The pantyhose debate, again | Bleader

The pantyhose debate, again



Slate asks, what happened to pantyhose? And will it come back? (You can thank Kate Middleton if it does.) Maybe women wised up and realized that they were spending their hard-earned money on a pointless piece of underclothing that was quickly ruined by snags and runs. On the other hand, our society has become so unceasingly body-conscious that the original purpose of hose—to hide imperfections—is not as much of an issue, what with everyone working out, getting waxed, exfoliated, liposuctioned, tanned, etc. Maybe women feel less of a need for a light layer of nylon mesh between their gams and the world. Maybe we just don't care.

As an aside, I always found it curious that in the past some very conservative businesses required or preferred women to wear skirts instead of pants, and of course pantyhose. But why the hose? Because their legs should be on view, but their completely naked legs would be too much? Some confusing messages there.