It’s been a steamy weekend over at the Heart, Mind, and Strength blog. Woodeene posted a little blurb about some lace-making grannies in Poland who’ve switched from making altar cloths to more profitable undergarments, namely thongs. From there it descended to a wholesale discussion of women’s undergarments and modesty, with Kevin “Tightey Whitey” Miller charging that even if you can’t see the thong, it’s still immodest to wear it because it’s primary purpose is to induce lust.
Interestingly, the women of HMS Blog (particularly Woodene Koenig-Bricker and Sandra Miesel) express a bit of bemusement because they know that women wear certain kinds of underwear that some men might find “interesting” but for completely practical reasons.
But then Kevin gives us his “bottom” line. Ha, ha! I get it!
Whew! So did HMS Blog get bought out by Fox and turned into a new reality show or something?
When a friend wrote to me last night and said, “You realize that Kevin Miller is arguing with people about underwear over at HMS Blog,” I said, “Sweet mother of Schadenfreude, let’s get over there!” Truly, you could not hope for a more satisfying eructation from Prof. Miller, one more characteristic of his approach to practical theology. I felt like Ignatius Reilly in the Prytania as I read it. It was truly an occasion of unconfined joy.
And I wish to take credit for coining the new nickname for the Perfesser. I no longer call him Niedermeyer; I christen him Tighty Whitey.
As another friend e-mailed, “If you went out on the veranda and remarked, ‘It’s a lovely spring day,’ Kevin Miller would correct you by citing the proper lines of the catechism that instructed us that every day was a gift from God, regardless.
Odd. I pretty much agree with the women there. Yeah, some women get thongs for inducing lust, but then some Victorian women used to flash a little bit of ankle now and then… doesn’t mean stockings were inherently lust-inducing.
The women I know who wear thongs were wearing them long before the low-rider trend (and besides, they wouldn’t have fit in pants that tight). All of them claimed the thongs were more comfortable than regular bikini underwear, but that’s a matter of taste. I like a bit of coverage, even if it might result in lust-inducing pantylines (and you don’t need tight pants for that… just an ample fundament and walking up stairs generally does the trick.)
And I remember plenty of teens flashing the waistbands of their Calvin Klein non-thong underwear (come to think of it, it was =guys= doing that…)
Anyway, any item can be used lustfully. Eyeglasses, earrings, shoes, stockings… whatever.
I say bring back the codpieces!
There’s a gap between people of different ages and cultures regarding what boundaries exist between modest and immodest. Think about turn-of-the-prior-century women’s bathing suits as a definition of modesty.
In olden days, a glimpse of stocking
was looked on as something shocking.
Now heaven knows, anything goes.
Good authors too who once knew better words,
now only use fourletter words writing prose,
anything goes.
The world has gone mad today,
and good%23109082934511833844″>http://old-oligarch.blogspot.com/2004_07_01_old-oligarch_archive.html#109082934511833844
Does this mean I can say “arse” on this blog whenever I want. (But … Dom … HMS does it!!!!)