“Family-Friendly” is a Thin Disguise for Discrimination: They are on the Wrong Side of History

“Family-Friendly” is a Thin Disguise for Discrimination:
They are on the Wrong Side of History

Who else is on the “wrong side of history” regarding expressions of and legal sanctions toward and behaviors sourced by prejudice, bias, discrimination, hatred against ethnic, racial, religious, gender and other social identity groups?

Adolph Hitler. Austria and Germany. George Wallace. Richard Nixon. Phyllis Schlafly. Anita Bryant. The United States of America. Several Catholic Popes. Margaret Thatcher. Great Britain. Mao Tse Tung. China.

The list is, unfortunately, endless, if we keep going into history and across the globe. Humans seem to have an unlimited ability to be irrational and small-minded.

Fortunately, we do learn. We do grow. Some more slowly than others, as we see all too often, but change we do. One of the main ways people change is through exposure, a personal “eye-opening” moment that educates them (“leads them out”) away from their irrationality and biases.

The other way is through enforcement, such as the enlightened few and the majority collaborating to change the laws that require citizens to change behaviors accordingly. When behaviors change, minds can follow: not always, and not completely, as we see with the laws of integration and other civil rights for Blacks in the USA NOT eliminating racial biases and racism, but these are certainly steps in the right direction.

The current social and political landscapes—right here, right now—are changing rapidly with respect to fairness, acceptance and legal rights for those with all sexual orientations and gender identities exactly as they did with racial intolerance in the 1960s.

As usual, some are being dragged, kicking and screaming, into this new way of being. They are simply not keeping up, are they? Laws often get “ahead” of some people’s mindsets. AREN’T WE LUCKY? The haters may keep on hating, but they have no legal, moral or individual “right” to impose their “opinions” any longer.

Some definitions, for those unclear on these concepts:

from: http://littlelaughter.wordpress.com

from http://pt.slideshare.net

Current circumstances:
I am an author who publicly proclaims myself a feminist. Anyone who knows me or reads me online or reads my books also knows I am Buddhist, Jewish, and bisexual, and I am vocally an anti-discrimination, anti-oppression activist.

I am also a reader who occasionally does reviews. Therefore, I do agree that each reviewer has the right to refuse to review any book we do not want to review. We do not have to give reasons, either.

However, I do not agree with the opinions, prejudices and biases this reviewer expresses when she gives some (but not all) of her reasons for discontinuing her reading of and refusing to review my book.

In fact, when we allow such actions to be fueled in these ways, not commenting, not confronting, we are aiding and abetting the institutional oppression rampant in literary circles. “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem” is never truer than in these circumstances.

Some would say that she would have been off not saying anything, but since she did, here we are.

Read below and comment, please! http://www.sallyember.com/blog

After finding me on a reviews-seeking site, this reviewer emailed me, saying that she wanted to review all three books in The Spanners Series. She wrote a few days later, saying she had started and was liking my first book.

Then, the next day, this potential reviewer sent me this email:

From: xxx

I will not be able to review your books. I have just come to a part that is [sic] conflict with my site. I have a family friendly blog and your book contains content that my readers would find offensive. It would also put at risk some of my advertising spots on my site that demand only family friendly content.

I understand that you were just trying to get across the point about non-discrimination but your content concerning sexual affiliation will not work with my site.

Best of luck to you,


“Hi, xxx,

“I have no idea what you mean by ‘not family-friendly’ or ‘offensive,’ since my books are accepted by ‘[Facebook authors’ group],’ a strict group on Facebook which promises readers fiction that won’t make them recoil. For example, I use no swear words stronger than ‘damn’ or ‘shit,’ there are no explicit sex scenes, no gratuitous or obvious violence, and no traumatic scenes in my books: they are PG-13.

“If you are objecting to any mention of or acceptance of alternative sexual orientations and gender identities to heterosexual or straight people or cis-gender people, if that would be something you or your followers find ‘offensive,’ then, please: DO NOT READ MY BOOKS.

“And, by the way, discrimination, bias and prejudice are NOT ‘family-friendly’ to any families I would want to be connected with, ever. Use of that terminology to describe what you are perhaps claiming is absurd.

“Since more than 10% of every population of humans on this planet are actually gay, lesbian or bisexual and at least 5% are transgendered, whose families are you ‘protecting’?

“If what I am assuming, in fact, are your positions, I find your views to be extremely offensive, and so would most of the rest of the world, at this point in time. Marriage equality and sexual identity acceptance are legal in many countries, including this one, and discrimination is NOT.

“I welcome you and your readers into the 21st century any time you’re ready to come.

“If I have misunderstood, I apologize. Please explain. I would welcome your further description of what, exactly, is ‘in conflict with’ your site and specifics as to your presumptions about your advertisers’ objections to the content of my books.”


She responded:

From: xxx

What is offensive is that you mention any sexual affiliation at all. I would not blurt out in a book that I was heterosexual. I would not refer to sex at all. It is irrelevant and has no place in a family friendly book. You can have any sexual orientation you want and that is your business but I don’t have to and will not promote it on my site. The fact that you felt you needed to make a political statement with your book is your business but I won’t be a part of it.

As I said Good Luck to you but I will not be doing this review.


Curious as what others who might be “in her camp” would say, I posted our email exchange on the group site I am part of, the one I mentioned, above, and asked for opinions.

I received the following anonymized responses (I didn’t include them all; some are repetitive or off-topic).

Then, I wrote a few responses, below.
Why do I bother? Because Education.

from: http://teachersteachfromtheheart.blogspot.com

“Need[ Facebook Group members]’ opinions, please! Just had this exchange with a potential reviewer and I’m burning mad. (She approached me, BTW, asking to review my books via a [reviews-seeking/reviewers-finding site] last week!).

“She emailed me this earlier today…” (same as above, posted)

FB group’s responses:

From AAA:
“She has the right to her viewpoint, and I don’t think she should be dressed down, scolded, or insulted for it. I thought your words were rather condescending and insulting.

“OTOH, she should have done her research first before approaching you, and rather than try to take YOU to task for what she didn’t agree with in your books, she should have just politely said ‘sorry, I was wrong, it’s not going to work out this time.'”

From BBB:
“The old saying I’ve tried to remember is not to lower oneself to another’s level in order to argue or debate. It’s not ever worth it.”

From CCC:
“It’s her site, she can do as she wishes, just as you are able to write about anything you want to. This enters into the forbidden realm of writers who snap at reviewers for not liking what they wrote. She didn’t give you a bad review on her site, which she could have. She simply declined to review at all. It could have gone a LOT worse for you.”

From DDD:
“Sally, I totally get where you’re coming from, having experienced this kind of reaction (my books include gay characters who are treated as normal people). I’m living vicariously through your email because I’ve wished I could say something like that to reviewers who’ve one-started me because of it. smile emoticon But I’m inclined to agree that it’s better to steer clear of these rhetorical boondoggles. I’d just let this go and get on with writing. Your audience is out there, but it’s not this lady or her blog followers.”

From EEE:
“It’s her site. She is entitled to her opinion and the way she manages her site. We have our rules here, but IMHO, even shit and damn are not family friendly. She was polite. I’m sorry that you were not.”

From FFF:
“I have to say also, the reviewer could have gone ahead with her review, as she’d promised you one. She could have been completely open and honest about her opinion, and put it on her public site.
“Instead, when she saw it was something that she didn’t believe she could endorse, she privately messaged you, letting you know that she’d have to back out.
“This was gracious of her to do.
“So to be treated badly was not something that I feel she deserved.”

From GGG:
“PG-13 does not constitute ‘family-friendly’ in my mind. I have a 9, 7 and 4 year old, and I don’t even let them watch most PG movies.”

From HHH:
“Unfortunately, I have to agree with what many others here have commented. In addition, I have to point out that you ASSUMED her problem with your book was the fact that there are gay characters. She simply wrote that she came ‘to a part’ that conflicted with her site. The thing that may have bothered her could’ve been profanity, or whatever else is in your book. It can be dangerous to reprimand someone for their stance – especially since she could always turn around and decide to write a poor review, or even one-star your book.

“On a personal note, I write both Christian AND secular stories (things that would give Junot Diaz a run for his money in the department of shock value). So I can honestly say that even the words you listed are not ‘family friendly,’ meaning appropriate for all ages. As far as homosexuality is concerned, I have a #LiveAndLetLive philosophy on life. That means that I do not judge someone else for their lifestyle choice. However, that doesn’t mean I want my six year old reading about it. Again, it’s a subject not necessarily appropriate for all ages.”

From Me:
to HHH: “She came right out and stated what her concerns were. I didn’t assume what she objected to at all. I assumed her reasons, because she did not state them. Also, I did not expect any 6-year-olds to read this book; it’s way too complicated and sophisticated. PG-13 is the rating i always state. Thanks for your comments, though.”

From JJJ:
“Wow. And she was so polite…”

From Me:
“Since when are expressions of bias, prejudice and discrimination ‘polite’??? If her objections were obviously about my having Jewish or Black characters, would you be defending her ‘family-friendly’ smokescreen???”

From JJJ:
“She made her reasons for choosing not to include your work on her site clear to you in a very polite manner. Tolerance works both ways.”

From Me:
“To JJJ and others here: I appreciate all your comments, but for some of you, I am disappointed. SOME don’t seem to know the difference between being ‘impolite’ and being against someone else’s being discriminatory, Number 1.

“Number 2, it is not the job of those who are not being tolerated to return such intolerance with tolerance. I was not ‘impolite’ to her: I was direct and I expressed my thoughts and feelings. I did not call her names, I did not insult her.

“Remember: she VOLUNTEERED to read my books and had already sent me an email prior to this saying how much she was enjoying the first one. Then, she came to a part she didn’t ‘tolerate,’ which she and her groups, of which some of you are obviously members, seem to think it’s just fine to insult and demean. That is plain wrong. She doesn’t have to like it. She could have just said “It’s not for me” and DNF or not even written me. But, she chose to ‘explain.’

“Those who are not heterosexual or cis-gender do not deserve to be treated as if we are threats, are wrong to be ‘this way,’ or by our very existence, are ‘problems’ for ‘families.’ We ARE in families!

“I will defend to my dying day the right of all who are discriminated against to object strenuously to such discrimination, wherever it appears, however ‘nicely’ it is phrased.

“Maybe some of you are too young or didn’t have these experiences, but I grew up in Missouri under Jim Crow laws. I grew up with signs on stores and country clubs that said : ‘No Dogs, No Jews, No Niggers Allowed.’ Should I have greeted those racists with ‘tolerance’????? I am a Jewish, female bisexual. Our country is in the exact same place now with LGBT rights and biases as it was then with Jews and Blacks.

“Remember when women weren’t treated as ‘humans,’ weren’t allowed to vote, sit with men, drive, own property? Would you all be so ‘tolerant’ if she had said her ‘family-friendly’ group doesn’t want to read books with autonomous female characters, that all women be subservient to their families’ males to be considered ‘family-friendly’? Whoever doesn’t see the connections, here, I’m sad for all of you.”

From JJJ:
“Comments about the relative politeness of exchanges of views are not an automatic acceptance of intolerance or prejudice. In fact they are no comment at all about the relative merits of the content of the exchange – just the manner in which comments have been delivered.”

From Me:
“Thanks for all of your ideas, comments, and responses, here. Group. I am sorry that some of you still believe that strongly worded disagreement is ‘impolite,’ but we’re going to have to agree to disagree, there. Best to you all.”

from: http://www.calgary.ca

Okay, Followers/Readers and Other Peeps: Weigh in! What do you believe/do?

Please leave comments on this blog! Thanks! Best to you all!

1) Should we authors all just “be polite” when confronted with reviewers’ prejudices?

2) Should we authors “be silent” when potential or actual reviewers express their biases and refuse to “serve” us at the “review” lunch counter because our books or characters don’t meet with their “approval” (don’t have a right to exist)?

3) Is it incumbent upon us all not to allow any reviewer to give or imply that their personal, political, religious or other biases as/are sufficient “reasons” for refusing to review a book? Or, do you recommend letting that go unchallenged?

4) Does simply having LGBT characters make a book “unfriendly” to “families” and/or inappropriate for youth?

2015 GLORIA AWARDS (in honor of Gloria Steinem) from the Ms. Foundation for Women

Can’t say enough good things to and about these #feminist leaders, innovators, advocates and authors. read about and support this year’s group of honorees!

There is a great GALA on May 11 at 6 PM in New York City, USA, and an “after party” from 9 – 11 PM at the same location. Both cost money.

See below for more info, but mostly, I’m posting about the Honorees, who ROCK!

Ceremony is on May 11, 2015, in New York City, Pierre Hotel, 6 PM, 2 E 61st St, 10065
Contact: events@ms.foundation.org or 212.709.4436
Purchase tickets, get more info here:

the Ms. Foundation for Women

msfoundation logo
to celebrate and honor
Ms. Foundation Grantees
2015 Woman of Vision Award Winners

Ms. Foundation Grantee
Woman of Vision Award

CDM logo

CDM supports Mexico-based migrant workers to defend and protect their rights as they move between their home communities in Mexico and their workplaces in the United States. Founded in 2005, Centro de los Derechos del Migrante, Inc. (CDM) is the first transnational migrant workers’ rights organization based in Mexico.”

Co-Founder and President, Michael Stars, Inc.
Woman of Vision Award

Suzanne Lerner

Suzanne Lerner is an entrepreneur, political activist and philanthropist. She is currently the president of Michael Stars and owner of Lerner Et Cie. Suzanne Lerner boasts decades of experience in business, as well as a background in dozens of causes, primarily centered around female empowerment. In 1983, Lerner founded Lerner et Cie, a wholesale fashion showroom, currently with four locations nationwide. Lerner co-founded and currently serves as President of retail clothing company, Michael Stars. Lerner primarily oversaw sales and marketing until 2015, when she was appointed President. Lerner’s second career is philanthropy – both personal and with the Michael Stars Foundation. Lerner serves on the board of Women Thrive Worldwide, ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Prosperity Catalyst and Children Mending Hearts. She is also a member of Women Donors Network and Women Moving Millions. Lerner funds a number of NGO’s that focus on women’s empowerment, economic stability, gender reconciliation and gender-based violence. She resides in Los Angeles.”

****GOLDIEBLOX: Construction Toys for Girls
Corporate Innovation Award


“Debbie Sterling is the founder and CEO of GoldieBlox. She never knew what engineering was until her high school math teacher suggested she pursue it as a college major. Debbie couldn’t figure out why her math teacher thought she should be a train conductor! Nevertheless, she gave engineering a try during her freshman year at Stanford. Four years later, she graduated with a degree in Mechanical Engineering / Product Design. Bothered by how few women there were in her program, Debbie became obsessed with the notion of “disrupting the pink aisle” with a toy that would introduce girls to the joy of engineering at a young age.”

****JANET MOCK, Author and Advocate
Marie C. Wilson Emerging Leader Award


“JANET MOCK is the New York Times bestselling author of Redefining Realness: My Path to Womanhood, Identity, Love & So Much More. She considers herself a Beyoncé scholar but is widely known as a sought-after speaker and prominent advocate for trans women’s rights. A native of Honolulu, Janet attended the University of Hawaii at Manoa, earned her MA in journalism from New York University, and worked as a Staff Editor for People.com (People magazine’s website) for five years. In 2012, Janet launched #GirlsLikeUs, a social movement that empowers trans women and celebrates the diversity of womanhood. In 2013, Janet joined the board of directors at the Arcus Foundation, a leading global organization advancing social justice and conservation issues. She lives and writes in New York City with her boyfriend, photographer and filmmaker, Aaron Tredwell and their cockapoo, Cleo. Currently, she hosts the weekly culture show “So POPular!” on MSNBC’s Shift network and serves as Contributing Editor for Marie Claire.”

And, a special award:
The Free to Be Foundation gives its first-ever
Peggy Charren/Free to Be You and Me Award to
JOAN GANZ COONEY, Co-Founder, Children’s Television Workshop

Joan GanzCooney

Joan Ganz Cooney, co-founder in 1968 of Children’s Television Workshop (renamed Sesame Workshop in June 2000) and originator of the preschool educational series, Sesame Street, served as President and Chief Executive Officer until 1990. She is currently Chair of the Executive Committee of Sesame Workshop‘s Board of Trustees and in November 2007 introduced the Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop, dedicated to investigating the potential of digital media to help children learn and collaborating with educators, media producers, policymakers and investors to put this research into action.

Sesame Street, which began as an experiment, is the first preschool program to integrate education and entertainment as well as feature a multi-cultural cast. It has been broadcast daily since 1969 in the U.S. on the more than 300 stations of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and is seen by millions of children in more than 150 countries. Indigenous co-productions of Sesame Street reflecting local languages, customs and educational needs are produced for audiences all over the world.

“Following the successful launch of Sesame Street, Ms. Cooney and her colleagues created other award-winning children’s series on network and public TV including The Electric Company, 3-2-1 Contact, Square One TV, Ghostwriter, CRO, Big Bag, Dragon Tales, Sagwa the Chinese Cat and Pinky Dinky Doo, each offering educational opportunities around science, mathematics, reading and bringing new experiences to life.

Sesame Workshop programs have been awarded over 150 Emmys and have received scores of other honors presented here and around the world. The Workshop’s activities also include publishing, digital media, product licensing and community engagement efforts such as the award winning program — Talk, Listen, Connect — launched in 2006 to help military families with young children between the ages of two and five build a sense of stability and resiliency during times of separation and change.

“Ms. Cooney is presently a Director at the Peter G. Peterson Foundation and a Lifetime Trustee of the Paley Center for Media, The New York Presbyterian Hospital, WNET Channel 13/Educational Broadcasting Corporation and of the National Child Labor Committee and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.”

In 1968, children’s television programming was revolutionized with the creation [by of the Children’s Television Workshop – the force behind Sesame Street, The Electric Company and many other award-winning educational programs.”
Peggy Charren was the founder of Action for Children’s Television, which lobbied broadcasters, advertisers and legislators to create quality educational programming and TV commercials that promote healthy eating and positive child development.

Also being honored:
ACT for Women and Girls as Women of Vision

ACT Logo

“Based in Visalia, California, ACT for Women and Girls works to transform women of all ages into leaders for reproductive rights and health care. Through the Female Leadership Academy, ACT engages women from the community to take active roles in eradicating the oppression that lies deep in the roots of California’s Central Valley region – addressing poverty, teen pregnancy, unemployment and environmental issues.

“The Ms. Foundation for Women is proud to be a longtime supporter of ACT for Women and Girls, and honors them as Women of Vision for their innovative efforts to promote and protect reproductive rights.”

ACT is located in Visalia, California, the epicenter and largest metropolitan area of Tulare County. Led by Erin Garner-Ford, ACT‘s mission is to engage women of all ages in leadership opportunities to promote social and personal change. ACTwas founded in 2005 with the creation of the Female Leadership Academy (FLA) program. From the inception of FLA, it was evident that reproductive justice issues demanded to be addressed, as participants were often misinformed about reproductive health, justice, and access.

“Unlike Southern California and the Bay Area, Tulare County has few resources and is the most adversely impacted region in California regarding social issues, such as poverty, unemployment, teen pregnancy, and environmental degradation. ACTtakes an active role in eradicating the oppression that lies deep in the roots of the Central Valley. Through one young woman at a time, ACT makes an impact.

ACT engages young people ages 14-24 through three program areas: The signature eight month leadership program, FLA, which develops young women leaders to actively engage in the reproductive health and justice movement; ACTion Teams for young women and men to educate their peers on sexual health information in the community through events, street outreach and education; and Teen Success, a support group for pregnant and parenting teen moms. ACT’s program participants come from every rural community in Tulare County.

“Through ACT’s programs, young women are prepared and energized to actively participate in shaping the future of their communities (both locally and globally). ACT focuses on reproductive justice leadership, developing young women leaders to engage in civic participation projects and partners with state and national groups for policy advocacy work. The overarching vision of ACT’s reproductive justice work is to INCREASE ACCESS to reproductive health education, contraception, abortion, and protection against sexually transmitted infections. ACT strives to promote services that are comprehensive and culturally competent, influence legislation, and provide a voice from the Central Valley on important bills that impact women and their health.

“Each of ACT’s program participants contribute to ACT’s grassroots campaigns to increase awareness of reproductive health and justice. One of the cornerstones to developing young women’s leadership is through direct action and organizing opportunities. Participants help shape and implement three signature reproductive justice campaigns annually: Pharmacy Access; Comprehensive Sexual Health and Education Initiative; and ‘Don’t Let a Hot Date Turn Into a Due Date.'”

Ms Afterparty eVite 42215
Link to purchase tickets for the “after-party”: http://forwomen.org/afterparty
($75 in advance; $100 at the door).

Want to Make A Difference? RUN!

North Bay, CA Peeps: inspired by today’s elections (frustrated or elated)? DO SOMETHING!

Women’s Global Leadership Initiative (WGLI) and local partners have come together to support and inspire the development of new leaders in the North Bay, CA, area (Sonoma County)!

The Rise Up Now (RUN) Forum is about becoming informed, knowing what you have to offer and taking the next steps!

Come and enjoy a day of inspiring speakers, lunch and being in the company of those who have passion to make things happen.

The RUN Forum provides attendees with the opportunity to learn what it takes to make a difference in their communities by joining committees, commissions, and boards.

Open to all in the North Bay, CA, area and close by who want to make a difference!


Please share this important info.

RUN Flyer Nov 8, 2014 real

Go to http://www.wgli.org to register today!

Cost: $25.00, Student $15.00 lunch included.

For more info or to request for scholarship, call or email Wanda Tapia at 707-935-8532, wtapia@latinoserviceproviders.org

Lead Lipsticks, Folliculitis with MRSA from Hair Removal, and other Deadly “Beauty” Choices

Deadly Lipsticks

Hold on just a minute: what are you putting on your lips? What are you kissing on someone else’s? LEAD, if you use commercial lipsticks these days, and other poisons.


image from: http://rosearden.blogspot.com

Don’t believe me?

“[Researchers in 2013 and earlier found that] women who apply lipstick two to three times daily can ingest a significant amount—–20 percent of the daily amount that’s considered safe in drinking water or more—–of aluminum, cadmium, chromium, and manganese. Depending on the lipstick, in some cases women who slathered it on (14 times a day or more) were meeting or surpassing the daily recommended exposure to chromium, aluminum, and manganese.”

How many ways does the “beauty” industry despise, disrespect and want to murder women? It’s enough to make anyone sick.

Here are some lipstick facts.

Lead in Lipsticks inforgraphic

As of 2007, Burt’s Bees, owned by Clorox but which claims to be a down-home, “natural” product company, had lead in its chapsticks and did not respond to Mother Jones‘ inquiries as of 2013 asking what they had done to eliminate lead. This does NOT just affect adult women: children and men use Burt’s Bees’ lip balms.

Not to single out Burt’s Bees, but I’m hitting that company harder than others because of its atrocious pretense to “natural” ingredients. FRAUD.

Instead of getting the lead out, lipsticks tested in 2007, 2009 and 2013 got WORSE over those years, with products made by Maybelline, Cover Girl, L’Oreal, Revlon, Stargazer, and others, including Burt’s Bees, all selling popular colors/brands of lipstick containing lead.

“Lead, a metal that humans should avoid exposure to entirely, was detected in 75 percent of the samples.”

What if you are lucky enough to have a lipstick that does not have lead? Are you safe, then?

Oh, no, you’re not.

“…[L]ead isn’t the only toxin lurking in your lippy—–a new study finds cadmium, aluminum, and other heavy metals, too.”

The research showed that only a few companies, notably Wet n’ Wild, Bobbi Brown, and Shiseido, had zero lead in their lipsticks as of 2012. However, these companies’ products are not necessarily “healthy” for you, just not deadly.

To learn know more about the toxic and disease-inducing effects of these chemicals when they are ingested by humans (not to mention getting into our water system when wearers wash their faces and hands), please read the article.

(Original article is By Maggie Severns | published 5/6/13 in Mother Jones magazine. Read it!
Lead in your Lipsticks link:

You want to cover/decorate your lips, anyway?

Please use healthy, all-natural, proven and tested as well as beautiful products: lip glosses, tinted “shimmers” and balms from Badger. Badger Balm‘s products and the company itself are winning significant “green” and “B” Corporation awards annually. ALL Badger products are completely safe, mostly organic, and never tested on animals. They have hair oils, a line of products for men, skin products and much more than lip treatments.

Please check them out: http://www.badgerbalm.com


Now, what about that “extra” hair? If you insist on removing it, how to remove body hair safely?

Hair Removal is Causing Infections: Folliculitis with MRSA and others that can Kill

First, some definitions:

Folliculitis is an inflammation and infection of hair follicles, the tiny openings in the skin from which hair grows. Folliculitisis due to an invasion of bacteria that enter the follicles and cause a bacterial infection. Folliculitisis most commonly the result of an infection of staphylococcal bacteria. This causes inflammation and a red rash that is bumpy and itchy. The rash can occur anywhere on the skin or scalp.”

How does one get Folliculitis? Let me count the ways…

Folliculitisis often caused by an infection that occurs after shaving, waxing, tweezing and other types of hair removal methods.” (The above info is from: http://www.rightdiagnosis.com/f/folliculitis/intro.htm)

The ONLY method that does NOT lead to Folliculitis is mentioned, below. I still do NOT recommend removing unwanted hair, though. Just my personal preference: cut it.

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus = MRSA is basically a “staph” infection that is resistant to treatment/cure by most/conventional antibiotics, which means MRSA is much more dangerous and can be deadly. Some have called MRSA a “flesh-eating” bacteria, but that is a misnomer. MRSA can erode flesh, but not any more often or thoroughly than other untreated bacteria in the staph family.

MRSA ninjas

image from http://www.research.ibm.com

Let’s say you’re a “modern” female or male who wants to get rid of some (or all!?!) of your body hair who doesn’t want infections that maim or kill. Picky, picky. What to do?

First of all, WHY do you have to remove body hair? I haven’t used a razor since 1978 and I am quite happy with that choice. Misplaced vanity and age inspire me to cut my chin hairs, but trimming is very different from actual removal (and completely harmless).

Unless you suffer from a disorder that covers your face, arms, legs and other parts with hair and you are NOT okay with that, I just don’t understand why anyone “needs” to remove hair. Don’t send me comments explaining, though: I am not interested in your rationales. I just want you to do it more safely.

Let’s go on to safe(r) hair removal methods.

HOW are you going to engage in /have you already been doing removal of YOUR body hair? What will result from your chosen method(s)? Are you DIY or do you go to a “salon” or “spa” or other commercial establishment and have them do the removal?


MRSA, HIV, Hepatitis B, STDs and other infectious/contagious diseases lurk in public spas/salons, worldwide!

“No matter how posh or pricey a salon or spa is, if it isn’t keeping up with health and safety standards, it can easily be a breeding ground for harmful bacteria and germs. Be sure that all non-disposable instruments used are sterilised in an autoclave, a medical-grade device that uses superheated steam to sterilise. It’s the only way to be sure that infectious organisms have been destroyed.”

The article I am quoting, here, was published in India, but the safety recommendations and problems it researched apply everywhere. Not only women are affected, either.

“Men need to make sure that disposable razor blades are used to trim their hair (shaving) so as to avoid hepatitis B and HIV.” This may seem obvious, but you’d be surprised at how many men go to barber shops to get haircuts and never ask if the razors used to shave their NECKS (which is part of providing all “short” haircuts) have been sterilized or used prior to their shaves without having been replaced. This warning applies to electric as well as manual razors.


image from http://www.wisegeek.com

What is required to keep hair removal equipment safe? More than some shops do.

“Dipping the instruments in some solution is not going to kill bacteria and fungi. The place should use either a proper disinfectant or an autoclave for sterilising the instruments. Check the labels. Spa or salon disinfectant should be EPA-registered hospital-level liquid that is virucidal, bactericidal and fungicidal that is 10 per cent bleach; 70 per cent or higher isopropyl or ethyl alcohol.”

Think about ALL the re-usable instruments/tools that come into contact with your body in commercial establishments. I’ve had a pedicure and manicure occasionally in recent years, but I have never asked these questions or checked out these procedures.

I will NOW! This article is worth reading (link below).

Let’s talk about waxing safety measures, since waxing is currently THE most popular and commercialized hair removal method, especially for younger women and most men.

“Body hair removal techniques like waxing sometimes can cause redness, breakouts, severe infections, irritant reactions and ingrown hair. Always check if salon staff doing waxing are using a fresh wax jar and maintaining proper hygiene and sanitation. Confirm that there is no double-dipping (putting an earlier used tool back into the wax) and no double-using (reusing wax) policies to avoid product contamination.”

Re-using wax? Ewww. That is truly disgusting to contemplate. How do they remove all the hair from the wax? Yuck.

There are so many ways for hair removal methods to be done sloppily that I shudder to consider them all, especially due to the severity of the potential outcomes.

“…[If] hygiene and sanitary measures during waxing (especially bikini waxing) go haywire, then there is a risk of getting infected by viruses like herpes, molluscum contagiosum and genital warts, which, otherwise in adults, are sexually transmitted. These can be transferred from an infected client to a healthy customer specially while getting waxed in and around bikini and gluteal areas.”

Picture this: a woman (or man) goes in to get her hair removed. Waxing ensures. All seems to go well UNTIL a few weeks later, s/he develops herpes or warts in the groin area. These diseases are incurable, painful, contagious and recurring. For the rest of the victim’s LIFE and possibly any future partners’ lives.

Don’t even get me started on what imbalance or illness has developed in a modern girl’s or woman’s self-regard that makes her believe her vaginal area is supposed to be almost or completely hairless (making it resemble a pre-pubescent girl’s) or for males to believe that a hairless chest or back (again, relegating “attractiveness” in adult males to pre-pubescence) is all their partners will accept. These cultural constructs make me both sad and furious.

I like hairy, adult, male chests? Am I the only one left who remembers Sean Connery as James Bond, hairy chest exposed, with great affection and attraction? Ahhh.

Sean Connery

Are the so-called benefits of waxing worth the risks?

I say not.

Read on. Please regard and share these extra and specific cautions, below.

Other wax warnings:

  • Do not wax over an area that has had a botox injection for at least 72 hours.
  • Do not wax if you have protruding varicose veins, diabetes, skin eczema or infection.
  • Do not wax if you are using any anti-ageing or acne creams that may contain a retinoid, as skin will be extra susceptible to getting burned and peeled off.

Read full article here:

Deciding you may want to keep your “unwanted” hair rather than acquire even more seriously unwanted problems? Good choice!

Or, if you INSIST or removing hair, try lasers! These are expensive if you buy one for your home or get treatments at dermatologists’ offices, BUT laser removal methods are considered safer than other methods because laser removal “damages the hair follicle at its root without damaging the surrounding skin tissue.”

I usually ignore or deride Fox “NEWS,” but this article quoted above and below seems well-researched and the info corresponds to many others I read. (Credit goes to Julie Revelant (who is a freelancer and does NOT work for Fox NEWS), published 8/29/14: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/08/29/4-hair-removal-methods-that-really-work/ ) for the following list (and she gives more info) about SAFE HAIR REMOVAL methods, to date.

  • 1. Diode laser hair removal (GETS MY VOTE)
  • 2. Sugaring (THIS IS STILL WAXING, though)
  • 3. Threading (STILL too much like TWEEZING)
  • 4. Electrolysis (STILL too much like TWEEZING)

If you want to know more about these methods, please go read her article. (Julie Revelant is a freelance writer and copywriter specializing in parenting, health, healthcare, nutrition, food and women’s issues. She’s also a mom of two. Learn more about Julie at http://revelantwriting.com)

I’m sticking with my Badger Balm lip balms and lip shimmers and my hair-cutting scissors for my errant chin hairs.

hair scissors

Meanwhile, I plan to visualize that everyone gains more positive self-esteem, higher self-acceptance and an expanded view of “beauty.”

Also, I wish you all the best, whatever you choose.