this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2026
354 points (91.2% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

47302 readers
2490 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that. Please post actually infuriating posts to !actually_infuriating@lemmy.world

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating. If your post better fits !Actually_Infuriating put it there.

-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, but attribution is not required in any way. No links to Reddit in post body


-If you would like to provide a source link, do so in the comments but not in the post body.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Gallery image 2

Gallery image 3

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I didn't criticize their individual choice.

I am criticizing the media for only showing women as hairless.

Do I need to explain this again in different words for you to understand I'm not attacking the actresses' personal choice?

Subsequent ad campaigns of the 1920s, ’30s and ’40s worked hard to rebrand armpit hair and leg hair as the enemy, pushing prepubescent bareness as the American ideal, along with toxic depilatory creams like “Sheer" (which contained mercury and bromine) and Koremlu, which contained a now-banned chemical — a rodenticide! — known to cause neuromuscular damage and blindness.

Those advertising campaigns paid off when silk and nylon shortages during World War II made stockings a luxury and bare legs a necessity. A widely-cited stat suggests that by 1964, a staggering 98% of American women were routinely shaving their legs. Today, the global market for hair removal products and services is a impressive $5.42 billion.

Though some feminists of the ’60s flaunted armpit and leg hair as a political statement, the demand for hairless bodies only grew more intense over time. In the 1980s and ’90s, the “the Brazilian,” an especially painful practice of using wax to remove some or all pubic hair, became popular. Millions got on board, including in Europe, where a 2018 Belgian study found that 80% of women reported removing at least some of their pubic hair. The increased pressure to be fuzz-free sometimes resulted in fierce reactions — ranging from shock and disgust to ridicule and mockery — for those who didn’t comply. (You may recall images of Julia Roberts lifting her arm to wave at fans at the 1999 “Notting Hill” premiere. The backlash was not cute.)

“Women often don’t realize how much friends, family and society weigh in on what we do with our body,” Breanne Fahs, a professor of women and gender studies at Arizona State University told CNN in a 2020 interview. “Often, what we think is a choice — as in ‘I choose to shave’ — has actually been…enforced upon us for generations.”

Here, some reading for you

[–] knitwitt@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

When EggInDisguise suggests that it may be personal choice and you chime in to say that representation matters as a response, it sort of comes across like you don't think the actor's preferences matter over the end goal of changing the media landscape.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is a produced television show. Nothing the actress is wearing is her choice in the show.

I will fight tooth and nail for anyone to choose how they present their body. I don't care if people shave or don't shave.

I do care about how the media presents women and the affect it has on how society expects women to look and behave.

[–] knitwitt@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Assuming that actors literally have no choice at all is a bit short sighted. The original premise of the whole thread was 'what if that's just their preference'?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Then you’re back to ignoring how media presents women as if this conversation about personal choice and patriarchy have no bearing here which is false.

Look- I didn’t respond that it would be nice to see more representation as a dig at this actress. I think you’re fundamentally misunderstanding that.

Even if the actress chose to present hairless in this show, it would still be nice to see more representation of diversity throughout media. Tv shows, movies, ads, etc.

I’m not criticizing her choice or anyone’s choice of shaving. I’m criticizing how women are presented in media.