--------------040408020902080505030801
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> That's an interesting question. Here's my take for what its worth:
> (warning: long and rambling diatribe below)
>
> Pantyhose are out of style, plain and simple. Women today will say
> that PH are hot, uncomfortable, expensive, bothersome, and on and on.
>
> Well, you could say the same thing about high heels, but I don't see
> women giving them up any time soon. It's about current fashion, not
> utility.
>
> One other point about fashion: Women tend to dress for other women,
> not men. I'm not talking about being attractive--I'm talking about
> being in STYLE. Women consider men hopeless in that respect. A woman
> will most likely choose her wardrobe not to please some man but more
> to be in step with other women.
>
> Of course, I believe there's more to it than just plain fashion.
>
> The bare leg craze has been going on for about 6 years. It started
> with Hollywood and fashion magazine types and was picked up by the
> mainstream.
>
> Women's fashions and styles change over time as we all know. As a
> means of sexual attraction, body parts go in and out of vogue. What
> defines "sexy" is usually in a state of flux. In the 50's, breasts and
> so called "sweater girls" were all the rage. In the late 60's the mini
> skirt came along. In the early 70's, it was hot pants. The emphasis
> seemed to focus on showing off a great tush. The late 70's were all
> about tight pants. By the mid 80's, the mini skirt had started to come
> back. So it was back to legs.
>
> Well, the late 90's saw breasts come back in a big way. You also had a
> huge change in attitudes as to what defined a sexy female body--the
> starved, emaciated rail thin look became very big.
>
> So now you have these 98 pound women running around with stick arms
> and legs and of course the obligatory boob job and the dyed blond hair
> (and let's not forget the fake tan) and that's what defines sexy. It
> doesn't matter if the woman has stick legs like a 8-year-old girl. To
> me, it looks these women are perpetually about to topple over due to a
> weight distribution issue.
>
> Clothes fashions have adapted themselves to this trend--or are it the
> other way around? In any case hip huggers and bare midriffs now reign
> supreme. From a woman's point of view, I guess it's a perfect fashion
> choice--the best of all worlds. If your legs are thin and you have no
> ass, hip huggers give the illusion of a more rounded tush while
> placing the emphasis on breasts and midriff.
>
> On the other side, if the woman has a few spare pounds, hip huggers
> still tend to emphasis the upper body while a full tush/hips can be
> explained away by the cut of the pants.
>
> In all of this, legs play no real part. As long as they're shaved and
> the woman has a pedicure, than everything is fine.
>
> For all of the above and more, PH are just out of style. Legs are not
> the focus in current fashion trends. The bare leg look is so dominant
> now that even women who HAVE to wear hose (office attire, etc.) now
> choose ultra sheer hose. You know, the hose that make it look like the
> woman is not wearing hose? What an abomination!
>
> What's even worse if that you've now had an entire generation of young
> women come of age who have never really wore PH--that's an attitude
> that will most likely last a lifetime.
>
> Personally, I don't get it. A skinny bare legs and foot stuffed in to
> a pair of strappy, stinky high-heeled sandals holds no interest for
> me. Put the same legs in hose and heels (pumps) and I'm VERY interested.
>
> Fashions have changed before and will again. The bare leg/ignore the
> leg trend has been going on so long that EVERY woman is doing it--even
> blue haired grandma's. When that happens, a change is not usually far
> behind. The people who make fashion and value BEING fashionable can't
> stand not to be trendsetters. So while the main stream is still
> running around bare legged in high heeled sandals, perhaps the
> Hollywood types will switch back to more traditional styles with the
> empahsis on legs, not breasts. Who knows.
>
> I sometimes wonder though--do women today know what a HUGE advantage
> they are give up in terms of being attractive by ignoring legs?
>
> Jack
>
BoycottAI wrote:
>Jack, I really wanna know why women back then insisted to wear hose to have
>a slimmer profile and all that.... but women nowadays make it seem like
>putting on pantyhose is a chore. Its like pulling acid fabric over their
>legs and are soooo uncomfortable. ?
>
>What gives.
>
>
>"Jack" <jack@fake.net> wrote in message news:438BF49B.2070402@fake.net...
>
>
>>I agree-- very nice hips. I've also always like Gates McFadden (Beverly
>>Crusher from "TNG")-- geat hips and ass as well.
>>
>>By the way, thiese images of Crosby are as good as it gets in the
>>episode. There's really no other angles of her in the hose and there's
>>no nudity (she does not remove her bra as I remember -- could be wrong
>>about that however.
>>
>>As to why she wore the hose instead of garter belt and stockings:
>>perhaps it was a choice by Crosby herself. She might have felt the hose
>>gave her hips a slimmer profile than wearing panties, stockings, and
>>garter belt. Or perhaps the hose gave her a flatter tummy than regular
>>panties would have.
>>
>>I'm just glad she wore hose!
>>
>>Jack
>>
>>PHreakster wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Red Shoe Diaries was one of the hottest shows on TV. It would just be my
>>>luck that the rare missed episode would be a wild pantyhose scene. These
>>>
>>>
>are
>
>
>>>even more revealing than the Dangerous Curves episode. These must have
>>>
>>>
>been
>
>
>>>produced by a pantyhose fan. To the unknown person: I salute you! I'll
>>>
>>>
>bet
>
>
>>>you had to do a ton of negotiating with the others who probably wanted
>>>
>>>
>the
>
>
>>>more common garter belt and stockings.
>>>
>>>I just love her hips. Such a beautiful, classic shape.
>>>
>>>PHreakster
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
--------------040408020902080505030801
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<blockquote type="cite">That’s an interesting question. Here’s my take for
what its worth: (warning: long and rambling diatribe below)<br>
<br>
Pantyhose are out of style, plain and simple. Women today will say that PH
are hot, uncomfortable, expensive, bothersome, and on and on.<br>
<br>
Well, you could say the same thing about high heels, but I don’t see women
giving them up any time soon. It’s about current fashion, not utility.<br>
<br>
One other point about fashion: Women tend to dress for other women, not men.
I’m not talking about being attractive—I’m talking about being in STYLE.
Women consider men hopeless in that respect. A woman will most likely choose
her wardrobe not to please some man but more to be in step with other women.<br>
<br>
Of course, I believe there’s more to it than just plain fashion.<br>
<br>
The bare leg craze has been going on for about 6 years. It started with Hollywood
and fashion magazine types and was picked up by the mainstream.<br>
<br>
Women’s fashions and styles change over time as we all know. As a means of
sexual attraction, body parts go in and out of vogue. What defines “sexy”
is usually in a state of flux. In the 50’s, breasts and so called “sweater
girls” were all the rage. In the late 60’s the mini skirt came along. In
the early 70’s, it was hot pants. The emphasis seemed to focus on showing
off a great tush. The late 70’s were all about tight pants. By the mid 80’s,
the mini skirt had started to come back. So it was back to legs.<br>
<br>
Well, the late 90’s saw breasts come back in a big way. You also had a huge
change in attitudes as to what defined a sexy female body—the starved, emaciated
rail thin look became very big.<br>
<br>
So now you have these 98 pound women running around with stick arms and legs
and of course the obligatory boob job and the dyed blond hair (and let’s
not forget the fake tan) and that’s what defines sexy. It doesn’t matter
if the woman has stick legs like a 8-year-old girl. To me, it looks these
women are perpetually about to topple over due to a weight distribution issue.<br>
<br>
Clothes fashions have adapted themselves to this trend--or are it the other
way around? In any case hip huggers and bare midriffs now reign supreme.
From a woman’s point of view, I guess it’s a perfect fashion choice—the best
of all worlds. If your legs are thin and you have no ass, hip huggers give
the illusion of a more rounded tush while placing the emphasis on breasts
and midriff.<br>
<br>
On the other side, if the woman has a few spare pounds, hip huggers still
tend to emphasis the upper body while a full tush/hips can be explained away
by the cut of the pants.<br>
<br>
In all of this, legs play no real part. As long as they’re shaved and the
woman has a pedicure, than everything is fine.<br>
<br>
For all of the above and more, PH are just out of style. Legs are not the
focus in current fashion trends. The bare leg look is so dominant now that
even women who HAVE to wear hose (office attire, etc.) now choose ultra sheer
hose. You know, the hose that make it look like the woman is not wearing
hose? What an abomination!<br>
<br>
What’s even worse if that you’ve now had an entire generation of young women
come of age who have never really wore PH—that’s an attitude that will most
likely last a lifetime.<br>
<br>
Personally, I don’t get it. A skinny bare legs and foot stuffed in to a pair
of strappy, stinky high-heeled sandals holds no interest for me. Put the
same legs in hose and heels (pumps) and I’m VERY interested. <br>
<br>
Fashions have changed before and will again. The bare leg/ignore the leg
trend has been going on so long that EVERY woman is doing it—even blue haired
grandma’s. When that happens, a change is not usually far behind. The people
who make fashion and value BEING fashionable can’t stand not to be trendsetters.
So while the main stream is still running around bare legged in high heeled
sandals, perhaps the Hollywood types will switch back to more traditional
styles with the empahsis on legs, not breasts. Who knows.<br>
<br>
I sometimes wonder though—do women today know what a HUGE advantage they
are give up in terms of being attractive by ignoring legs?<br>
<br>
Jack<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
BoycottAI wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="midf4idnexwPZ2pUBDeRVn-jw@comcast.com">
<pre wrap="">Jack, I really wanna know why women back then insisted to wear hose to have
a slimmer profile and all that.... but women nowadays make it seem like
putting on pantyhose is a chore. Its like pulling acid fabric over their
legs and are soooo uncomfortable. ?
What gives.
"Jack" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jack@fake.net"><jack@fake.net></a> wrote in message <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="news:438BF49B.2070402@fake.net">news:438BF49B.2070402@fake.net</a>...
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I agree-- very nice hips. I've also always like Gates McFadden (Beverly
Crusher from "TNG")-- geat hips and ass as well.
By the way, thiese images of Crosby are as good as it gets in the
episode. There's really no other angles of her in the hose and there's
no nudity (she does not remove her bra as I remember -- could be wrong
about that however.
As to why she wore the hose instead of garter belt and stockings:
perhaps it was a choice by Crosby herself. She might have felt the hose
gave her hips a slimmer profile than wearing panties, stockings, and
garter belt. Or perhaps the hose gave her a flatter tummy than regular
panties would have.
I'm just glad she wore hose!
Jack
PHreakster wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Red Shoe Diaries was one of the hottest shows on TV. It would just be my
luck that the rare missed episode would be a wild pantyhose scene. These
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->are
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">even more revealing than the Dangerous Curves episode. These must have
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->been
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">produced by a pantyhose fan. To the unknown person: I salute you! I'll
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->bet
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">you had to do a ton of negotiating with the others who probably wanted
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">more common garter belt and stockings.
I just love her hips. Such a beautiful, classic shape.
PHreakster
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------040408020902080505030801--
|
|