Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There isn't anything I categorically wash after every wearing BESIDES underwear.
My husband is like that. He will wear his jeans several times before throwing them in the basket to be washed. I just can't do that. I wash everything except sweaters and the stuff that has to be dry cleaned after every single wear.
yes on the west coast. i have been here in southern california my whole life. do a google search for jeans from 1995 and also for 2000. definitely started getting a lot lower in 2000 era, but definitely still had a lot that were high wasted as well.
I'll take a look at that. My recollection is that the mid- to late-90's were already seeing lower-rise jeans come in, that showed the curve of the upper hip. Sometimes that was combined with a short crop-top, to show the whole curve of the waist to the high hip. Maybe the high-waist thing was more of a short blip in the fashion calendar.
edit: OK, I think I see what the discrepancy here is. I think what some here are calling "high waist" jeans is different from what I think of when I hear "high-waist". I call "high-waist", jeans that come to above the natural waist, not at the waist. These days, after so many years of super-low-rise jeans, a lot of people see pants that hit right at the waist as being "high-waist".
It's all relative. I had both natural-waist jeans at the time, and below-the-waist jeans, almost hip-huggers that had flared legs below the knee. Those were starting to come in.
Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 05-31-2015 at 09:00 PM..
I'll take a look at that. My recollection is that the mid- to late-90's were already seeing lower-rise jeans come in, that showed the curve of the upper hip. Sometimes that was combined with a short crop-top, to show the whole curve of the waist to the high hip. Maybe the high-waist thing was more of a short blip in the fashion calendar.
edit: OK, I think I see what the discrepancy here is. I think what some here are calling "high waist" jeans is different from what I think of when I hear "high-waist". I call "high-waist", jeans that come to above the natural waist, not at the waist. These days, after so many years of super-low-rise jeans, a lot of people see pants that hit right at the waist as being "high-waist".
It's all relative. I had both natural-waist jeans at the time, and below-the-waist jeans, almost hip-huggers that had flared legs below the knee. Those were starting to come in.
ok, so when i made my initial post i said 15/20/30 years ago. so yeah, 15 years ago there were still high waist jeans out there. maybe not as many as 20 and 30 years ago. still...they were out there, and definitely here in southern california. probably i should have said more like 20/25/30 years ago. also, i am not talking about jeans that are just high to above the natural waist. (i have been spelling waist wrong all this time in this thread. ooops! call me embarrassed... ) anyway i am talking really high waisted, not just right above the natural waist line. waist. waist. waist. not waste.
me: slinking off into the corner really really embarrassed. i'm going to blame this on getting old...haha!
Last edited by beachie123; 05-31-2015 at 09:21 PM..
ok, so when i made my initial post i said 15/20/30 years ago. so yeah, 15 years ago there were still high waste jeans out there. maybe not as many as 20 and 30 years ago. still...they were out there, and definitely here in southern california. probably i should have said more like 20/25/30 years ago. also, i am not talking about jeans that are just high to above the natural waist. (i have been spelling waist wrong all this time in this thread. ooops! call me embarrassed... ) anyway i am talking really high waisted, not just right above the natural waist line. waist. waist. waist. not waste.
me: slinking off into the corner really really embarrassed.
Thats what I thought you means--a waist that extends toward the midriff, above the waist. I don't remember that at all. Maybe it was a niche thing in the Bay Area. Or maybe it didn't last long.
Thats what I thought you means--a waist that extends toward the midriff, above the waist. I don't remember that at all. Maybe it was a niche thing in the Bay Area. Or maybe it didn't last long.
i don't know. i guess jeans in the same style can be higher or lower on different people. i'm 5'2" and jeans almost always fit me weird anyway. again, i guess i meant maybe not so much 15 years ago. more like 18, 19, 20+. anyway, i'm in orange county FWIW and i consider myself to be relatively normal in the clothing department. i'm definitely not a fashionista and i don't usually wear trendy clothes. but i've been around and seen plenty of girls and women wearing what's "hip" for any given time. ok, i've talked enough off topic about jeans. this was supposed to be about thongs and granny underwear.
I'd agree with this. It seems like the article was considering anything will full coverage, even briefs for boyshorts as "granny panties" as opposed to thongs or g-strings. I may be wrong. Since ppl are posting pics, here are what I consider pretty granny panties:
A little too high cut, but these look COMFY as heck.
LOL ok this is a stretch...but so cute
And finally
*Also the married ladies posting about how their husbands don't care. SO TRUE. We may care about how our underwear looks than men do. Husbands and boyfriends, are just like...how can I get that off?
Yeah I don't consider any of those "granny panties". Those are all pretty "stylin'".
How is it less laundry? Going commando means that you have to wash your jeans, etc. every time you wear them instead of getting a few wearings out of them before you do laundry.
i don't know. i guess jeans in the same style can be higher or lower on different people. i'm 5'2" and jeans almost always fit me weird anyway. again, i guess i meant maybe not so much 15 years ago. more like 18, 19, 20+. anyway, i'm in orange county FWIW and i consider myself to be relatively normal in the clothing department. i'm definitely not a fashionista and i don't usually wear trendy clothes. but i've been around and seen plenty of girls and women wearing what's "hip" for any given time. ok, i've talked enough off topic about jeans. this was supposed to be about thongs and granny underwear.
Exactly. If you are "short-waisted", then jeans will fit you quite differently than someone who is "long-waisted".
i don't understand not wearing underwear with pants. especially jeans. i just don't get that at all. seems very unsanitary and uncomfortable to me. the seams rubbing all up in there...no thanks! it gives me the heebie jeebies just thinking about it. i can see going without them under a skirt for being flirty if you are out with your man and having "fun", if you know what i mean. but to regularly walk around with a skirt on and no underwear, i don't get that. seems dirty and not in a sexy way, i mean unhygienic. but maybe that's just me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
do a google search for jeans from 1995 and also for 2000. definitely started getting a lot lower in 2000 era, but definitely still had a lot that were high wasted as well.
) anyway i am talking really high waisted, not just right above the natural waist line. waist. waist. waist. not waste. 
