11 year olds getting bikini waxing

Adelie

I always had dark hair, and I got a leg wax (and bikini) for the first time when I was 12 (now mid-20s), because I was embarrassed about going on a week-long school tour where we would be sharing bedrooms and going swimming. I'm very happy my mom was understanding enough to bring me to the salon and that the salon were also very nice, and I could enjoy the week without worrying about hair. Sure it's not appropriate for every 12 year old, but I think it was actually better than handing me a razor and telling me to shave every day - if anything it allowed me to keep my innocence!

Edit: we did go to a doctor too, Yes I had more hair than usual, No there was nothing wrong with me.

Lia_lia

I dunno. I'm not taking sides on this one.

I did gymnastics for years when I was younger. We had to wear leotards. And some (well, most) of the girls DID get waxed, or simply shaved at that age. Some developed earlier than others. And it was embarrassing for them! I, personally never had to get it done. My hair down there (and er..everywhere) is blonde so it never really showed.

But I can't see why 11 year olds should be getting waxed if that hair isn't on show. Like it is in the case of gymnastics, swimming etc..

metrovelvet

I dont know why everyone here is so anti waxing. I think its a much better idea than shaving or those chemical hair removal creams.

enda1

Before you all go on about shaving causing thick hair growth etc., have a read of this.

http://www.snopes.com/oldwives/hairgrow.asp

Adelie

enda1 wrote: »

Before you all go on about shaving causing thick hair growth etc., have a read of this.

http://www.snopes.com/oldwives/hairgrow.asp

Enda I think (hope!) very few people actually believe that. The reason some people recommend not starting to shave is because when the hairs are short and blunt they look and feel much more obvious. So once you start shaving, you really will have to keep shaving them or else wait for them all to grow out and fall out, before your legs get back to normal.

Other disadvantages of introducing a young teenager to leg-shaving are that they are pretty likely to cut themselves, and also they are more likely to then start taking a razor to any bit of hair on the arms, face etc.

As for the chemical stuff, even as an adult I've gotten very slight burns from those, I wouldn't want a young teenager near them.

Nevyn

WindSock wrote: »

You'd think girls and women would be hitting puberty and the menopause later in life, if bodies were to tie in with their societies.

Births in this country are at their highest in the teen age group and in the the 30s which means for the majority of women's most fertile years they are not having kids and so 'mother nature' is lengthening that fertile window.

Which really means we should have proper sex ed in schools.

coffee_cake

Adelie wrote: »

Other disadvantages of introducing a young teenager to leg-shaving are that they are pretty likely to cut themselves, and also they are more likely to then start taking a razor to any bit of hair on the arms, face etc.

I still have a scar on my leg from when I was about 11
I wouldn't call it a reason to stop though, I could as easily nick myself these days.

Adelie

bluewolf wrote: »

I still have a scar on my leg from when I was about 11
I wouldn't call it a reason to stop though, I could as easily nick myself these days.

Yeah I know what you mean. I didn't really mean that girls shouldn't be allowed shave, more like I think that shaving/waxing each have their advantages and disadvantages and I think they are both reasonable options for a girl who is starting to remove leg/bikini line hair.

panda100

Why would anyone want to get the hair ripped of from their nether reasons whatever their age?

Be they 11 or 27 I think the whole bikini waxing thing,as well as armpit and leg shaving, is just ridiculous.

Nevyn

Different people have different prefernces when it comes to personal grooming.
If a woman wishes to shave fair enough but I am not going to judge her one way or the other based on if she does or not.

panda100

Thaedydal wrote: »

Different people have different prefernces when it comes to personal grooming.
If a woman wishes to shave fair enough but I am not going to judge her one way or the other based on if she does or not.

Yes I see where your coming from, but I just think the whole hairless female body thing as something that need's to be resisted as its just gone way too far.

The majority of my friends get waxed because its what everyone else does and/or their boyfriends like them shaved down below.

I can't even begin to tell you the amount of derogatory and really horrible comments I have gotten since I've stopped shaving. Its frustrating because Its okay for society to judge what is natural and normal i.e me having body hair!

Maguined

Brushing your teeth is not natural, plaque is a natural build up on teeth, just because something is not natural does not mean it is superior to artificial standards.

If someone wants to shave their body their choice should not be resisted, it should be respected, Obviously young girls at 11 makes it a very grey area so like everything it comes down to the parent making a judgement call and i would not judge any parent on such a decision.

Chuchoter

When I was 11 I was about 3 years after puberty, so I basically was fully grown up at about 10. Had I been able to get these I would have, vs being self conscious in front of other girls a good 2 or 3 years off starting puberty.

trickywitch

Yep. I agree. If pubic hair was making my child miserable (for whatever reason) I'd rather it was done properly and supervised. Otherwise, they will try and deal with things themselves and like me at that age - make a complete bags of it.

Kooli

I don't see a HUGE deal with this.

If you had an 11 year old daughter who was self-conscious about pubic hair poking out both sides of her swimsuit, would you just send her off like that?

If we're talking about brazilians or anything like that, then fine it's totally nuts. But I do actually think it is normal not to want to show other people your pubic hair in public.

So it is the waxing itself people have a problem with or is it any type of hair removal?

The Big Red Button

Kooli wrote: »

I don't see a HUGE deal with this.

If you had an 11 year old daughter who was self-conscious about pubic hair poking out both sides of her swimsuit, would you just send her off like that?

If we're talking about brazilians or anything like that, then fine it's totally nuts. But I do actually think it is normal not to want to show other people your pubic hair in public.

So it is the waxing itself people have a problem with or is it any type of hair removal?

That's the same way I'd see it! I mean, the article makes it very clear that the salon is only offering the "classic" bikini wax, i.e. just enough to get rid of whatever would be seen if the girl were wearing a swimsuit.

If you have a daughter that age who goes to swimming lessons through school or whatever, of course other teenagers will notice and bully her if she has hair visible when she's wearing the swimsuit, and the other girls don't. Yeah it's not fair, and yeah hair is only natural, but what parent would want to leave their teenage daughter vulnerable to bullying if it could be avoided?

So, you can hand her the sharp blade or the chemicals and leave her to deal with it on her own - possibly not a good idea, considering we're talking about such a sensitive area. Or you could bring her to a professional to get the visible hair waxed - waxing isn't for everyone, but it does give more lasting results, especially if the girl has never shaved before.

Just to stress - I think it's OK if the girl suggests it herself and considers all other options first, and if she is very much aware in advance that it will hurt and that there might be side-effects etc; if we're talking about a pushy mother forcing her daughter into it, well that's a whole different situation.

But the thing is, a twelve year old isn't really just a "child" ... most girls that age can think quite independently, and will be very much aware of what's going on with their own bodies. And rather than making a massive fuss about it and making the girl feel like some sort of freak, a bit of understanding and practical help from the parent could make a massive difference in situations like this.

Catari Jaguar

Before we get all "Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!!" esque, I'm just gonna add that there are plenty of 11- 12 year olds in sexual relationships.

But the "cool" thing about 5/6 years ago (around the time my 13 y/o cousin got knocked up... :rolleyes:) was wearing your hipsters so low that you could see the pubes. Lots of girls really not so self conscious of it - more using it as a bragging right about how grown up they (think they) are.

Dudess

I dunno... I'm kinda in agreement with those who make the point that it isn't necessarily being done for "sexiness" reasons, it's just something to avail of for adolescent girls who feel self conscious. I was quite an early developer - I had ample enough breasts at 10 and my hair is as black as the ace of spades :pac:. I felt horrendous about these things in the swimming pool changing rooms and would have jumped at the chance to get waxing done. All it is, is getting rid of unwanted pubic hair, which many 11-year-olds have. And for some people, the follicles can get infected and very painful if the hairs are thick.

I mean, there's all this fear of kids growing up too fast these days - but I bet when we were kids and early teens, adults were saying the very same thing. There was a time when it was the norm for women to be having babies in their teens, so if anything, we're taking longer to grow up. Now I'm not saying it's a good thing for 12-year-olds to be giving blow-jobs, or that it's not something many 12-year-olds wouldn't do only for the fact that they feel pressurised, but I do think it might be unwise to view everything "adult" as dangerous and worrying and sinister for those of pre-pubescent age onwards. Like it or not, physically, they are developing adult traits.

Someone mentioned the padded bra controversy - I flagged that here all right, not so much because I felt it meant "our kids are in danger", moreso that I considerd it a rather cynical move by retailers; a bit of exploitation of the little girl desire to be a woman. I don't see the necessity for enhanced cleavage at 10 and... not quite sexy, but certainly adult-looking undies, whereas I can understand the necessity (for some) for pubic hair waxing. That said, the "exposé" done by some rag about the "sicko paedo retailers" for selling padded bras for young girls thing was just embarrassing.

Oh and that's not the first time that that Patricia Casey one has said something totally tactless and unbecoming for a person of her professional standing. :mad:

metrovelvet

The funny thing about this is you get people complaining about women taking it all off it and trying to make themselves look like little girls, and here you have people complaining about little girls taking some of it off to look like,little girls.

metrovelvet

metrovelvet wrote: »

It might not be normal. My friend started menstruating at 9. That is not on the normal spectrum. It turns out she has a thyroid problem which does not produce the right chemicals and was also the reason she could not lose any weight.

I got my period when I was 10. Not that abnormal. Was wearing a bra by then as well. I had practically finished growing by 12.

There is no point in saying that an 11 or 12 year old shouldn't 'want to be an adult' when they're menstruating and have body hair. They don't have much choice in the matter. It's incredibly embarrassing to go to PE class with hairy legs, for example, and I'm sure it's the same for swimming. Like it or not, the peer pressure is there and it always has been. I still have a huge scar on my leg from secretly shaving with a cheap razor and I still resent my parents for not allowing me to find a safe way to do it. They were obsessed about me not growing up too fast but the fact was, I had a lot of hair and I just wanted to remove it. Why is that OK at 15 but not 11? I wouldn't be a fan of young girls wearing short skirts and lots of make-up, but this is a different issue entirely, IMO. Not too different from an 11 year old wearing deodorant or a bra if they need to.

Truley

Dudess wrote: »

Someone mentioned the padded bra controversy - I flagged that here all right, not so much because I felt it meant "our kids are in danger", moreso that I considerd it a rather cynical move by retailers; a bit of exploitation of the little girl desire to be a woman. I don't see the necessity for enhanced cleavage at 10 and... not quite sexy, but certainly adult-looking undies, whereas I can understand the necessity (for some) for pubic hair waxing. That said, the "exposé" done by some rag about the "sicko paedo retailers" for selling padded bras for young girls thing was just embarrassing.

I mentioned the padded bra controversy because I felt it was a similar example of scaremongering and exploiting peoples' long held aversion to the idea of young girls growing up 'too fast' and consequently losing their innocence, (although naiveity would be a more accurate term, since the opposite of innocence is guilt.) This, as well as completely ignoring the pragmatic reasons these bras probably existed; correcting uneven breasts, protection, support. Basically the same reasons an adult needs one.

I always thought a padded bra had an insert, or some sort of push up effect. These bras had a thick fabric no more than half a centimetre thick, I wouldn't have even classed them as padded.

metrovelvet

Truley wrote: »

I mentioned the padded bra controversy because I felt it was a similar example of scaremongering and exploiting peoples' long held aversion to the idea of young girls growing up 'too fast' and consequently losing their innocence, (although naiveity would be a more accurate term, since the opposite of innocence is guilt.) This, as well as completely ignoring the pragmatic reasons these bras probably existed; correcting uneven breasts, protection, support. Basically the same reasons an adult needs one.

I always thought a padded bra had an insert, or some sort of push up effect. These bras had a thick fabric no more than half a centimetre thick, I wouldn't have even classed them as padded.

I wouldnt say the opposite of innocence is guilt, I would say its counterpart is conciousness.

I think we like to see them unaware of shame and conciousness and awareness of their bodies. In a way, the padded bra is like the figleaf, in that it signifies the beginning of awareness and judgement.

Truley

metrovelvet wrote: »

I wouldnt say the opposite of innocence is guilt, I would say its counterpart is conciousness.

I think we like to see them unaware of shame and conciousness and awareness of their bodies. In a way, the padded bra is like the figleaf, in that it signifies the beginning of awareness and judgement.

However removing the proverbial 'figleaf' doesn't automatically remove the consciousness of one's body. Trying to ignore or somehow shield young people from their bodily needs and functions, (knoweldge in the form of physical and sexual education, or the more pragmatic aspects such as personal grooming,) it does nothing but create confusion and misunderstanding for a young person. I thinkthis is what reinforces feelings of shame and guilt, not the developing breasts and body hair themselves.

Surely Ireland's abismal history of sexual knowledge and education would have taught us that.

starlit

To be honest I don't think there is anything wrong with 11 year olds getting waxed in general if they have excess dark hair on arms and or legs and or armpits but the bikini waxing I wouldn't be in favour of it unless its really bad. If its a image thing then girls of 11 shouldn't feel they should have to do it until their teens at least.

up for anything

Sex education/knowledge starts at home and should take place mostly in the home. The schools do what they can with the RSE program but the culmination of it in 6th class is a complete joke with the kids planning a week before hand what questions they will ply the teacher with that they think will embarrass the teacher, with an awareness that goes far beyond what they have learned through the program and the basics most of them have learned from their parents. Mostly the teachers just shrug those questions aside.

People seem to have to have some sort of fantasy that the more basic the information the children are given, the more 'innocence' they will retain. It doesn't really work that way.

Dudess

Truley wrote: »

I mentioned the padded bra controversy because I felt it was a similar example of scaremongering and exploiting peoples' long held aversion to the idea of young girls growing up 'too fast' and consequently losing their innocence, (although naiveity would be a more accurate term, since the opposite of innocence is guilt.) This, as well as completely ignoring the pragmatic reasons these bras probably existed; correcting uneven breasts, protection, support. Basically the same reasons an adult needs one.

I always thought a padded bra had an insert, or some sort of push up effect. These bras had a thick fabric no more than half a centimetre thick, I wouldn't have even classed them as padded.

I went over and picked one up in Dunnes thinking the adult lingerie section had been moved - it was definitely a padded bra, which I thought said size 10 initially but it was actually age 10. I fully agree with you it is appropriate for there to be functional bras for 10-year-olds - some 10-year-old girls do have breasts, but these looked more like cleavage enhancers, which as I said, I don't think they're going to cause "corruption" of young girls but I do think it's needless... and one hell of a cash-in for department stores.

Citygirl1

Perhaps a different solution to the bikini line debate is an alternative style swim-suit. Something similar to what was worn in early part of last century, where the suit came down a little further, and was not shaped to display the bikini line.

I'm sure if a manufacturer was to release such a range, in a reasonably flattering style, they would be bought by some grown women and younger girls (I would:o). Obviously not quite as sexy as the high-cut swim-suits, but, as has already been pointed out, looking sexy is not the point of going to a swimming pool, and certainly not for young girls.

I would be firmly against allowing a child of 11-12 to be waxed. However, showing pubic hair is not considered acceptable for grown women, so it doesn't seem fair to tell a girl of 11 or 12 she should ignore it. Immac seems to be the only other solution.

The Big Red Button

Citygirl1 wrote: »

I would be firmly against allowing a child of 11-12 to be waxed. However, showing pubic hair is not considered acceptable for grown women, so it doesn't seem fair to tell a girl of 11 or 12 she should ignore it. Immac seems to be the only other solution.

Why are you so firmly against waxing, and why do you consider Immac to be any better? I don't like the idea of an eleven year old being left to apply it on her own ... too much could go wrong, and what if she decided to go a bit further and attempt to remove the whole lot?! There is the option of supervision, but really, a mother supervising her teenage daughter doing that ...? Seems a bit inappropriate, and uncomfortable for all involved! That's why I think that leaving it in the hands of an uninvolved professional is probably the best solution, in certain cases.

coffee_cake

Citygirl1 wrote: »

Perhaps a different solution to the bikini line debate is an alternative style swim-suit. Something similar to what was worn in early part of last century, where the suit came down a little further, and was not shaped to display the bikini line.

I'm sure if a manufacturer was to release such a range, in a reasonably flattering style, they would be bought by some grown women and younger girls (I would:o). Obviously not quite as sexy as the high-cut swim-suits, but, as has already been pointed out, looking sexy is not the point of going to a swimming pool, and certainly not for young girls.

http://www.ahiida.com/

Citygirl1

chatterpillar wrote: »

Why are you so firmly against waxing, and why do you consider Immac to be any better? I don't like the idea of an eleven year old being left to apply it on her own ... too much could go wrong, and what if she decided to go a bit further and attempt to remove the whole lot?! There is the option of supervision, but really, a mother supervising her teenage daughter doing that ...? Seems a bit inappropriate, and uncomfortable for all involved! That's why I think that leaving it in the hands of an uninvolved professional is probably the best solution, in certain cases.

I personally have had a bikini line wax only 2-3 times, and each time found it extremely painfull - even the beautician didn't like to see the pain in my face. (I've had the legs done several times, with no trouble). I also got a bad rash. I'd hate the idea of allowing an 11 year old to go through this.

Also, I do think that going into a beauty salon to have such a personal treatment would be introducing a child to a very adult environment.

I don't think Immac is ideal, but if the mother goes through the instructions carefully with her daughter, and emphasises the warnings, I'd think a fairly intelligent 11-12 year old could give it a try. It all depends on how sensible they are.

Of course, I come back to the query as to why swim-suits must be designed to show off this area.