The Pantyhose Thread

[Elspeth]

In that article, 4/5 ways for fashion trends to get started are "top down", created by people telling women what they should want to wear, only one is a trend set by what actual people wear in real life. So I'd say his statement, while incomplete, is more correct than to say that young women decide on trends themselves and stores just follow that.

People who pursuit the fashion industry don't do it to dictate what they want women to wear. Celebrities are normal people just like all of us, and they don't wear anything with the intent of trying to tell women what to wear (I know, because my family is in this industry). I'm not sure what the origin is of this belief, but it's not what drives artists to do what they love to do. The fashion industry is only entirely "top-down" if one doesn't want to take part in it and create their own looks (e.g. teenagers on TikTok drive a lot of trends, etc.). That's why I always encourage others to wear what makes them feel good, because how they present themselves may inspire others -- especially if it goes against the grain of what is currently considered "fashionable", since that's how new trends are often created. A lot of ladies here would love to see hosiery become popular again. By wearing it themselves, they are keeping it alive and may inspire someone else to try them out. Regular people have as much influence over fashion (thanks to the internet) as those who do it for a living.

 

[FutureCatLady]

People who pursuit the fashion industry don't do it to dictate what they want women to wear. Celebrities are normal people just like all of us, and they don't wear anything with the intent of trying to tell women what to wear (I know, because my family is in this industry). I'm not sure what the origin is of this belief, but it's not what drives artists to do what they love to do. The fashion industry is only entirely "top-down" if one doesn't want to take part in it and create their own looks (e.g. teenagers on TikTok drive a lot of trends, etc.). That's why I always encourage others to wear what makes them feel good, because how they present themselves may inspire others -- especially if it goes against the grain of what is currently considered "fashionable", since that's how new trends are often created. A lot of ladies here would love to see hosiery become popular again. By wearing it themselves, they are keeping it alive and may inspire someone else to try them out. Regular people have as much influence over fashion (thanks to the internet) as those who do it for a living.

I see Instagram sets a lot of trends so I bet if more influencers and instaho types were to wear nylons more young women would follow suit but then again there is the issue of dressing up which most women don’t want to be bothered with.

 

[It_is_my_time]

Just an off shoot question for the guys that I thought of when reading the responses to this thread. Do you guys notice other women's apparel as much as you would notice stockings/pantyhose/tights?

I ask this because I have seen the comment, which is accurate, that feminine dress attire is more than just tights and heels. Certainly true. But men, do you notice ear rings, matching color combinations, purses, jewelry, hair pieces, etc.? I honest don't. I could talk to a woman for 30 minutes and if you asked me any of these details afterwards I couldn't tell you what color combination she was wearing, if she had ear rings or not, and certainly not other jewelry. I think jewelry is one thing women put so much emphasis on and a large majority of men simply don't even notice it.

But when women are wearing heels and/or tights, I notice and remember right away. And observing men turning their heads to look, I see a lot of other men taking a long look as well. And this is why I potentially see heels and tights as the height of female attire.

#1) Because men don't wear these things. Men wear jewelry, men wear color combinations. Men even carry man purses (satchels). But men don't wear heels and stockings, well unless they are cross dressing.

#2) Because as a man I notice these things and they are attractive. Where as the other things I don't even notice, even after a conversation with the woman. Should could have left all her jewelry at home and never bought a purse in her life, and I wouldn't find her one bit less attractive or even noticed after talking to her.

 

[Mountaineer]

The only thing that I would remember is the makeup. I don't remember the last time I've seen a woman wear heels and pantyhose.

 

[Cavalier]

Just an off shoot question for the guys that I thought of when reading the responses to this thread. Do you guys notice other women's apparel as much as you would notice stockings/pantyhose/tights?

I ask this because I have seen the comment, which is accurate, that feminine dress attire is more than just tights and heels. Certainly true. But men, do you notice ear rings, matching color combinations, purses, jewelry, hair pieces, etc.? I honest don't. I could talk to a woman for 30 minutes and if you asked me any of these details afterwards I couldn't tell you what color combination she was wearing, if she had ear rings or not, and certainly not other jewelry. I think jewelry is one thing women put so much emphasis on and a large majority of men simply don't even notice it.

But when women are wearing heels and/or tights, I notice and remember right away. And observing men turning their heads to look, I see a lot of other men taking a long look as well. And this is why I potentially see heels and tights as the height of female attire.

#1) Because men don't wear these things. Men wear jewelry, men wear color combinations. Men even carry man purses (satchels). But men don't wear heels and stockings, well unless they are cross dressing.

#2) Because as a man I notice these things and they are attractive. Where as the other things I don't even notice, even after a conversation with the woman. Should could have left all her jewelry at home and never bought a purse in her life, and I wouldn't find her one bit less attractive or even noticed after talking to her.

To be honest when an attractive woman wears heels and pantyhose it is difficult not to remember, it lingers in the mind long after.

 

[It_is_my_time]

To be honest when an attractive woman wears heels and pantyhose it is difficult not to remember, it lingers in the mind long after.

I agree. Do you remember their ear rings or purse or color combination? I certainly don't.

 

[Cavalier]

I agree. Do you remember their ear rings or purse or color combination? I certainly don't.

If any of those things are a bit out of the ordinary like large hoop earrings I might but generally no.

 

[Kitty Tantrum]

What I want to know is how the heck pantyhose are considered both "sexy" AND "modest" as an entire category.

TBH, part of why I DON'T wear pantyhose, and part of why I'm not particularly interested in even looking for any made from better materials, is because they are at least 99.9% of the time advertised as sexy sexy lingerie and modeled by women in highly provocative poses showing 80%+ of their skin.

My own standards of modesty do not permit a sheer fabric to function in place of an opaque one, so if I wouldn't be comfortable somewhere showing my bare legs, I would feel immodest in sheer nylons as well.

I might feel EVEN MORE IMMODEST in sheer nylons than in bare legs, actually --

To be honest when an attractive woman wears heels and pantyhose it is difficult not to remember, it lingers in the mind long after.

Because of exactly this.

What man sees heels and pantyhose and DOESN'T conjure up some kind of associated image of some kind of lingerie ensemble? It's emblazoned on the mind's eye of EVERYONE who has been exposed to modern TV, magazines, advertising, etc.

I would love to have an old fashioned pair of silk stockings with the nifty back-seam, but I avoid wearing anything that makes people think about what kind of underwear I might be wearing.

I've been equally exposed to the notion that pantyhose (of any kind, even the very sheer ones) are "necessary for modesty" (which makes no sense to me because they are such a modern contrivance), AND the notion that pantyhose (of any kind, even very opaque stockings) are BASICALLY "fetish wear."

So, grandma will yell at me if I wear a knee-length dress with no pantyhose.

But if I wear the pantyhose with the knee-length dress, guys are going to be staring at my legs like "ooooh pantyhose."

I can't win. So I just don't play.

Knee-high cotton socks for the win.

 

[It_is_my_time]

What I want to know is how the heck pantyhose are considered both "sexy" AND "modest" as an entire category.

TBH, part of why I DON'T wear pantyhose, and part of why I'm not particularly interested in even looking for any made from better materials, is because they are at least 99.9% of the time advertised as sexy sexy lingerie and modeled by women in highly provocative poses showing 80%+ of their skin.

My own standards of modesty do not permit a sheer fabric to function in place of an opaque one, so if I wouldn't be comfortable somewhere showing my bare legs, I would feel immodest in sheer nylons as well.

I might feel EVEN MORE IMMODEST in sheer nylons than in bare legs, actually --

Because of exactly this.

What man sees heels and pantyhose and DOESN'T conjure up some kind of associated image of some kind of lingerie ensemble? It's emblazoned on the mind's eye of EVERYONE who has been exposed to modern TV, magazines, advertising, etc.

I would love to have an old fashioned pair of silk stockings with the nifty back-seam, but I avoid wearing anything that makes people think about what kind of underwear I might be wearing.

I've been equally exposed to the notion that pantyhose (of any kind, even the very sheer ones) are "necessary for modesty" (which makes no sense to me because they are such a modern contrivance), AND the notion that pantyhose (of any kind, even very opaque stockings) are BASICALLY "fetish wear."

So, grandma will yell at me if I wear a knee-length dress with no pantyhose.

But if I wear the pantyhose with the knee-length dress, guys are going to be staring at my legs like "ooooh pantyhose."

I can't win. So I just don't play.

Knee-high cotton socks for the win.

I don't know if anyone here said they were "sexy", heck maybe I did inadvertently, I just don't remember reading it. To me, it isn't "sexy" as in some perverted way. It would be "attractive" and "feminine" in that "this woman is very feminine and proud of it. She has a lot of self respect. She is modest but has class and style And if she is single, that is the kind of woman I want to meet and get to know better because those are great qualities in a life time partner.

If I see flip flops, I think "lazy, very entitled, not my likely partner". Then maybe that same woman talks to me and I find my prejudice to be wrong, but it is a prejudice that is innate within me.

If I see lots of skin (unless it is real hot out), tattoos, then my prejudice is "she has low self esteem, low morals, and would not be a good partner". This again could be very far from the truth. But what you wear and how you carry yourself is how people will always prejudge you as a person. Right or wrong, it is human nature.

 

[Elspeth]

What I want to know is how the heck pantyhose are considered both "sexy" AND "modest" as an entire category.

TBH, part of why I DON'T wear pantyhose, and part of why I'm not particularly interested in even looking for any made from better materials, is because they are at least 99.9% of the time advertised as sexy sexy lingerie and modeled by women in highly provocative poses showing 80%+ of their skin.

My own standards of modesty do not permit a sheer fabric to function in place of an opaque one, so if I wouldn't be comfortable somewhere showing my bare legs, I would feel immodest in sheer nylons as well.

I might feel EVEN MORE IMMODEST in sheer nylons than in bare legs, actually --

Because of exactly this.

What man sees heels and pantyhose and DOESN'T conjure up some kind of associated image of some kind of lingerie ensemble? It's emblazoned on the mind's eye of EVERYONE who has been exposed to modern TV, magazines, advertising, etc.

I would love to have an old fashioned pair of silk stockings with the nifty back-seam, but I avoid wearing anything that makes people think about what kind of underwear I might be wearing.

I've been equally exposed to the notion that pantyhose (of any kind, even the very sheer ones) are "necessary for modesty" (which makes no sense to me because they are such a modern contrivance), AND the notion that pantyhose (of any kind, even very opaque stockings) are BASICALLY "fetish wear."

So, grandma will yell at me if I wear a knee-length dress with no pantyhose.

But if I wear the pantyhose with the knee-length dress, guys are going to be staring at my legs like "ooooh pantyhose."

I can't win. So I just don't play.

Knee-high cotton socks for the win.

This is a really interesting point. While my personal modesty preferences are different than yours, I can definitely see where you're coming from. It's crazy how some clothing can become culturally fetishized where there is no rhyme nor reason for it to be.

 

[Elspeth]

I don't know if anyone here said they were "sexy", heck maybe I did inadvertently, I just don't remember reading it. To me, it isn't "sexy" as in some perverted way. It would be "attractive" and "feminine" in that "this woman is very feminine and proud of it. She has a lot of self respect. She is modest but has class and style And if she is single, that is the kind of woman I want to meet and get to know better because those are great qualities in a life time partner.

If I see flip flops, I think "lazy, very entitled, not my likely partner". Then maybe that same woman talks to me and I find my prejudice to be wrong, but it is a prejudice that is innate within me.

If I see lots of skin (unless it is real hot out), tattoos, then my prejudice is "she has low self esteem, low morals, and would not be a good partner". This again could be very far from the truth. But what you wear and how you carry yourself is how people will always prejudge you as a person. Right or wrong, it is human nature.

I also see where you're coming from. Before I got married, I used to wear very comfy, androgynous clothing. It wasn't because I was lazy, however. It was because I worked so hard and that was what was practical for me to wear at the time. When I met my husband, he fell in love with the person that I was (despite his preferences, which weren't the kind of clothing that I wore at the time), and I did him. Because we loved each other, I took great joy in changing up my wardrobe to suit his preferences, since I knew what he liked, yet he never demanded it of me. He also made it possible for me to wear clothing that's generally more impractical for everyday wear (heels, hosiery, etc.), because I no longer had to work hard due to his provision. In fact, he even did the same for me a little with his own wardrobe, haha. What I learned is that environment and/or finances can also play a part in how someone chooses to dress, rather than it simply being about someone's character or personality. The presence of femininity often relies on the presence of masculinity, not the other way around. It's hard to be feminine (vulnerable, gentle, etc.) if a woman has to look out for herself all the time. If a man brings this to the table in any relationship that he pursues, I'm confident that any loving woman would have no problem changing things up for him.

 

[Starlight]

People who pursuit the fashion industry don't do it to dictate what they want women to wear. Celebrities are normal people just like all of us, and they don't wear anything with the intent of trying to tell women what to wear (I know, because my family is in this industry). I'm not sure what the origin is of this belief, but it's not what drives artists to do what they love to do. The fashion industry is only entirely "top-down" if one doesn't want to take part in it and create their own looks (e.g. teenagers on TikTok drive a lot of trends, etc.). That's why I always encourage others to wear what makes them feel good, because how they present themselves may inspire others -- especially if it goes against the grain of what is currently considered "fashionable", since that's how new trends are often created. A lot of ladies here would love to see hosiery become popular again. By wearing it themselves, they are keeping it alive and may inspire someone else to try them out. Regular people have as much influence over fashion (thanks to the internet) as those who do it for a living.

The “90s Grunge” fashion revival feels very inorganic and forced, imo. I took my two oldest daughters to the mall for some new clothes the other day and it was like the stores were just emptying out old warehouses of clothes. In the past, I would take my girls to Abercrombie and Hollister so they could get a few pairs of proper fitting jeans and then a few tees and tops… but now… all their styles are soo weird… Lots of “Lakers” tops which was really weird (every store had “Lakers” tops)… Everything is “ghetto” style… We went to the shoe store and they had a whole bunch of 90’s band shirts for sale (Nirvana, Sublime, Boyz n’ the Hood, etc.)… There was a kid who bought a Nirvana band shirt so I asked if he liked Nirvana… and he said he didn’t know what that was…

 

[Elspeth]

The “90s Grunge” fashion revival feels very inorganic and forced, imo. I took my two oldest daughters to the mall for some new clothes the other day and it was like the stores were just emptying out old warehouses of clothes. In the past, I would take my girls to Abercrombie and Hollister so they could get a few pairs of proper fitting jeans and then a few tees and tops… but now… all their styles are soo weird… Lots of “Lakers” tops which was really weird (every store had “Lakers” tops)… Everything is “ghetto” style… We went to the shoe store and they had a whole bunch of 90’s band shirts for sale (Nirvana, Sublime, Boyz n’ the Hood, etc.)… There was a kid who bought a Nirvana band shirt so I asked if he liked Nirvana… and he said he didn’t know what that was…

Yep, that sounds like teens being teens (I used to wear A&F exclusively as a teen when it was at its height). Fashion has this 20-year rule where stuff that was popular 20 years or so ago will always come back after that amount of time. However, because of fast fashion, that rule has now become 10 years. The stuff that was popular in the 2010's (when I was a teenager) is already back and it's left me so confused. My husband was apart of that original 90's grunge era, and he gets a kick out asking kids what song they like the best from these bands, and they give him the same response that you got, haha.

 

[Starlight]

Yep, that sounds like teens being teens (I used to wear A&F exclusively as a teen when it was at its height). Fashion has this 20-year rule where stuff that was popular 20 years or so ago will always come back after that amount of time. However, because of fast fashion, that rule has now become 10 years. The stuff that was popular in the 2010's (when I was a teenager) is already back and it's left me so confused. My husband was apart of that original 90's grunge era, and he gets a kick out asking kids what song they like the best from these bands, and they give him the same response that you got, haha.

Well, A&F had its height in the 00’s, imo, especially with the teen tv program “The O.C.” That was the height of Cali-Prep lifestyle clothing… interestingly in California, there was also a strong 50’s revival among the White lower class during the same time.

 

[Elspeth]

Well, A&F had its height in the 00’s, imo, especially with the teen tv program “The O.C.” That was the height of Cali-Prep lifestyle clothing… interestingly in California, there was also a strong 50’s revival among the White lower class during the same time.

Yeah, I definitely remember that! I first wore it when I was a young teenager in 2010, but I think A&F started to shift somewhere within the next two years or so. They've completely transformed their whole brand since then. I recently walked into one out of curiosity and I don't even recognize it. I recall that they had some major controversy associated with their old CEO that prompted the brand to have to reinvent themselves.

 

[Starlight]

Yeah, I definitely remember that! I first wore it when I was a young teenager in 2010, but I think A&F started to shift somewhere within the next two years or so. They've completely transformed their whole brand since then. I recently walked into one out of curiosity and I don't even recognize it. I recall that they had some major controversy associated with their old CEO that prompted the brand to have to reinvent themselves.

You wore what? You watched The OC? (Of course you didn’t, you were barely a child)… and wore A&F in 2010? Lol… no offense… I was hoping you might have some insight into why White kids of the late 90s/early 00s might have chosen to dress the that way that they did… why the forgotten, poverty stricken White kids were dressing like they’re from the 50’s. Fashion Magazines don’t print articles on White poverty.

 

[Elspeth]

You wore what? You watched The OC? (Of course you didn’t, you were barely a child)… and wore A&F in 2010? Lol… no offense… I was hoping you might have some insight into why White kids of the late 90s/early 00s might have chosen to dress the that way that they did… why the forgotten, poverty stricken White kids were dressing like they’re from the 50’s. Fashion Magazines don’t print articles on White poverty.

I wore A&F. And no, unfortunately, I've been driving longer now than I had been walking then, haha. I know the general gist of trends, pieces, and designers that have risen and fallen since 1960, but not any specific, cultural insight that might be related to most of them pre-2014.

I didn't know that poverty-stricken, white kids were specifically gravitating towards 1950's fashion at that time. Maybe 50's inspired clothing was easy to find in thrift stores then, since a lot of 80's fashion was inspired by that era? I remember when I first shopped at Forever 21 when I was a young child, and 80's fashion was really popular then.

 

[Atlas Shrugged]

Can’t stand pantyhose but I love tights.

 

[Max Roscoe]

I had no clue women weren't wearing pantyhose anymore, other than American women are wearing less classy dresses and more frumpy baggy cargo pants and t shirts, where pantyhose are not part of the attire.

I think the lesson is, wear what you want*. Guys simply don't pay that much attention.

I think wearing hose would present a very positive impression, even if I didn't remember or notice that the woman was specifically wearing them I would recall, wow she really looked sharp and well put-together. It's like a nice piece of jewelry or a tie or something. It's supposed to be an accent that makes you look sharp, but I doubt anyone remembers what color tie I wore after seeing me in a suit.

* That doesn't mean wear frumpy baggy clothes, unless you want zero attention from men and low respect from others in society. It just means people aren't paying such specific notice to your appearance as you probably think they are, especially men! So wear a nice, respectable outfit, if you like it, even if it's not considered trendy or cool. I couldn't even tell you what fashion trends are, and anyway they are mostly designed by jewish homosexuals in NYC and Paris an normal people are not clued into that scene.

I wonder if hosiery is/was more popular in rural areas?

 

[Pray_Everyday]

I like wearing tights, but don't think I've ever worn pantyhose... I guess I never really thought about if there's a difference? I prefer white, black or even fun colors to flesh tone, so that may be it.

When it's extra cold I like wearing those tight gym pants underneath ankle length skirts. I had a whole collection from years ago (and find them incredibly immodest on their own), so rather than toss them out I use them to keep warm under long skirts. When doing outdoors stuff like light hiking I also like to wear those kinds of pants under a knee length skirt or dress for modesty.