i'm thinking with all the new high-waisted pants, high-waisted unders may become a necessity.
(the loved one + fortnightlingerie via fieldguided)
but.... are they actually sexy? do we care??
this $170 pair by agent provocateur doesn't suck.
also: these silk-satin shorts are meant solely for lounging, but were "tap pants" originally invented to avoid panty lines when wearing a skirt? i think that's pretty genius.
woolandmisc gets the credit for this post. I had no idea how to wrap up pants week until she said "Take them off."
they accentuate the waistline and eliminate muffin top. if you ask me, that's pretty sexy.
ReplyDeleteabove-the-belly-button underpants make me want to barf (see pic #1)
ReplyDeletethe rest are okay though
@nikki: I concur. Though I'm also an avid fan of boyshorts. Anything else is just too ... wedgie inducing.
ReplyDeleteI always thought there was something sexy about them, but then I looked at pic #1 and realized they kind of give you a gunt.
ReplyDeleteThey seem to have a sexy, old Hollywood vibe to me, but I'm not sure that I would actually feel sexy in them. I think I would feel like a granny.
ReplyDeleteno, cookies.
ReplyDeleteHmmmm ... I have one pair of 1940s esque black ones that actually just off brand spanx purchased in a moment of desperation. And actually, I like them.
ReplyDeleteBut, in general, not a fan. I think that AP pair makes the model look bulgy, which makes me wonder what havoc it would wreak on me.
I have one pair and love them (and so does my man). They are quite the opposite of wedgie-inducing: full cut across the bottom means they are not creeping up. And yes to what Celia wrote about muffin top.
ReplyDeleteWhere you at, Rob?
ReplyDeleteLOVE THESE ! if only i had itty bitty titties. :-(
ReplyDeleteI was TRYING to stay away from this one. But if you really want to know, here I am. I'm trying to go about this as objectively and as helpfully as possible.
ReplyDeleteI think they're terrible. Although, I do agree that if they help muffin top that is a good thing. Not much is less sexy than muffin top. I do like the idea of the lounging shorts, I think those could be fun.
Keep in mind I'm a single guy. If I had a lady, that I was emotionally attached too, this opinion could be very different.
But, I'm sure you ladies would look fabulous in them, obvs. Can I be finished now, please?
OF COURSE they're sexy. (hello, pin-ups!) :) Listen up! I've got a full, fun, sexy body, and itty bitty tiny things just do not even come close to showing off my assets.
ReplyDeleteKnow what is not sexy? Anything ill-fitting, of course.
@Rob you're such a sweetie
ReplyDeleteone could argue if you feel sexy in these, you could probably pursuade someone seeing you in them to believe you
ReplyDelete(but I would feel like a big fat granny)
you know, i feel strongly enough about this that i'm coming back. i don't care how you're shaped, team; if your underwear is giving you muffin top, your problem is sizing, not cut. a well-designed pair of seamless panties in a modern cut stands a much better chance of being comfortable and flattering beneath most clothing than a wildly impractical, pinup-style pair of high-waisted panties does. as for the style angle, every last one of the models pictured would look better in something else. if you're feeling retro, ladies, whip out a phonograph and some edith piaf (and find some lingerie which is sexy without the crutch of nostalgia).
ReplyDeleteDo love that my undies are vomit inducing! hehe.
ReplyDeleteHigh undies for sure, so long as they are above the belly button.
This is just a boy-pretty versus girl-pretty. It's a tricky one...like rompers.
ReplyDelete