AlexaFaie's World of Corsetry @alexafaie - Tumblr Blog

I've been invited to create a community...

So I'm thinking that I will do so for corsetry but I am not sure whether to make it a public community or a private one.

There are pros and cons to both.

For a public community, anyone could view the posts, but only members can interact with them and see the members list. This could be a good option if people would like the focus to be help and advice based as it would allow people to learn something about corsetry without having to be a member. However based on how public groups regarding corsetry have gone elsewhere, can attract people just wanting to oggle.

The private option would allow posts to stay private within the community so that it could be more comfortable for people to share photos of themselves for fit advice or just to show off a corseted outfit. However any info/advice wouldn't be visible to newbies who haven't joined so from a sharing knowledge standpoint it might not be as preferable.

I would love to get some feedback on what people would prefer. I have experience running/being admin/moderator on several corset communities across various sites (I was mod, then admin of the VampireFreaks Corset Cult when VF still existed, admin in 3 groups on Facebook related to corsetry and help out whenever possible on r/corsets, r/tightlacing & r/corsetry over on reddit). So that side of things shouldn't be too tricky.

Its just that if you make a community private, it can't later be made public so I really need to pick which when I make it. People will have to message me so I can send them invites whichever option I go with as there isn't currently another way to request to join communities - you have to be invited.

So which would you prefer?

Public, so it can help everyone

Private, so photos can be shared with greater comfort

Voting ended onMay 31, 2024

alexafaie

4 days left on the poll & no responses yet.

#corset #corsets #corsetry #corset community #real corsets real people #realcorsetsrealpeople

I've been invited to create a community...

So I'm thinking that I will do so for corsetry but I am not sure whether to make it a public community or a private one.

There are pros and cons to both.

So which would you prefer?

Public, so it can help everyone

Private, so photos can be shared with greater comfort

Voting ended onMay 31, 2024

#corset #corsets #corsetry #corset community #real corsets real people #realcorsetsrealpeople

fashionindetail

Early machine-made corset, c1886. On display at Harborough Museum.

Made from a black sateen-type cloth known an ‘lasting’ and lined with white cotton twill. Finished with attractive gold stitching with decorative hand-stitching at the top and bottom. Narrow gold ribbon is also slotted through the black lace trimming at the top front. One of the earliest commercial corsets.

This lace edging forms the main decoration on the corset. The ribbon threaded through the lace picks up the bold yellow of the reinforcing stitches at the top of the corsets boning.

#corset #historical corset #1880s corset #antique corset #corsetry

fashionsfromhistory

Dress

House of Worth

1907-1909

Manchester City Galleries

alexafaie

I have such a strong need to have a reproduction of this dress made for me. Its my favourite shade of green & the silhouette is lovely too.

sailorsally

How expensive is the most expensive piece of clothing you own?

under $50

$50-100

$100-200

$200 - 500

$500 - 800

$800 - 1500

$1500+

Voting ended onJan 28, 2024

blanketforcas

people who found this poll:

jensen and misha

and lesbians

fittingoutjane

Hmm. I have a few things that were gifts or inherited that might, possibly, be more valuable than anything I have paid for. Not sure how to rate those.

alexafaie

I have a few corsets that fit in around the $500-$800 mark when converted from £GBP.

They were custom made to my measurements though by one person (or multiple single people as I've ordered some from different corsetieres). So I was supporting small businesses not big brands using sweatshops.

That's not because I am rich or anything. One was purchased during a manic episode with the money my grandpa had sent me to help cover rent that month as I was otherwise at the bottom of my overdraft. So ummm... many were the result of not the best financial planning or using overdraft funds.

Weirdly I've not had a custom corset since getting out of my overdraft and actually having some money I could spend. Not that I get much - only PIP so it would cost me multiple months of disability benefit to get one. It may also be down to being mentally stable taking cbd oil - I'm not making spur of the moment decisions as a result of hypomania or full blown mania anymore. Not that I don't want more or anything, I'm just able to be more sensible now.

annalandin

There's a new swarm of totally real ladies with empty blogs following me, and I'm blocking and reporting them left and right. If you are an actual human person with a brand new account trying to follow me, I urge you to please post *anything at all* on your blog so that when I go to check who the heck you are, I can tell you aren't just a bot-encrusted void. Just a simple "hello this is my lurker account I use to follow people" is enough.

annalandin

*taps sign* I am once again being haunted by ladies of questionable reality, as well as a lot of blank blogs without a custom avatar. If you are a recent arrival from the ex-parrot site with a brand new tumblr blog, I am asking you to please post ANYTHING at all on your blog, even if you're only going to lurk passively to follow people. Otherwise, you look just like the dozens of bots I've blocked this week.

alexafaie

Posting this to my main as I've been getting a lot of follows from what look like bots. I've been reporting and blocking them all.

I doubt they're following me for the corsetry content I've not updated in years so...

If you're real and interested in following me, I need to see something that makes you look real. Weirdly I'm one of very few people on tumblr who use a photo of themselves but given its one from 2014 I feel like it barely counts anymore. So if you're a real person using a photo of yourself you'd happily use on instagram or facebook, then here you will look like a bot. Pick something fandom related instead. Most people here choose to be fully anonymous. Add a description to your blog, and maybe post something, even if its just a "new blog! Hello!" kind of post. Only then follow people. Otherwise you'll have a very sad time getting blocked from blogs you're interested in following and reported which could get you deleted.

lookingbackatfashionhistory

• Corset.

Date : 1868-1874

Medium: Silk, baleen & cotton

marzipanandminutiae

The Snark Is Real This Morning

Oh no! Some patriarchal shill just had an Illegal Corset Thought on the Internet!

Maybe they said "corsets weren't invented by the patriarchy" or "comfort was actually often a prime concern for most women's day-to-day corset-wearing, as evidenced by mid-late 19th century advertising" or "women didn't go around fainting constantly because most of them didn't tightlace most of the time."

Maybe they brought up "survivorship bias in extant clothing" or "rampant photo doctoring in the 19th/early 20th century" or "treating satirical cartoons and fashion plates as gospel" or "museums displaying corsets laced entirely closed when wear patterns and primary sources indicate that lacing gaps were more common in many times and places" These concepts are actually conspiracies invented by Big Misogyny to sell more booze to depressed history workers!

Maybe one of them said that she'd worn corsets, or even that she and/or her friends actually found them more comfortable than bras! Clearly she believes this is representative of all women throughout history and in the present day. Besides, she is suffering from Femininity Poisoning and nothing coming out of her silly, weak little brain can be taken seriously. Remember, it is Peak Feminism to dismiss what a woman says because of her gender presentation!

Don't be fooled! All of these statements mean one thing: they are saying that corsets were and are, always and forever, universally feminist and empowering. That no woman in the past ever found them uncomfortable, and that GNC women didn't exist before 1960 and also are icky. Did they actually say that? Doesn't matter! You know what she Really Meant- you've seen P*rates of the Caribbean and Br*dgerton! Corsets were always torture devices meant to oppress women, and any statement contradicting that clearly means the extreme opposite.

So what's a right-thinking and concerned Internet Citizen to do? You have a few options:

See point above re: femininity. Feminine-presenting women are basically brainless, so if a woman talking about dress history Wears An Skirt, you can just write off whatever she says. Easy peasy! Be sure to say something derogatory about her appearance, so others know why they shouldn't take her seriously.

Accuse them of not knowing their history. Any degrees, professional experience, publications, academic accolades, etc. they may have are irrelevant. Their primary sources are...idk photoshopped or something? Best to ignore them altogether. You have Feelings on your side, and that's far more valuable than any research!

Accuse them of accusing you of being a t*rf. Works especially well if they've said anything about the preponderance of t*rfs expressing your True and Correct views- that just means they're calling everyone who thinks like you a transphobe, duh!

Tell them they're not believing women. If they have cited so-called "realities of historical women's lives," well, that's clearly just the rich elite of any given era (who were also brainrotted by Femininity, natch). If you're a woman, and you say corsets were the spawn of Beelzebub, that should be enough ~evidence~ for anyone!

Appeal to common knowledge. Everyone KNOWS corsets were evil; can they really be DEFENDING a KNOWN HATEFUL OPPRESSIVE HELL-GARMENT?! What is the world coming to! If they ask how exactly everyone knows that and where that collective belief comes from, reply with a snarky GIF and block them. There's just no reasoning with some people.

Call them a tradwife. Are they a tradwife? Irrelevant.

With all these tools in your arsenal, you are now well-equipped to fight the horde of vile corset apologists online. Remember: It's Only Real Oppression If The Oppressed Group Is Miserable 24/7!

fittingoutjane

An active young girl, putting on a corset for the first time, may have found it confining. 25 years later, with large saggy breasts and chronic back pain after bearing several children, she’d probably be more comfortable with the corset on, especially when standing or carrying things.

Different people had different experiences, yo. And corsets did serve a practical purpose.

alexafaie

Along with this I'm so fed up of the people who are trying to middle ground the "corsets are only ever tools of oppression" people by saying:

"women didn't go around fainting constantly because most of them didn't tightlace most of the time."

They're still pandering to people who assume that corset wearing causes fainting. I've tightlaced past the point most women would've worn their corsets at back in the day. I've worn corsets at close to a 6" reduction just fine. Never once have I fainted whilst wearing a corset, regardless of how tight I've laced myself.

But its not some "oh well you must just not be prone to fainting" thing. Ever since I got labyrinthitis in my late teens & fainted in the heat of the kitchen, I've actually been very prone to fainting. I was already somewhat prone due to POTS, but now that's much worse. If I stand up too quick, or have been stood up mostly stationary for longer than 20 mins, chances are I will faint. But if I'm wearing a corset? I don't even get the dizziness on standing bit. It increases and stabilises my blood pressure just enough to prevent my usual ease with which I faint. So the exact opposite of what people assume happens.

And I mean, even Cathy Jung who has the Guinness world record for smallest corseted waist on a living person at 15" and wears her corsets for 23 hours per day (which is longer wear than most Victorian people wore) doesn't experience fainting. And neither did Ethel Granger who had the world record when she was alive of a 13" waist. She even wore corsets through pregnancy (designed to allow her lower stomach to expand, but still keeping her waist quite small) and only stopped wearing them for like the last month. Then straight back to lacing up tight again after. Even she didn't experience fainting and she was tightlacing down to what is likely the smallest its actually possible to lace to given the size of the spine and the nerves, muscles and parts of organs which would have to fit through the waist region of the corset.

Both women were/are reducing their natural starting waist sizes by a whopping percentage. Ethel, whilst she got down smaller than Cathie, started with a smaller natural waist measurement (23") and so ended with a 56.6% reduction on her starting size. Cathie has a 60% reduction having started at 25".

To put that in perspective, let's say a Victorian middle aged woman had a natural waist measurement of 34" and wore a corset with a 4" reduction down to 30". That would be only an 11.8% (to one decimal place) reduction. What about a younger Victorian woman with a natural 26" waist working as a maid and only wanting a tiny reduction of 2" to provide support? Well that's a 7.7% (to 1dp) reduction. If you were interested in what a 2" reduction would be like for that previous 34" waist, that's a 5.9% (to 1dp) reduction. So less extreme than for the smaller woman.

Fun fact that its possible for a garment with an elasticated waistband to reduce your waist by up to about 2" without you even thinking you're having any reduction. You don't see people complaining about their leggings causing them to faint now do you?

lookingbackatfashionhistory

• Woman's Corset and Shoulder Braces.

Date: 1890's

Designer/Maker: Probably Made by Williamson Corset and Brace Co., Saint Louis

Medium: Black and off-white cotton sateen, brown cotton lace, brown cotton twill, yellow silk thread, black and brown cotton/elastic.

Hi! This is sort of a silly question but I was wondering if people ever stuck stuff in their corsets like how people today stick stuff in their bras (for storage, like your phone/pen/wallet)? Or did they not have to because they had actual functional pockets?

The simple answer to this is probably a "yes" since there's such a wide variety of people & situations that someone, somewhen could have done that, even if it weren't commonplace.

The more complicated answer would be that it would likely depend on the era in question, the social status of the individual wearing the corset, and a whole host of other factors.

If we were talking about the stays of the 18th century, then those were commonly worn as part of the outer garb - often with sleeves attached by ribbons to the straps. So one could quite easily put something in the top to hold it. However, pockets were worn by pretty much everyone who wore a dress, so for the most part you'd just use those.

Those are extant examples of some pockets. They would be tied around the waist, or pinned to an underskirt, and were accessed through a slit in the outerskirt. If you've ever heard the term "cutpurse" for a thief, this is where it came from - they would literally be cutting the purse (pocket) strings to get at them.

When panniers were worn under the dresses, it was also common to just carry stuff in the panniers!

A working individual would also wear an apron on top of their clothes and it very easy to just tuck the ends of the apron up into the waistband to create an impromptu large bag.

As for the stays, we know that the busks were removable and would sometimes be given as tokens of affection:

Sometimes they had messages carved into them too. They were inserted in a little pocket in the front of the stays to keep the straight flat line. We do know that people would sometimes include written notes on paper in there too. Perfect place to hide a love letter from a secret admirer.

If we're talking about Victorian era corsetry, then things get more complicated. The necklines of day dresses were higher, and the corsets fully hidden so it wouldn't be as practical to just tuck something in as you'd go about your day. Pockets were becoming something which were sewn directly into the skirts themselves, handbags were becoming more common. And for small items, there was the chatelaine. I absolutely adore chatelaines!

They were also worn in earlier eras (and there were similar items worn by Vikings), but they became very fashionable during the Victorian era as a sort of status symbol. The fancier they were, the better kind of thing.

Though they were also worn by housekeepers:

The following was a chatelaine purchased by Queen Victoria in 1849:

So that's where you'd keep your pen, or if you were Queen Victoria, your *checks notes* miniature dagger (probably a letter opener) and pokey pointy stick. Mustn't forget your acorn!

There's bound to have been poorer people, perhaps prostitutes who might shove things in the top of their corset if visible. And someone is bound to have put something there momentarily whilst dressing.

But certainly not undoing your dress to shove something in whilst in the streets/out shopping or something.

Fun fact: I've never actually put anything in my bra (phone, pen, wallet) because one it would be uncomfortable, and two, my bras have always been very full of breasts! There's never been the spare space. I just use a handbag. My phone is a Nokia 3220, my wallet is actually quite chunky, and so when you add on things like an umbrella in case it rains (needed here) its just easier to have a bag.

sauntervaguelydown

genuinely, we should bring back bumppads and other bits of padding to get a fun fashion silhouette in our clothing. Forget all this stuff about "flattering your natural body type" or "getting the perfect body" or whatever. Let's just put some fake ass and thighs into the skirt and call it a day.

nonasuch

I mean, this is the thing. For a large chunk of human history, nobody thought your actual human body was supposed to be shaped like the currently fashionable silhouette.

Like, a given person’s ability to meet the standards of fashion was very much tied to wealth and class, but the standard was “be able to strap on the various foundation garments required to fill out the dress, which is ideally made from as much expensive fabric as you can possibly afford.”

A lot of people today talk about stays and corsets as instruments of torture, but they don’t seem to notice that we absolutely do still have a fashionable silhouette that changes cyclically. It’s just that now, if the clothes don’t fit you right, the problem is not your lack of crinoline/bum roll/sleeve supports/bustle/bust improver/whatever — it’s just you. Your body is the thing you’re supposed to change.

And, frankly: fuck that.

alexafaie

Valerie Steele discuses it in her book The Corset: A Cultural History as never actually having got rid of the corset, its just we internalised it & made it all about shaping the body through extreme diet, extreme exercise and plastic surgery.

And I honestly think that's much more damaging to one's mind than padding the shit out of your figure to get this season's wacky shape.

And the thing is that some version of the fashionable silhouette was available for everyone. There were free patterns included in magazines so you could make your own stuff if poorer. The Pretty Housemaid corset was designed specifically for housemaids who would be stooping a lot (like to lay fires). It had an extra busk to help prevent the main one from bending out of shape & breaking. To keep the price point low it was stiffened mostly with lengths of rolled up paper! (Instead of fabric cording or using whalebone or steel). It was available in both standard sizes and to order, so even servants could get something better fitted if needed.

Everyone's clothes were tailored to fit them, even if the clothes were hand me downs from an elder sibling altered to fit, or bought cheaply from the equivalent of a thrift store. They'd often be dresses way out of fashion, but it was common to rework a dress to suit the new silhouette.

It was a completely different mindset of how to approach clothing the body & how to conceptualise the body. Women were always doing it wrong though according to the men. They were so very against corsets on women as they were "vanity" and "against nature"🤦‍♀️ I so hate that people think it was men forcing corsets on women & so have stigmatised an important foundation garment (way better than a bra for bust support plus free back support thrown in -win win). Like most people only laced down by about 2". They might buy a corset 4" smaller, but this was usually to leave a gap between the lacing. 2" reduction is achievable for me immediately on lacing up even when I haven't done so for months. Though I have easily laced down to 4" reduction without much effort & have owned corsets with a 6" reduction if fully shut (never wore them fully shut though as I didn't train long enough). I'm a natural hourglass and my waist seems to handle being squished fairly easily though. But most people only laced down enough to account for the bulk of the clothing being worn on top of the corset and underwear (chemise under corset always). Just enough to stop the corset shifting up and down on you.

If you've worn elasticated waist trousers of any kind then you've likely already experienced up to a 2" reduction without really realising it. Though its way less comfortable than a corsets as elastic keeps working its way tighter. Corsets stay put at what you lace them to & the body can reach a pressure equilibrium. It legit feels like a comforting hug. If you're a fan of deep pressure therapy you'll likely love wearing a corset.

Anyway, I've gone off on one & really need to sleep since its gone 3am (ooops),

thebibliosphere

I’ve been looking more and more into investing in a custom corset to see if it’ll help with my back pain. I had a custom leather one made years ago when I was going through my steampunk burlesque phase, as well as my wedding corset and a few other off the rack ones, but that was over a decade ago and my size has changed a lot since then. So I’m no stranger to the world of corsets. I’m just new to getting one made here in the US.

And twice now I’ve run into the same problem where I explain what I want (bust support with minimal compression of my lower abdomen due to medical issues) and I get told the same thing. “Oh, but that shape won’t slim your waist” and like… bestie, I don’t want to slim my waist down. I want support for my 34EE/F tits before my back breaks and a bra strap subluxates both my shoulders again.

I’m this close to taking a risk on a $300 purchase on an off-the-rack (heh) option if it’ll let me avoid human interaction 😖

alexafaie

Have you tried the Timeless Trends overbusts? They won't be as good as custom, but if your measurements work ok with them then it will certainly be cheaper than $300. There's benefits to both their overbust styles so it really depends on your measurements which might be best. The hourglass version has bust ties in addition to 3 bust sizes per waist size (can fit up to a US J cup), but fixed hips so your hip measurement would be the limiting factor in picking a size. The slim version isn't cut as curvy through the waist and features hip ties which could allow you to adjust the pressure lower down without compromising the bust support, but the bust area is fixed to 3 sizes per waist size with no bust ties, so will be less adjustable there.

I recommend checking out Lucy's Corsetry as her shop pages have better measurement info than Timeless Trends own website and she's great at offering advice if you drop her an email via her website form. She won't push you to get something she offers if it won't work for you & will advise somewhere else.

She also has a database of custom makers so you could try some of those if you haven't already. Since you mention a medical reason not to have lower abdominal compression you'll probably have better luck going to someone who offers medical corsetry since they tend to be much more understanding of different needs. Like Dark Garden will not treat you weird for wanting what you need, they make medical corsets for all kinds of things, but they are quite pricey (one of the most expensive but they pay their staff well above living wage so it balances out if you can afford it).

You might also have more luck going for something by a corsetiere who primarily makes historical replicas since they tend to focus on corsets as support garments (like originally intended) rather than for tightlacing purposes so they likely won't make comment on you wanting little to no reduction.

I'm also happy to help more if needed if you want. And I'd be interested to know which corsetieres gave you that response because I will make sure not to recommend them to people who are after similar to what you need. It was not an appropriate response to give in the slightest!

youre missing the point, bisexuality has and always will include trans and non binary people

No I am not missing the point because I did not say that it excluded them! Nor am I against anyone else using it as a term (see my previous post responding to another ask on the same subject).

I said that for me personally I am not comfortable with using bi- as a prefix for my own sexuality given that the prefix bi- means two (2). And only two. Bicycle, bipedal, bivalve, bicuspid etc etc etc all use the prefix meaning two. I wouldn't use bicycle to refer to a tricycle just because it has "two or more" wheels. I wouldn't use bipedal to refer to an animal which is a quadruped even though it does technically on two feet (4 total).

Its purely a semantic issue I have with the word using the prefix bi-. If the word wasn't like that I'd have no issue using it for myself, but it just makes me uncomfortable to use it from a grammatical point of view. I much prefer to just use queer or pansexual for myself because they don't give me a headache.

And I have the exact same visceral reaction to the term "quad bike" which uses the short form of bicycle even though a quad bike is not four bicycles stuck together (so 8 wheels total) but is just a 4 wheeled vehicle. Like it just bugs me immensely and way more than it probably should do. But bug me it does. Probably my autistic brain being its usual awkward self.

Ultimately, one should always feel comfortable with the term(s) used for ones gender and sexuality. Given that the prefix bi- bugs me on such a level when used to mean not "two", but "two or more", its not a very good match for me. It doesn't make me happy or comfortable to use it for myself. So I don't use it. Using queer and pansexual and also maverique (my gender identity) *do* make me happy though. And I had to fight long & hard to get to a point where I could say something makes me feel happy. I have bipolar disorder, plus cPTSD from childhood trauma so its been a loooooonnnngggg road to get me to this point & I've Marie Kondo-ed the terms I use to refer to myself.

But I'm not about to exclude others from using it or ignore what others use it to mean.

#delete later

Mystic City Corsets have released a new version of the MCC35 (MCC35-S to denote the sweetheart top shape after they released a longer version) and I think I might have to have it.

I can't seem to help myself when there's a pretty new corset in a pattern which works for my proportions.

Do I need another new corset? No, not really. I've worn the most recent one I bought only a few times since I got it.

Am I going to be getting it anyway? Just because I don't have one quite like that yet? And because I like collecting them? Quite probably.

Its pretty!

Corset MCC35S Black Brocade/Mesh Underbust "sweetheart" waist training corset

#corset #steel boned corset #Mystic City Corsets #MCC35-S #mccorsets #corsetry

ofc ur a cis "pansexual" obsessed w linguistics aren't all white people🙄

Actually no, I'm not cis. I can't argue the colour of my skin, it is what it is, but I am very much not cis gendered.

As I said in my comment, I have nothing against people who use the term bisexual. I used to feel it identified me myself. But it doesn't fit me now and I do not understand the sudden hatred there seems to be for people who identify as pansexual.

Is this the latest fad? People are fed up with hating other identities so are moving on to this one? It just reeks of the same exclusionist rhetoric that terfs love to spread within the whole LGBTQIA+ community. The old tactic of "divide & conquer" springs to mind. What we really need is more togetherness. Not falling for their old tricks of suggesting its wrong to identify as this latest in a long line of identities. I've seen them hating on asexuals and aromantics, I've seen them hating on trans people, I've seen them hating on nobinary people and trying to separate that identity from the trans umbrella, and I've seen them hating on bisexuals, and gays, and lesbians, and queers, and every other identity that dares to exist.

I do not argue with others who choose to use bisexual to mean "more than two" if that is the term they are happy to use to mean that, then that is absolutely fine by me. I don't doubt their identities, I know that their use of the term is not meant to be exclusionary of any genders or what have you.

Its just not something my brain is happy with for itself. And yes, its a purely semantic discomfort. My autistic brain has certain things it latches onto as right and wrong & try as I might, I can not get myself to feel comfortable using the prefix bi- for my own sexuality the more I come to understand myself. I'm not ever going to try to stop others using bisexual for themselves, nor do I want them to do so. Its a perfectly valid identity and I have no problems with anyone using it to mean any of the things in that post. Its just not right for ME personally.

If you came asking this expecting to get a rise out of me or something, then I am deeply sorry to disappoint you.

I'm comfortable in my identity as a queer pansexual person. I'm not going to be shamed for having found a description that works for my own brain. And I'm not going to shame others for theirs.

I hope you have a lovely rest of the day wherever you are, and may you receive as much kindness as you give to others.

#delete later #not corset related

New Corset On The Way!

So I haven't bought myself a new corset in a few years now and when I saw the following I just had to get it!

It is the MCC36X from Mystic City Corsets in a size 22" which I'm hoping will fit me well as it's a similar set of proportions to the MCC36 which was the first corset I never got from Mystic City before they changed factory which was when they discontinued the pattern. The X version seems to be a cupped rib shape whereas the original was more conical and the hipspring has been increased a bit I think. But can't be exactly sure until it gets here so I can compare it to my original one (though I had that in the 20" as I was smaller then).

So pictures!

Front of the corset:

Its black sports mesh with a black with large gold floral brocade for the busk panel. The busk and eyelets are also done in a gold tone to match & there is a gold satin bow at the top (though in other photos the bow is black, Mystic City usually supply 2 colours if it matches the corset tondo so). The front lacing over the hips is a thinner black satin ribbon.

The back:

The back lacing panel is more of the brocade and the larger eyelets are also gold toned. Its shown laced with black polyester laces (like shoe laces). I'm not sure if it will also come with gold satin ribbon laces for the back or not. It would look pretty but I don't get on well with satin ribbons so will just keep the regular lacing in place.

Should be arriving in a few days, really excited!

Oh and here's a link in case you're interested in buying it (be sure to check your measurements against the size chart for this model though).

https://www.mysticcitycorsets.com/shop/mcc36x-black-brocade-mesh-underbust-corset

#corset #steel boned corset #mystic city corsets #MCC36X

star-anise

Feminist fantasy is funny sometimes in how much it wants to shit on femininity for no goddamned reason. Like the whole “skirts are tools of the patriarchy made to cripple women into immobility, breeches are much better” thing.

(Let’s get it straight: Most societies over history have defaulted to skirts for everyone because you don’t have to take anything off to relieve yourself, you just have to squat down or lift your skirts and go. The main advantage of bifurcated garments is they make it easier to ride horses. But Western men wear pants so women wearing pants has become ~the universal symbol of gender equality~)

The book I’m reading literally just had its medievalesque heroine declare that peasant women wear breeches to work in the field because “You can’t swing a scythe in a skirt!”

Hm yes story checks out

peasant women definitely never did farm labour in skirts

skirts definitely mean you’re weak and fragile and can’t accomplish anything

skirts are definitely bad and will keep you from truly living life

no skirts for anyone, that’s definitely the moral of the story here

beatrice-otter

Now, a skirt that’s too long will be harder to work in–skirts brushing the floor may look elegant, but is also a tripping hazard–but that is not a problem with skirts in general, it’s a problem with that particular skirt not being suited to being worked in. Skirts are very practical. You can hike them up if you’re hot or need more freedom to maneuver (this is called “girding your loins”). If you need to carry something, you can lift up your hem and make a pouch just like the person in yellow in the bottom picture above. If you need to handle something hot, a skirt generally has enough material you can hold it out from your body to use as a hot pad. (Tight skirts were only used by people who didn’t need to work/move until the invention of elastic fabric.)

star-anise

Long skirts were markers of class almost as much as gender. Both men and women in the European middle ages wore extravagantly long garments to indicate both “I’m so rich I can afford THIS MUCH fabric” and “I don’t walk in the mud, I pay servants to do that for me.”

Skirt hiking: Definitely a Thing. (Janet’s tied her kirtle green/above the knee and not below…)

plavoptice

Love this post, and want to add: another example of the “empowerment means shitting on feminity” is the bizarro way that this genre attacks basic survival skills like cooking and sewing as pointless, inferior or mutually exclusive with masculine pursuits (like your lady knight should probably know how to cook for herself and sew her own wounds and patch her clothes while she’s on her quest through the North to rescue her boyfriend, or this happy couple is in for a world of hurt!)

Or to quote one of my all favorite posts, “fuck women’s contribution to our survival.”

whatevercomestomymind

Historically, skirts have been the garment of choice for almost every culture, gender and class. Breeches, or pants, were created specifically for riding horses.

fittingoutjane

I think people got 1850 or 1950 mixed up with the Middle Ages.

The clothing worn by upper-class Western women in the later Renaissance into early 20th century really was difficult to move in. But even when queens and fashion plates were wearing 20 pounds of ruffled petticoats, or giant hoops and bustles, or corsets so tight they fainted, most women didn’t dress like that. Their clothing styles were superficially similar, but fact they were quite practical.

How do I know? I’m a reenactor. I’ve done it.

I’ve spent 12 hours straight cooking in skirts down to the floor, or run around outside dressed like that while my small children used all that fabric to hide themselves in. When it’s made of linen, it’s even comfortable in extremely hot weather. And when I need to move very fast, or walk through mud, I tuck the ends into a belt and move on with my life. Even the corsets aren’t nearly as bad as you’d think, so long as you don’t try to turn yourself into Barbie, which again most women most of the time didn’t. Corsets provide good boob support and back support. As for women’s work, back in the day, women’s work was life and death every single day. If someone couldn’t cook and preserve food, no one would eat. Without clothing, you’d freeze to death, and making cloth was an ENORMOUS amount of work.

By the mid 20th century, things didn’t work that way any more. People bought clothing in stores, produced in factories that could sell it quite cheaply. You could buy food that required very little cooking. And so, at least among the middle and upper classes, survival women’s work was replaced with… not as survival women’s work. Now, instead of starving, being unable to cook meant living on canned beans and store-bought bread. Having no housekeeper meant that your house would be dusty and lack color coordination, not that you’d freeze because you had no fire.

So, when you’re making a fantasy setting, please be aware of what the actual middle ages were like, so you don’t inadvertently mix in stuff from much later periods. (Doing it on purpose is fine.)

alexafaie

Also, the kind of foundation wear, including corsets helped distribute the weight. Its also very true that if you take a modern coat and carry it over your arm, it will be quite heavy or awkward after a while, but when you wear that coat, the weight is spread out over your body so you just don't feel it as much if at all. Same thing with historical dress. Even chainmail is easier to bear the weight of when worn than when carrying it. And there are videos of people in full chain & plate armour being able to complete military assault courses quicker than the people in modern military gear. We often just assume its hard to move in historical clothing because its so stationary when on display. People think the "whalebone" corsets are restrictive of movement and heavy. But that's a misunderstanding of what "whalebone" is - its actually keratin plates from the baleen whale's mouth. Keratin is a protein which also makes up fingernails and hair in humans. Think how flexible fingernails are. Then they were usually only a single layer of a tightly woven fabric which makes them incredibly lightweight. Modern corsets full of steel with 3 or more layers of fabric (in cheaper off the rack garments, because the fabric isn't tightly woven enough to use fewer layers) are way heavier & even those don't massively restrict movements. Most restriction there is is actually beneficial in keeping you in the correct posture to do certain things, like bending knees instead of stooping to pick something up is better on your back.

And even if you do lace tightly in a corset it doesn't cause fainting. It just makes the waist smaller (source being myself when I wore corsets 6" below my natural waist & was still able to run to catch a train dragging a heavy suitcase). Fainting is such a silly corset myth which I wish would just die. It used to be a thing included in Ettiquette guidebooks for rich ladies. Learn how to fake fainting to avoid awkward social encounters. It was fashionable to faint to avoid suitors you weren't interested in (all the girls would know to gather around). It was also used as a polite way to excuse oneself to go to the toilet (mentioning feeling faint). It didn't have anything to do with the corsets at all. Interestingly, the fashion to feint fainting actually fell out of popularity towards the later part of the Victorian era when it was more possible to actually tightlace if one wished to simply due to the materials used (prior to metal eyelets, the fabric would rip under too much tension, the patterns the earlier corsets were cut to didn't emphasise the waist, nor allow extra room for the bust & hips to be padded out like later, but kept them more natural etc). Men rejoiced when women stopped fainting so much and came up with all kinds of ideas as to why they'd done it in the first place. It was common enough that it became a trope in books long after it fell out of fashion & eventually people already hellbent on hating the corset as some "tool of oppression" linked the idea to the corsets using men's suppositions of why women would "faint" so easily rather than looking at why women actually did it. So its just more erasure of a woman's agency. Especially relevant given that the women who "fainted" were the social elite at balls, not the regular working women who wore corsets whilst doing all kinds of heavier exercise. You never see literary mention if the serving girls fainting despite working from sun-up to sundown laced up. It was always the women of the class of arranged marriages instead of marriage for love who had "fainting issues".

Also, also, on the original subject of skirt-wearing, there are plenty of modern day cultures where men wear garments which are robes/skirt based. They just aren't the common western idea of what clothing is. Those men are not somehow less capable of doing things than men who wear trousers, which further emphasises the sexist nature of classing skirts/dresses an inherently more restrictive/harder to be "free" people in.

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

AlexaFaie's World of Corsetry