whole lot before the war. Men from small towns were probably used to doing things in a certain way, based on the advice of their parents and the local preacher, mostly using products and brands of products carried by the local store. All at once, they were moving around the country, meeting people from different areas, workers from different industries, and people of different ethnic origins. Even looting would have exposed troops to stuff some of them had never seen and others hadn't thought of using. I can't speculate on the effect of period pornography, but I believe there has been some examination of condom use during the CW. Since there was very little public discussion of birth control or description in the "decent" health manuals I've seen, word of mouth must have been the teaching method. Surely there must be one of those letters from a man to his son preserved somewhere!

Here's the hygiene section of a home helth manual from 1859:

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=moa&cc=moa&idno=ajy9854.0001.001&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=611

[Hank Trent]

Re: Shaved legs

It seems strange to us (from a 21st century point of view) to court a women and when things become intimate, finding your date has more hair than you :-)

As others have noted, there is a great deal of information. Is there some resistance to it due to modern bias? Are you trying to find out that women of the 1860s did shave their legs and underarms because it would be upsetting to you to picture them otherwise?

Obviously, it's going to be hard to find a primary source where the author states, "I was shocked to discover my wife didn't shave her legs" if it was normal not too. Similarly, who today would write that his wife didn't paint red henna spots on the inside of her thighs? You have to know the customs of the future before you can comment on their lack.

This all just seems much ado about nothing, to me, because I can look at it without all the pent-up 21st century disgust that seems to affect it. My wife has very light colored, sparse body hair, which she almost never shaves. I can almost be positive it wouldn't show up on her legs in a period photo. So of course she doesn't shave before reenactments, and she always has silky smooth skin with never any stubble which is attractive in itself, IMHO. So from that viewpoint, I'm sensing a lot of 20th/21st century emotional baggage, that's making this a hotter topic than it needs to be.

In my youth (the 1960s-1970s) it was considered effeminate for men to lack hair on their chests, and thick chest hair was supposed to be a sign of virility and attract all the girls. I can recall how strange it seemed to me when things shifted, and the "ideal man" was expected to have a hairless and/or shaved chest to look attractive. As eternal as they seem at the time, fashions and opinions somehow do change.

I don't know about women in the 1860s with very heavy dark body hair, but speaking from personal experience, it's neither gross nor particularly obvious nor a big deal even today, for some women today not to shave and surely that was true for them and probably more in the 1860s.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[NoahBriggs]

Re: Shaved legs

"The few period health or marriage manuals I've seen are exceedingly delicate, to the point that some portions need a thorough re-reading before you figure out what in the Sam Hill they're talking about. I wish I could find one of them to quote."

The health manuals I have read are anything but delicate. They lay it out (literally), complete with diagrams, and discuss women's health in straightforward educated English. Let's give our ancestors credit. These people were not dummies. Men knew what a woman's form was, and certainly vice versa. The presence of siblings and later your future spouse will fill in any blanks the manuals and erotica might have missed.

I know this digresses from the original topic, and I am sorry. Unfortunately I do not have any documentation to prove shaving of unwanted hair. In my study of the "1000 Nudes" published by Taschen, and their subsequent books, both photos and pictures tend to show lots of armpit hair. Then again, this is Europe for most of the pictures, which may be an additional variable. Some pictures are large enough to see if legs are smooth or hairy. For me, it's hard to tell. My common sense says it was a matter of personal preference. Maybe they shaved because otherwise it was uncomfortable to wear long stockings. Then again, I have not seen the razor and its entourage mentioned in a woman's travelling kit.

My speculations after looking through the Skinny Anne collection.

[Charles Heath]

Re: Shaved legs

The simple mechanics of shaving arm pits with a straight razor are worth pondering, too.

[Hank Trent]

Re: Shaved legs

The health manuals I have read are anything but delicate. They lay it out (literally), complete with diagrams, and discuss women's health in straightforward educated English.

I agree. We have the 1860 edition of Frederick Hollick's Marriage Guide, which states it's the 200th edition. A reprint of an undated edition, which looks similar to the 1860 version, is partially online here: http://books.google.com/books?id=05LmDTFPa5MC so anyone can take a look.

There were of course a wide range of individuals, from those who would be shocked at the thought of reading such a book to those who would find it useful, but there were plain spoken manuals out there.

Here's the hygiene section of a home health manual from 1859:

To put that in context, I'd note that "hygiene" had a slightly different meaning than we give it today. In the period it was a relatively new name for a specific offshoot of the hydropathic view of medicine and health. It emphasized living in a healthful way to prevent disease with minimal or no reliance on medicines when ill, while hydropathy, which was similar, also emphasized the role of doctors and medicines in treatment. Some people bought into the idea, some didn't, but it wasn't universally accepted, and would probably be considered a little eccentric, extreme or what we'd call "new age" today, like someone today who suggested yoga, meditation and a macrobiotic diet as the only route to health and happiness.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[Becky Morgan]

Re: Shaved legs

Aha! This area is STILL overrun with, as you say, what is now New Age everything. We had Kellogg devotees, hydropaths, colon cleansing parlors, and I don't know what all over the years. Every time I find an antique manual in a yard sale or bookstore, it's exactly like the online example I gave--one of the "natural way" sort, and it's very, very prissy about the human body, without any diagrams at all, and so vague that it would be useless as a teaching tool. Now I understand why. (Of course, one very old lady I met in my long-ago teens once told me she literally did not know how babies were made. She was an only child in a very refined late-Victorian Wheeling home, sent to the best private school her parents could find, and she was not only utterly shocked at the natural conclusion of her wedding night but also at the events nine or ten months later. She was nearly a hundred when she told me the story, and she was roaring with laughter while her numerous children were looking on, mortified.) This may be hyperurbanization at work; the Better Class of People appear to have overreacted to our rural area by going to the wildest excess of Victorian false modesty.

My grandmother (1895-1988, always rural Belmont County, Ohio) had all six of her children delivered by a midwife because (she claimed, and her sisters confirmed) the local doctor, well into his eighties, was too embarrassed to look at a woman's privates even in the line of duty. Doc Berry was a GAR vet whoses idea of postnatal care was to stop by the next day, ask how everyone was doing, admire the baby and take the birth certificate out to the county recorder, since at the time midwives were not permitted to submit the certificates.

The farmers' institute stuff is nowhere near that delicate about animal life, of course. I would think it would be difficult for anyone who grew up on a farm to lack an understanding of sexual activity, whether they were supposed to talk about it or not. It would also seem--and once again, this has no solid research behind it yet--that farmers, having a more frank attitude toward the body, would be less apt to want an "airbrushed" mate of either sex. For what it's worth, I have yet to see a razor listed among a woman's personal items, packing list for a trip, etc. even though some of the "what you simply must have along on your journey" chapters are exhaustive, and likely exhausting to hotel porters.

[Becky Morgan]

Re: Shaved legs

Excellent thought about a straight razor and an armpit. While it was doubtless possible with practice, I can't imagine most women would think it a good idea. The horror at body hair does seem to be very recent. I, too, recall when a man without chest hair was thought effeminate and a woman who asked him to shave his back would have been laughed at. As I said above, when many Americans were farmers, we were more accepting of bodies in a natural state. Far too many modern city dwellers are so far removed from anything approaching nature that when a woman's magazine suggests they should shave, wax or otherwise depilate still more body parts, they don't even ask why.

Re leg hair and stockings: modern nylons are indeed uncomfortable over stubble or grown-out leg hair, socks and heavy stockings aren't. Armpit shaving for women serves the additional purpose of aiding in sweat and odor control. Also, modern women wear garments which expose our underarms on occasion; ladies of the 1860s didn't.

For those of you who have recent experience in and around Europe, several acquaintances who have traveled to the region say that shaving is much less common in France and elsewhere on the Continent. Has this been your experience also?