seagull wrote:
Anyhow, I still seem to get various apparel brochures, etc in the post, which feature some girdles, and I was interested in one "best seller", a pantie girdle which not only "controls the tummy", but also provides, "lifting and support to the buttocks". Interesting, isn't it? I thought girdles were supposed to hold the buttocks down.
Going way back to when the OBG was the norm, it was certainly the case that the girdle was required to minimise the bottom by flattening the buttocks. For women who believed their behinds were too big (a very common belief then and now) the crucial characteristic of their girdles was an ability to provide a firm, reducing effect at the back. When pantie girdles began to take over, worn over tights and under increasingly short skirts, my fiancee was initially disappointed with them. Though sold as firm control (and they were quite tight) they did not have either extra layers of powernet or a downstretch panel at the back. She even tried wearing two girdles but it wasn't really the solution. The truth was that fashion seemed to have moved towards favouring a "pert" bottom and I saw adverts for pantie girdles that emphasised their ability to "lift and separate" the buttocks in a similar way to how bras worked on breasts. That might have been fine for the new generation of mini-skirt wearing young things but for slightly more mature young women in their mid to late twenties, who had been brought up to have their rears minimised it was no good. Eventually my fiancée, by then my wife, tracked down some very good, firm control pantie girdles with quite a large downstretch back panel that worked almost as well as her old OBGs. She had good legs and could wear a mini-skirt but, until she found the right style of pantie girdle, always felt that her bottom pushed the skirts out too far at the back and affected the line of the skirt hem at the back. She was much happier in her short skirts and dresses once she had her bottom "properly" held in again.