BS: Oh Knickers!!!

Subject: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bert
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:29 PM

Queen Victoria's

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Sorcha
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:31 PM

BERT! You bad boy! LOLOLOLOL!

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Rapparee
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 06:10 PM

Victoria's secret, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: MarkS
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 06:16 PM

Nuts to the knickers, tell us more about the model!

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Emma B
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 06:22 PM

I may be one of the few people who has had the dubious pleasure of handling a pair of Vicky's drawers.

A few years back I did an evening course at a city museum on the history of clothing and textiles.
They had a wide range of historical clothing in their archives which we were allowed access to - some of it was 'wider' than others and I can assure you the 50inch waist is no exaggeration and she was under 5foot tall too!

I was rather hoping a friend in Derbyshire, currently looking for a replacement tent, might have been in the bidding :)

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bee
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 06:45 PM

The sixty-six inch bust is a bit of an eyepopper, as well. Too bad there's no photo of the chemise.

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Sorcha
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 07:14 PM

Oh dear oh dear oh dear...I'm helpless here!

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: topical tom
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 07:26 PM

Zounds! No baby bloomer, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 07:34 PM

£4500 huh? If I had that kind of money, I'd get a smaller size....filled.

I guess there's no accounting for taste.

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: frogprince
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 08:44 PM

I had just copied the new site address to clicky to it myself. I'm sure there are plenty of websites where a guy can get a used pair of panties for a lot less, if you're into that sort of thing. I don't suppose you would get nearly as much fabric for your money from most of those, though...

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bee
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 08:44 PM

Now, Bill, a lot depends on the woman.

When I was in college, I knew a young woman who was under five feet tall and proportioned much like the Venus of Willendorf, with a smaller waist and a more prominent behind. She had waist length luxuriant waving black hair, smouldering dark eyes, tiny hands and feet, a beautiful face. Unable to buy any clothing to fit her proportions, she solved the problem by sewing her own, in rich glowing printed Indian cottons, and not your flowing muumuus, either. She made her dresses to lightly hug her flagrantly female figure and exaggerate her proportionally narrow middle. That young lady attracted hordes of young men. She practically personified female sensuality. One young man I knew said of her once, with considerable admiration, that she could make a featherbed look uncomfortable.

Perhaps Vicki was a bit like that, in her day. ;-D

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 09:52 PM

Wasn't it Vicki who said "I close my eyes and think of Englnd"? Doesn't sound much like she "practically personified female sensuality." *grin*

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Emma B
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 10:03 PM

If this is personified female sexuality the human race has problems.

However ......all may not be as it seems

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: topical tom
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:21 PM

Talk about a royal cover-up!

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:56 PM

I'm a little bemused at the photo in the first link... if it's an article about a pair of HRH's pants, why can we only see a pair of tits - and for once I'm not talking about the feathered variety!

As for personified female sexuality - you are judging by modern standards, where slenderness and outwardly visible, stereotyped views of 'beauty' are the desired "norm".


A hundred years ago, women were judged more on their abilities to bear, rear and nurture children, survive lean winters and organise households. How many fertility symbols from any culture or continent can you think of that depicts a skinny female? I'll bet there aren't many.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bee
Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:59 PM

Emma, indeed - and if you Google images of young Queen Victoria, you'll find she didn't always look like that.

It wasn't Victoria who said "Lie back and think of England", but another woman, Lady Something. I looked that up recently and already forget who it is.

She didn't say "We are not amused", either. She unexpectedly encountered a group in the palace, one of whom was making fun of her, and what she is reported to have actually said is "We are not a Muse."

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bert
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 12:32 AM

The "Lie back" remark is usually attributed to Lady Astor.

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Big Mick
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 12:36 AM

The young, and rather attractive, Queen Victoria

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: catspaw49
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 02:17 AM

Are her original skidmarks included?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Paul Burke
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 03:08 AM

Queen Victiria did not have skidmarks. Being Royal, she did not have a botttom, or indeed any naughty bits. Such unspeakable functions were delegated to flunkeys.

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Michael
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 04:31 AM

Hence the phrase "Flunk off" ?

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: theleveller
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 06:47 AM

I wish someone would buy the entire royal family and take them away.

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Cats
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 07:05 AM

They are no good to me, too small!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Rapparee
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 09:02 AM

Well, I don't want 'em. Talk about your high-maintenance pets!

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 11:02 AM

Spaw, go back and read the description. They're the crotchless variety. Split legs, joined at the waist.

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bee
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 11:07 AM

Very convenient bloomer design, I must say. (Wonders about Grandma's long bloomers now, the ones which so embarassed my little brother when Grandma would bend over to pick something up...)

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Emma B
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 11:15 AM

More information
(than you probably ever wanted to know) on Victorian Open Drawers

and an order form for your very own pair! - don't know if they do a size 50" waist though

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bee
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 12:25 PM

At their prices, if I wanted some I'd make 'em myself. I have a little experience in making patterns, and those would be really easy to construct.

Gotta say, there's times when I'm camping at night with no toilet facilities but the woods I'd be really happy with a set of crotchless bloomers!

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Mo the caller
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 04:36 PM

Liz, they couldn't put a picture of a model wearing knickers on a respectable news item could they. But click it, you get a page of pictures, click again, bingo.

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: PoppaGator
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 06:26 PM

Why is the subject of the article ~ the undergarment ~ cropped out of the photo? We see the model, and just enough of the top of the garment's waistband to recognize that it's white and very wide.

I particularly enjoyed the information that these enormous panties are of the "crotchless" variety...

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Bert
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 06:29 PM

Oh Granny's red drawers
Oh Granny's red drawers
There's a hole in the middle
so Granny can piddle
Oh Granny's red drawers

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: katlaughing
Date: 31 Jul 08 - 10:41 PM

Those crotchless ones came in handy for doctors of that era, too: Scroll Down!

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: JennieG
Date: 01 Aug 08 - 03:10 AM

Open drawers were also known as "free traders".....for obvious reasons!

Cheers
JennieG

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Rapparee
Date: 01 Aug 08 - 10:02 AM

The Army (and even today the Marines) used to wave a red flag nicknamed "Maggie's Drawers" to indicate a complete miss of the target on the rifle range.

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Micca
Date: 01 Aug 08 - 10:13 AM

Rapaire, I wonder if that was from a fairly obscene song I have a vague recollection of that seemed to be known in the services (British) in or about the 60s?

" They were tattered they were torn
round the a***hole they were worn
those old red flannel drawers
That Maggie wore

They were stained with Gin and beer
the were split from there to here
those old red flannel drawers
that Maggie wore"

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: Rapparee
Date: 01 Aug 08 - 10:19 AM

Could be. I think that the name of the flag goes way, way back, probably to about the 1880s which is when the US Army started putting an emphasis on marksmanship for the troops. Heck, the original might have been an actual pair of drawers but I rather suspect that it was not and the name was given to it by the troops.

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: PoppaGator
Date: 01 Aug 08 - 12:10 PM

Great link, there, Kat!

Didn't those women back then realize that their husbands and/or boyfriends could have provided the same kind of digital stimulation, and probably wouldn't ask for payment either?

I suppose that the art of fingerf***ing was one of the world's best-kept secrets if the medical professions was able to keep it to themselves ~ and get paid for it to boot! I suppose this made medical-school tuition seem like a bargain to prospective doctors...

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: katlaughing
Date: 01 Aug 08 - 02:40 PM

I don't think wimmin were supposed to want such things, Poppa, so how could they ask their husbands to participate?!*bg* Mind you, the husbands has no problem getting themselves taken care of, but, again, polite company probably kept them from asking their wives to do anything other than baby-making missionary!

Subject: RE: BS: Oh Knickers!!!
From: PoppaGator
Date: 01 Aug 08 - 05:05 PM

"I don't think wimmin were supposed to want such things, "

...but they were assumed to need it, but only from an appropriately licensed professional. Probably weren't supposed to enjoy it, either.

However, judging by some of what we've just been told about Victoria, those "Victorian" prohibitions apparently did not apply to royalty as strictly as to everyone else...