25
   

Low Rise Thong vs. Waist High Thong

 
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Fri 18 Sep, 2009 11:08 am
@stillasexydancer,
I'm over 40, wear a thong - depending on the pants I wear either high or low rise. I don't have a pudgy belly - my hips are a bit wider than before kids, but as far as averages they are smaller than most. I don't have a "tramp stamp", and the pants I wear fit well. The lower waisted pants look good on someone with a small waist and flat belly. They do not "slip" down. I wouldn't like that feeling and they are not loose fitting.

This is like a pair of jeans I would wear that would require a low thong panty.


http://www.stylebakeryteen.com/images/anntaylorlofttalljeans.jpg
stillasexydancer
 
  1  
Tue 29 Sep, 2009 04:47 pm
@Linkat,
That's great for you, Linkat. I'm happy for you. Back in the day, however, "low-rise" was called "hip-hugger" and none of the girls I knew would wear any underwear at all with a pair of hip huggers.

My post was simply my observation of what the fashion industry is doing to keep up with the increase in weight women are carrying nowadays. Cheeseburgers and fries are a major contributor to America's overweight problem. Someone mentioned college girls and stated that most are thin because they have eating disorders - LOL.
It doesn't matter what age you are - America is getting fat. Check out the little chubbies heading for elementary school any morning at any school, for example. In the past 30 years, the occurrence of overweight in children has doubled and it is now estimated that one in five children in the US is overweight. Increases in the prevalence of overweight are also being seen in younger children, including preschoolers. Also, while more children are becoming overweight, the heaviest children are getting even heavier. As a result, childhood overweight is regarded as the most common prevalent nutritional disorder of US children and adolescents, and one of the most common problems seen by pediatricians.
According to the American Sports Data website, obesity statistics in America are climbing. Over 3.8 million people weigh over 300 pounds, and the average adult female weighs an average of 163 pounds. (WOW!!!) Over 400,000 people, mostly males, weigh over 400 pounds. (WOW, again!!!)
This dangerous trend is alarming and it keeps growing. So, yes, I can clearly see where a pair of "low-rise jeans would be more comfortable than a pair of normal, properly fitting jeans. When the belly done laps over the belt it can be quite uncomfortable, so why not let that belly hang free, right? Nothing like sporting the plumber's crack, right!?

"aidan" mentioned she has some sort of problem with elastic around her waist so that's why she wouldn't wear a normal fitting thong. Okay for aidan, right? Whatever floats your boat, hon.

At 5'7", I do have a small waist, a flat belly, and I'm well over 40. What peeves me is that I have an extremely hard time finding clothing and underwear that is not "low-rise." If you like low-rise then buy low-rise. It should be an available option just like normal-rise should be an available option. This is not the case, however, and that's the point I was making. I want normal, or "classic" rise pants, jeans, swimwear, and underwear. I don't care for the way low-rise looks on me or feels on me, and with a pair of normal-rise jeans the low-rise underwear does slide down...on me.
That's my opinion and my observation. Thanks.
Linkat
 
  1  
Wed 30 Sep, 2009 10:49 am
@stillasexydancer,
There's lots of places that sell a variety of "rise" type pants and underwear. Ann Taylor (where I love to buy because their clothes fit me so well) - has all sorts of waists; I believe Old Navy has different sizes - there is always Talbots that typically gears to a more conservative style.
0 Replies
 
Eva
 
  1  
Wed 30 Sep, 2009 02:52 pm
Try Coldwater Creek. Nice selection of jeans and slacks, big range of sizes, and affordable. And they're made well, too.
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  0  
Fri 16 Oct, 2009 03:12 pm
@contrex,
contrex wrote:
I think that thongs, low, high or just plain intermediate, are soooo tacky and last year.

This is an absolutely amazing post if we assume Contrex is a man. I'm willing to bet good money that none of the women posting here ever appeared in her frilly lacy underthingies only to hear some man say "...these are soooo last year's fashion!" or words to that effect - personally I don't believe that such a man exists. Of course if Contrex is a man then there's this one exception - any explanation forthcoming?!
spendius
 
  2  
Fri 16 Oct, 2009 03:23 pm
@High Seas,
I'm a man. I agree with contrex. He was specifically referring to thongs. Frilly, lacy underthings are never out of fashion.

I'm hoping bloomers come back. They are really sexy.
0 Replies
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2009 03:41 pm
@High Seas,
I suppose if he were gay that would explain it.
High Seas
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2009 03:44 pm
@Linkat,
That would make 2 of them though, since Spendius has now joined Contrex in that opinion Smile
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2009 03:45 pm
@Linkat,
That would be against his sig line...
0 Replies
 
mismi
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2009 04:15 pm
@High Seas,
Quote:
This is an absolutely amazing post if we assume Contrex is a man. I'm willing to bet good money that none of the women posting here ever appeared in her frilly lacy underthingies only to hear some man say "...these are soooo last year's fashion!" or words to that effect - personally I don't believe that such a man exists. Of course if Contrex is a man then there's this one exception - any explanation forthcoming?!


I can't imagine standing around in white cotton drawers and a man saying "that is so last year's fashion", much less so something sexy...seems to me if you're a woman standing around in your underwear and there's a man around they are pretty much only interested in getting the underwear off.
spendius
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2009 05:20 pm
@mismi,
Don't count on it babe.
mismi
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2009 05:54 pm
@spendius,

Maybe I should clarify - not necessarily me - But if a man saw some woman other than me in their underwear, the only thing they would be concerned about would be getting it off. Razz


Francis
 
  1  
Sat 17 Oct, 2009 02:36 am
Mismi wrote:
But if a man saw some woman other than me in their underwear

Don't count on me either.

She has to meet at least some requirements...
spendius
 
  1  
Sat 17 Oct, 2009 04:17 am
@Francis,
We had better draw a veil discreetly over that.
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Sat 17 Oct, 2009 02:14 pm
@mismi,
Mismi - I've no idea what's going on here, are you doing the dance of the 7 veils?! Do you know these guys so very well - no, don't answer that online, they're not supposed to tell anything anyway. But generally I agree with you, except to the extent that if you get a present it's better to get it in some beautiful gift wrapping rather than having it suddenly plonked down unwrapped on a table in front of you - I guess that's the analogy here.
mismi
 
  1  
Sat 17 Oct, 2009 11:03 pm
@High Seas,
I don't know them at all High Seas...haven't really posted on the same threads as them it seems- maybe occasionally - I can't remember.

...but sex and how it's dressed is certainly subjective. I suppose any blanket statement whether in jest or not would be incorrect.
Linkat
 
  1  
Mon 19 Oct, 2009 10:58 am
@mismi,
I can see why they would say something like that - most likely because they are gay and would prefer to see a man in a thong.
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 19 Oct, 2009 12:13 pm
Did you hear that Francois? You have to laugh.

A man in a thong!!. Jeeze. Could be good for a smirk I suppose.

I once saw a guy in baggy underpants do Eskimo Nell with all the faces. That was pretty funny.
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Mon 19 Oct, 2009 12:47 pm
@Linkat,
I can see why you would say something like this.

Is this your kind of guy?

http://www.krinein.com/img_critiques/3879/32280_250.jpeg
Linkat
 
  1  
Tue 20 Oct, 2009 10:32 am
@Francis,
Oh yeah baby - he's a hot one.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/27/2021 at 05:53:29