stays again. I found a quote.
Posted by P. Bingham on March 20, 1998 at 14:10:12:
I stumbled on a quote while looking through The Family, Sex & Marriage by Lawrence Stone for soemthing else and I offer it with my humble glee! That doesn't mean I think it proves a point or anything. I just enjoyed it myself because I still disagree with every member of this board on the subject of stays! And I mean every member as I am more than a minority, I fear I am the only one! Here you go:
The passage began with the subject of fashions from the mid-1780 where the clothes were becoming "a fashion included grotesquely enlarged breasts and buttocks, the former created by wirework and the latter by cork attachments. Elegant women resembled the the callipsygous statues of prehistoric art (such harsh words!) Within a decade this fashion was replaced by the flowing see-through style in which women floated about in diaphonous veils with bosoms exposed or lightly covered, and the conours of the body fully displayed. Intheri different ways, both fashions reflected an identical desire to advertise sexual attractions, the one representing unrealistic male fantasies, the other exhibiting the real thing. While perhaps equally sexual provacative, when it came to courting or dalliance the latter fashion had one obvios advantag over the fprmer. Colonel George Hanger commented in 1801:
I must confess, I am a great admirer of short waists and thin clothing: formerly, when the women wore strong stiff stays and the cork rumps, you might as well sit with your arm around an oaken tree with the bark on, as around a lady's waist: but now, as you have seldom anymore covering but your shift and gown of a cold day, your waist is extremely warm and comfortable to the feel.
- Stays Marie Bernadette 23:32:30 3/20/98 (0)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.