Thursday, March 11, 2010

I support vajazzling and I vote!

So the latest ridiculous thing that the Internet seems to be coming down awfully hard on is "vajazzling"--the adornment of the crotchal region with goofy little crystals. (They call it the "vagina," because apparently everything between a woman's navel and her knees is "vagina" these days.)

I really don't have a problem with this. It's silly, but is it moronic, wasteful, self-hating, patriarchal, all men's fault, all women's fault, a conspiracy of Big Business? Nah. It's one of those t-shirt transfers, I think. Although I hope they're not using the iron-on glue.

There are two main differences between this, and things like labia dye and plastic surgery that do give me the heebie jeebies:

1) It's optional. No one is going around implying that women with unbedazzling crotches are ugly old man-haters. Women are clearly doing this on a giggly lark, not constantly keeping up with the bedazzling in a desperate attempt to still feel desirable. I have great, great difficulty envisioning vajazzling becoming the new normal.

2) It's artificial. No one is implying that a good vagina should grow its own dazzle. Labia dye is marketed to "correct discoloration" ('scuse me, I'd just call it "coloration"...) and surgery to "restore a youthful look and feel"--bedazzling is clearly an extra. Even shaving seems to be seen as a "correction" of "extra" hair sometimes; bedazzling obviously corrects nothing... except an insufficiently fabulous crotch.

Some people were even making the "why not give the money to Haiti" argument, to which my only answer is that I just bought a medium coffee, and I could have gotten a small coffee and given the 25 cents to Haiti, but I didn't because I am a terrible person.

But what really gets to me is that all these people harshing on groindazzling are telling women what to do with their own bodies and their own money. They're going out there claiming to be anti-patriarchy, anti-dominance, pro-woman, and then they're issuing orders to women! On a very personal and very inconsequential-for-society topic! And then calling women stupid and frivolous and brainwashed for not falling in line with their demands! WAY TO BE FEMINIST, PEOPLE.

So that's my 400 words on crotchdazzlement. Boy, I'm making good use of my time these days.

(Actually I am, I passed my EMT certification test today. And I did it with a plain old boring crotch. Which was quite the handicap, let me tell ya.)


  1. I can't see the appeal.

  2. I'm for this. Not because I like it specifically, but because I'm for body decoration in general. The only reason why I can imagine why this would be sexist is if it were being actively encouraged for women to do this and actively discouraging men from doing any equivalent thing. Of course, that's probably not what's on the minds of anyone screaming "patriarchy". It's probably more like "decorating the pubic region -> drawing attention to the genitals -> signaling sexuality -> getting laid more -> which is what men want -> giving men what they want equals patriarchy."

  3. The moniker is supremely off-putting, but putting rhinestones on your body is just kind of potentially-cute and harmless. After this fad it'll be intricate mons pubis henna tattoos and the cycle will begin again.

  4. I'm with you, I think this vajazzling (or vulvazzling, really,) is temporary & relatively harmless. I guess you have to have the usual worries over ingrown hairs and possible irritants on the skin. I can't see it getting popular enough to become a new forced fad - just a play thing. Jewelry doesn't grow on bodies so it's going to be reaaaally tricky to market this as an ideal normal to strive for.

    I do believe I've seen one or two sex toy sites recruiting for pictures of vulvas & yes, scrotums, bedazzled.

    In other news, Congratulations on your certification.

  5. I object only because the term "vajayjay" makes me want to scream and hit people. I swear, it's worse than people saying "lol" out loud. *twitch*

  6. Well, I agree with you Holly. I'm definitely in the "as long as I'm not hurting someone else, stay out of my business" camp. But we can just add this to the long list of things the Idiocracy is trying to control recently. Here's a couple more things you might have missed while you were driving your covered wagon across the country:
    School prom off after lesbian’s date request
    - and -
    Assemblyman seeking to ban all salt in restaurant cooking (including bakeries..)

    On a more positive note, Congrats on passing the test, and welcome home!!

  7. Jimbo - I, uh, generally don't cover cooking issues. It's not in the mission statement.

    And wow, I just wish I could have a very calm and reasonable "so what was the real problem here?" discussion with people who made decisions like that. It's hard for me to get in their heads and sometimes I wonder if it's hard for them to get in their OWN heads--if they simply thought "well of course that's inappropriate" without really digging into why they thought that.

    And if that didn't work I'd bite them.

  8. >vajazzling (or vulvazzling, really,)

    Wouldn't "vulvazzling" actually be bedazzling what people colloquially call the vagina?

    That's... an interesting thought.

  9. braaaiiins - It's neither really. It's pubis... azzling.

  10. Oh, I know that, but I think if someone actually called it "vulvazzling" then they would probably actually mean vulvazzling.

  11. Hear hear! I don't find it especially appealing but I've nothing against it - it looks like fun to have done!

  12. mons venazzling.

    I can't imagine enjoying it myself (wouldn't they be hard and bumpy? if one were actually going to have the sex?) but if i had any pubic hair, it would probably be dyed purple or blue, so i must be a tool of the patriarchy.