Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Paula Poundstone is waiting to answer your questions about life’s little mysteries. E-mail her at paula@motherjones.com.

DakiniOne, e-mail: Here’s my query: When and where did the strange custom of women shaving their legs originate, and most of all, why?

A: Gloria Steinem’s assistant, Diana James, told me that as far back as ancient Rome, women used to pluck their underarms — the public baths apparently resounded with the cries of people in the hands of inexpert pluckers. (I also read that in the 1850s women got skin ulcers from using depilatories made from lime, arsenic, and potash.)

Hair and sexuality (according to an article I read in Ms.) are closely linked. Great, now I don’t feel comfortable with my hair either. Hairless skin supposedly maintained our gender’s innocence.

It does seem painfully stupid. In fact, I think I saw a Slumber Party Shaving game for six or more girl players on the shelf next to the Dream Phone game at Toys ‘R’ Us.

Still, only in my most rebellious years could I fly in the face of the custom. I understand that many women in Europe don’t shave, but for the energy it would take me to learn another language, it’s just not worth it. I’d be constantly flipping quickly through my Berlitz book to bumble out, “I certainly enjoyed not shaving today in your lovely city” to a native stranger over some sort of foamy coffee beverage.

Barbara Baerg, e-mail: Why is it that women’s jackets button over to the left and men’s jackets button over to the right?

A: Barbara, my immediate answer when I read your question was, “To give me a way to appear feminine.” After a bit more thought, however, it didn’t seem reasonable that a fashion would be designed with me in mind.

“Money” and “oil” are also usually good answers to why anything is the way it is, but in this case I’m not sure how they’d apply.

When I asked your question to the curator for costumes and textiles at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, she would not just tell me the answer herself. Instead she insisted that I turn to the Judith Lopez article on page 74, vol. 20 in the 1993 edition of Dress, the journal of the Costume Society of America. (As this periodical is not featured among the stamps that come with the Publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes, I do not myself have a subscription.)

Once I got my hands on the article, in fairness to the curator, I saw that there isn’t one answer to your question. Some costumers speculate that at one time, both men and women held animal skins over themselves with their left hand, making a right-over-left closure, in order to free up their right hand for more important tasks, such as signing their Discover card receipt at the belt store.

Experts on armor from the 14th century say, “To insure that an enemy’s lance point would not slip between the plates, they overlapped from left to right, since it was standard fighting practice that the left side, protected by the shield, was turned toward the enemy. Thus, men’s jackets button left to right even to the present day.”

Women’s buttonhole placement, on the other hand, seems to have no particular rhyme nor reason, but there is some indication that at some point fashion illustrations began to influence how women made their clothes. (This was prior to the existence of Barbie, so it couldn’t be her fault.)

Jason Mitchell, University, Miss.: I like to gamble now and then, and I’ve noticed that casinos have slot machines for nickels, quarters, halves, and dollars, but no dime slot machines. Why is that?

A: Jason, as it happens, I was working at the Hilton in Las Vegas not too long ago. Naturally, I used my lofty position to answer your query. I talked to someone named Mary at the slot manager’s office. Mary says there are dime slots, but the Hilton doesn’t have them because customers don’t play them. She says she saw some dime slots over at the MGM once and that the only customers who were playing them were people who didn’t have any quarters or nickels left.

I also spoke to Greg, a sales representative at Bally Gaming, where they make slot machines. He told me that dimes are too hard for people to work with.

Jason, I worry that you’re frittering away your time with people who find picking up a dime too challenging. Do you need the money that much? You know, of course, that the odds are against you in casinos.

Write Paula c/o Mother Jones, 731 Market Street, Suite 600, San Francisco, CA 94103. Fax her at (415) 665-6696; or send e-mail to paula@motherjones.com.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate