Filed under: Uncategorized
Sarah Grenier
Ms. Robinson
AP Lang and Comp
4/10/2008
Blurring the Gender Lines: What It Does Not Say About Sexual Preference
Her hair was on fire- the day before, just three inches from her scalp, her flaming red locks had been severed. Many compliments ensued after that fateful hair cut. Some called her a “comely pixie” and others said she was simply “brave,” but the one poignant comment that she remembered most was “short-haired girls are dikes.” That girl was me. So what is a dike? It is an offensive word that refers to a lesbian who acts and dresses like a man, thus the stereotype that all women who look like men are lesbians. But although many heterosexual and homosexual women have the same hairstyle, they may not have the same sexual preference- claiming otherwise would be a false analogy fallacy. Regardless of the illogical foundation of this stereotype, many people believe it.
Like all other deep seated opinions, there was a beginning: the view that it is sinful or unnatural for women to have short hair stems all the way from Biblical times. Take the Corinthian passage 11: 3-16 for example: “…But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and same as if her head were shaved…” Of course, there are many interpretations of this passage, including one that suggests why nuns cover their heads, but the most common understanding asserts that the covering mentioned means hair and the “head” the women dishonors is both her husband and God (McDaniel). People who live by the Bible’s literal meaning have stressed the common interpretation of this passage to their Christian congregations. Just think- in the U.S. alone, Christians make up 77% of the population (Keysar, 2001). With the holy word in mind, it is no doubt that many believe a boyish coiffure is a stigma for women. Fortunately, the stigma is losing prominence as women retaliate against conventional beauty.
Within the past century, high culture and popular culture have been battling to assert what hair length is acceptable for heterosexual women. The lengthy-haired standard most often prevails because of society’s emphasis on gender- and its differences. For example, famous literary works (popular culture) have attempted to instill in our minds what stands for feminism and beauty. One book that is read in most high school English classes particularly illustrates this point: The Scarlett Letter. In it, Hester Prynne’s long, flowing hair was a symbol of youth, fertility, and confidence. Although this image was controversial at the time because the Puritans were a bunch of prudes, the symbol seems like a transgression to many today because it builds staunch correlations in teenage minds between beauty and long hair, as does A Farewell to Arms and Their Eyes Were Watching God. White Oleander, in contrast, has a heterosexual protagonist who cuts off her hair because it hides her loveliness; many of these books became movies and are influencing their audiences at the author’s dispense, but guess which ones are most commonly read?
Furthermore, in regards to hair length and sexuality, fashionistas and the social elite continuously attempt to set new beauty standards on top of old ones. For example, it was vogue to bob your hair in the 1920’s regardless of sexual preferences; even Twiggy and Edie Sedgwick of the 1960’s sported pixies, attempting to assert that you could be both feminine and straight with short hair. Contemporarily, high class actresses, models, and singers like Elisha Cuthbert, Agyness Deyn, Halle Berry, and Annie Lennox are rocking short hair to defy conventional beauty standards (hence the return of the pixie) and remain unwavering in their sexual preferences. Likewise in India, it is a part of their culture for upper-class women to have shorter hair because it needs more upkeep than longer hairstyles; therefore, it exemplifies one’s wealth. The battle never stops: sometimes the masses accept shorter lengths with open arms and sometimes they shun it with cold hearts.
Despite a time period or popular fashion, there incessantly remains evidence of why most men are inclined to conclude that a woman is a dyke because she has short hair- it comes from psychology. Pheromones exist on humans’ skin and in their hair: “smelling male and female pheromones activates the human brain in a sex differentiated manner” (Salvic). Since pheromones are not profuse on a woman with shorter hair, men are not often attracted to them because sometimes there is nothing to stimulate their brain functions. Furthermore, a fair amount of men are often intimidated by women with shorter hair: intimidation leads to a “fight of flight” response, hence the tactic of calling a woman a dyke. In the end, most men conclude that they could not be attracted to a “boyish” woman, which may be true due to a lack of pheromones, but this does not mean those women are forced into homosexual relationships. It means we just have to find the right kind of partner.
In essence, short hair was seen as a stigma in Biblical times and in the following centuries because it was associated with lesbianism, thus the stereotype that short haired women are homosexuals. Starting in the 19th century America with the Feminist movement, women began to defy this stereotype by bobbing their hair, professing that it stood for freedom, confidence, and sexuality. Since then, the style has been on an acceptance and rejection rollercoaster; however, men respond to women in correlation with pheromones -not fads- and are inclined to call intimidating short haired women dykes due to psychological reasons. Yet, to say that because straight women and lesbian women share one characteristic they should share another –sexual preference- is illogical. So I assert this stereotype busted- in other words (those of Anna Paker), “women are feminine no matter how boyish they dress, how much makeup they wear, or how short their hair is. And hey, there’s even room for feminine homosexuals, we call them lipstick lesbians.” (Parker).
