Corsets and Drawers: A Look at Regency Underwear

Fashionable young ladies of the Regency were fortunate to escape one constriction that had haunted the lives of their mothers and would later fall to their daughters and granddaughters: The Boned Corset. Where both the Georgian and Victorian sillouette called for unnaturally small waists and straight backs, designers during the Regency were captivated by the “natural Female form.” Drawing inspiration from classic greek and roman statuary (all things ancient Greece were the rage at this time) they allowed for column dresses with minimal flouncing. Where once layers of hoops and petticoats reined, now almost modern dress shape took over. Waists were raised to just under the bosom while skirts hung free. These new styles called for an all new type of support garment. Thus was born the short corset, forbearer to today’s modern undergarments. Unlike Victorian corsets which hooked in the front and laced up the back, older corsets only laced up the back in a zigzag fashion using one string—cross lacing would be invented later on—and stiffened in the front with a carved wooden or bone busk which created a straight posture and separated the bosoms for the “heaving” effect, so popular at the time. Pre-Regency corsets constrained the body from the hips to the bust line and were held on with straps over the shoulders where gown sleeves could be laced on. These corsets could be a separate garment worn under clothes, or used as the bodice of the dress itself. It would be worn over a chemise and stockings (knee to thigh high and held up with garters). In the 1700’s petticoats and panniers would be worn over that, though during the Regency this was slimmed down to one petticoat—and only if necessary. Drawers would not be invented until 1806. Until then, women walked free of any other undergarments. The “new” Regency Corset was a clever combination of straps, tapes and laces. They came in many styles—some for controlling the figure, some for pushing the bosom up and out in a shelf-like display. Two of these types are shown in this picture of 1819 stays from the Kyoto Museum in Japan. They would be stiffened with cording or stays, though the tight whale boned figure was still decades off. These corsets were mostly supportive, similar to today’s bras—and not constricting or dangerous to health as some later corsets would be. Of course, not all women even wore corsets! Some settled for a boned chemise (or boned, bodiced petticoat) or a chemise with a ribbon tied underneath the bosom for enhancement. It all depended on the style being sought, the shape of the wearer and the financial investment that they wished to make.

Many stories are told, both of the fun and exasperation girls had in modifying their underclothing to suit their styles and needs. Tales are told of girls who wore pink stockings (shocking!) to simulate bare flesh and others who dampened their chemises for a see-through effect through their white and pastel gowns (popular with the men, I’m sure!) Drawers, a modified version of the Men’s garment, tied at the waist with a string and split in the middle, were uncommon for women’s wear for the first 20 years of the 1800’s, though popular on young girls. Princess Charlotte is supposed to have worn them with glee, much to the astonishment of several other ladies, though this woman did not have the same happy experience: "They are the ugliest things I ever saw: I will never put them on again. I dragged my dress in the dirt for fear someone would spy them. My finest dimity pair with real Swiss lace is quite useless to me for I lost one leg and did not deem it proper to pick it up, and so walked off leaving it in the street behind me, and the lace had cost six shillings a yard..." Of course- Men had their own items—Undershirts are a relatively new invention, but before the advent of men’s drawers, they had nothing but their long shirts to tuck into their pants. Later, drawers- similar to shorts with a drawstring and buttoned flaps were invented, much to everyone’s relief. At the time of the Regency, men would normally be wearing cotton drawers, a linen or Muslin shirt, perhaps a corset (yes, not even the men escaped!) depending on the man, stockings and then pants (or knickers), cravat, vest and coat. Why not browse our costume section in our online giftshop for costume, patterns and accessories?

4 comments

brief summary for pantherer

The problem I having with online dating service is the plethora of single parents. I tried dating single mothers, But I an attainable objective I can do it. The number of women without children in their late 20s and early 30s is small or at best it feels like it online.

The women who held out on having children seem to have incredibly high standards, that explain why they haven had any kids yet.

There also the inherent problem with online dating sites due to the ratio. Women will date up online. Men typically have to date down sometimes way down. Men that aren willing to lower their standards significantly will end up alone if their only method of dating is online.

There a reason many of us are on dating apps. They not quite right.

I assume women who block you for no reason do it because they don want you start sending angry messages because they are ignoring you. (She was likely going to crank up ignoring your messages if she didn block you.)

I given up on POF. I mostly Tinder now, But you see the particular same behavior on Tinder. You can be having a decent chatter then the chat disappears because either they unmatch you or they delete their profile.

I think oftentimes it due to them not actually looking at your bio or all of your pictures until you start chatting with them. They swiping right on everyone and answering everyone who sends a decent message.

Badoo seems to be popular outside of the US. One benefit of it is it popular but not that popular. I comprehend [url=https://www.bestbrides.net/dateinasia-review-a-platform-that-bridge-asian-women-to-western-men/]dateinasia[/url] now, That one of the reasons why I used to have luck on POF. It had a lot of users but not so many that it was tricky.

The problem with Tinder is a variety of people using it. The top girls get way more matches they can ever answer to, And you can way more selective.

Say you hot girl on POF. you might get a couple dozen messages a day. The same hot chick on Tinder could get countless matches a day. it more convenient for a guy to break through the crowd on POF, Or at least it once was until the site went totally down hill.

experiment with Badoo. It a dating app where people actually use the live exploding feature.

you see though, nearl all females look WAY worse on live video than they do in their profile pics. It really not a small difference, It usually a big difference.

numerous other dating apps centered around video chat as well. I can remember fondly the name of it, But I remember trying one and it forced you to pay if it suited you to chat with only women. If you used a free deposit, It would randomly assign you to chat with a guy or a girl.

I do think video chat could work better for forming a link. It forces people to focus their attention on a person. The problem with Tinder and POF is people have multiple chats going at once. It easy to get distracted.

in truth, There no raking in. lumber is often posts on /r/Tinder, Many women will say off if you try to be sexually suggestive. So you can be too sexual and if you try to have a normal interaction, It likely to be like talking to a wall.

What matters most in internet dating is being ridiculously good looking since the ratio is at least 2:1, or 3:1 on the subject of men to women. Half of the men on dating apps are fucked and need never meet anyone. A large chunk of the half also need to be willing to settle for women below their league.

Imagine a dating app with 5 women and 10 men. Let say the ladies are rated 10, 8, 5, 3, And 1 in terms of looks and temperament. Then let say the men are rated 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, moreover 1. Here how they coordinate at best:.

LorenaBlairneara October 24, 2020

[…] era women in England favored the chemise dress with its simple lines. (Goodbye boned corsets, hello short corsets!) Though the pure-white gown looked genteel and could be embellished by whitework embroidery, it […]

Block Printed Cottons in the Georgian Era • Willow and Thatch July 26, 2020

[…] Corsets and Drawers: A Look at Regency Underwear […]

The Great Regency Underwear Debate - Front Porch Romance Book Review Blog July 26, 2020

[…] le sue audaci eroine hanno vissuto in un periodo di svolta per la biancheria intima. Secondo il Jane Austen Center le mutande, che ancora non esistevano, erano sostituite da pantaloncini sciolti che, anche se […]

La biancheria utilizzata dalle donne nell'epoca di Jane Austen July 26, 2020

Leave a comment