Ladders: attractive or not?

– Here’s an issue I’d love to test the forum’s opinions on: are ladders (runs) in stockings sexy? I’m not talking the obviously ripped nylon of the punk era, just small runs, caused accidentally through normal wear and tear.

To me they hint at both the magical sheer nature of the nylon and at a certain vulnerability that I find most alluring. Am I alone? Does anyone else have any laddered stockings anecdotes to share?

– I wholeheartedly agree. I have always found them alluring. And I don’t think that women don’t notice. A story: I had invited a female friend (admittedly a tease) over one time. She was kneeling on the floor going through my record collection (yes, it was in those days when women actually wore nylons). Her back was towards me and the soles of her shoeless tan-coloured stocking feet were showing. She quickly looked down at a long run starting from the end of one foot’s reinforced toe and running up the sole of her foot and past her calf under her trouser leg. “Oh, ” she said, looking at me and gauging my reaction, “I have a run in my stocking.” Runs are quite sexy. And, I agree, NOT when they’re deliberately done by those of the spiky-haired punk class as some sort of bohemian hard-edge ‘fashion’ statement.

– I absolutely agree. I have vivid memories of a school trip to Switzerland many years ago and me (as an impressionable schoolboy) being transfixed by the laddered black stocking of one of the (bit tarty) older girls in the party.

I think they are definitely sexier on black/dark tights. In fact I have been known to draw attention to one so that my colleague went and changed them. I was then able to nip into the ladies and grab her discarded and laddered tights from the bin. Am I kinky or is this not as uncommon as I think? But yes you’re dead right – ladders are sexy.

– Sorry guys, I must disagree. Runs are something to be avoided at all costs. They really are unsightly. But since you bring it up, what is it about them that turns you on? Is this a universal male thing or only for you who love nylons?

– Absolutely not! Let’s keep a good standard here.

– I absolutely think that a run in a stockings is the sexiest thing a woman could flaunt, second only to RHT stockings.

I think it’s kinda slutty and provocative. A few years ago I went to a Halloween party and this one girl was dressed up as a stewardess. She had tons of makeup on and her blouse was half open and she had tons of runs in her nylons (she was wearing pantyhose not stockings). I asked her what she was supposed to be and she said a “sky slut”. It goes to prove, ladders are enticing!

– Runs (ladders) in stockings are something to be taken care of. My wife keeps spare stockings in her purse when we go out as well as in the car glove compartment. She also has spares at work. That’s the “efficiency” of stockings vs. pantyhose – with two pairs you actually get three sets!

Having previously agreed that they are attractive, perhaps my view needs a little clarification. Most of us would, I am certain, find our gaze attracted to stockings which contain a ladder. I am still of the opinion that, once you’ve noticed it, a ladder can look very sexy. It depends perhaps on where and how bad a ladder it is. I would agree with the various correspondents who feel that unladdered stockings are better but that doesn’t stop a ladder from looking sexy. I’m going to beg to differ from most of you.

New product ideas: cool cotton and other issues

– Here’s one to get you thinking – as a product of the fact that I am currently sweltering in an office, genuinely wearing fully-fashioned stockings (lifts leg up to the monitor to prove it to everyone) and it has to be said I am not particularly comfortable. Far too hot.

Anyway, I am sure a few years ago I saw tights advertised with something along the lines of a “cool cotton” mix for just this kind of weather. The theory, I think, is that rather than making you all hot they actually help to cool you down. (I didn’t buy them because they were tights. I wasn’t *that* curious!)

Anyway that set me thinking: what products should we encourage the hosiery companies to make to encourage the wearing of stockings in all weathers. The cool cotton idea (mixed with nylon, naturally!) would be a good one, assuming I haven’t made it up. Any other ideas? What about other products generally? FF nylons with a hint of Lycra to make them a bit more stretchy? I think we have a great opportunity to provide market research data and ideas to the manufacturers and we rather therefore owe it to ourselves 🙂

– I think that the purists among us wouldn’t be too impressed with the idea of a Lycra additive to FFs but it would help with the fit for those with legs that don’t exactly fit the standard sizes.

– Some manufacturers do market ‘summer’ season tights as cooler to wear and some don’t have a cotton mix either. The manufacturers should market stockings in similar vein. Why they do not is open to conjecture.

The modern FF manufacturers are perhaps too reactionary in their thinking to offer FFs with a Lycra content. They sell them as identical copies of the classic 1950s nylons. Perhaps we are all guilty of wanting things exactly as the way they were, but today’s modern ladies want hosiery that fits well and looks good. The FFs with Lycra would seem the way forward. I know I’ll get shot down by the traditionalists but we do want ladies to wear stockings and this may be one way to increase the number of fully fashioned nylon clad ladies.

I agree – let’s have stretch FFs! And they WERE manufactured in the old days (although they were apparently in the minority), so it shouldn’t offend the traditionalists!

The hosiery/attraction trade-off

– How many men out there are willing to ‘compromise’ other features they may find not so attractive in a woman if the woman wears hosiery or otherwise dresses-up? For example she may not have as attractive a face or she may be too slight or overweight or her personality may leave a few things to be desired. Would you excuse these factors for the fact she wears nylons? I’m inclined to think I would and it may make 30-40% difference. However I do know women who always wear nylons and are always well-dressed and it still doesn’t matter.

– Gotta be honest. As much as I love stockings, it’s the girl I’m interested in. When I was younger I did it a few times. There was one girl with whom I was acting in a play with, who I caught in the dressing room (by accident) adjusting her hold ups. She wasn’t particularly attractive but the stockings did all the right things for me, so I set my sights on her and to cut a very long story short ended up in bed with her a couple of weeks later. What I failed to realize was that she was a human being that had genuine feelings for me, and I was only interested in the fact that she wore stockings every now again. As a result I hurt her quite badly, which I bitterly regret doing.

Now I’m getting married in four weeks time to a woman who I love very much. She doesn’t share my enthusiasm for the subject. But she does understand, and I’d take her over any girl that wears stockings day in day out. The reason… there’s more to a relationship than sex. Ultimately our fascination with women’s legs and hosiery is sexual… I know mine is!

I am coming up on my second wedding anniversary this fall, and I am happier every day! It’s unfortunate that you had to go through such a heart-rending breakup, but it’s important to learn for yourself the things that will make you happy and fulfill you. Earning the trust and devotion of the woman you love is more valuable than anything.

Too young for stockings?

– Many of the ladies posting here have recorded memories of wearing stockings as young girls. It was the style then. It’s not now. Sexless pantyhose have taken over. But an interesting event of this morning prompts me to ask the group’s opinion on an unusual matter.

I told you in an earlier post about a disco fund raiser my wife had hosted. I also told you that some of the women attending had told her that they would be calling her to ask about stockings suppliers. One of the women called today and casually mentioned that she was going to need stockings and good garterbelts for herself and her two daughters. The daughters are 14 and 16. They attend a private school that requires skirts and sheer hosiery for its girls. Their mother has decided that pantyhose are out. Her daughters will from now on wear gartered stockings. (I’m sure they will become quite popular amongst the young men… and a few older ones too!)

I had already given my wife information about suppliers and she relayed it to the caller. But, I must confess, I think that 14 and 16 are too young these days to be wearing stockings at all – much less on a regular basis. Maybe it’s just me but I think stockings have a strong sexual connotation and power. Pantyhose do not. Just the thought of these two pretty young girls in stockings and garterbelts everyday makes me a little uneasy. I get very conflicted feelings. If they were 18 and older fine. But 14 and 16?

My wife of course disagrees. But is there an age these days that is too young to wear stockings? Or, said another way, at what age should young girls be allowed to wear stockings?

– It’s sad in this day and age that something as innocent as a pair of stockings has darker connotations. I tend to agree with you which annoys me as stockings are actually a lot healthier for women to wear than tights.

I started wearing stockings at 16 and never had any problems, but then again I was never one to flash my stocking tops. If these girls wear their stockings in the same fashion very few people will know, so it shouldn’t be a problem.

Definitely one to think about.

– I feel it should be the choice of these young girls to wear stockings – not their mother’s choice. The mother needs to be reminded of how she would feel if someone forced this issue on her. Remember too that the many of the young teenage boys of today are not raised with the values young teenage boys had in yesteryear. Meaning they are not always as kind and considerate, and these girls could easily encounter a lot of teasing and ridicule from classmates. It’s hard enough to be a teenager, but then to stand out by wearing an unusual form of hosiery, they will be made targets. They may also strongly rebel against what their mom wants them too do.

I am all for the promotion of stockings but I agree they are too young for this sort of thing. Unless they themselves have expressed an interest in the stockings, but still I think they are too young. After age 18 fine. Forgive me if I sound a bit old fashioned, but those are my feelings.

– What’s the problem. Stockings are a part of underwear. It is a little bit unusual when such young women (girls) wear them. But who is wrong? Those who think it is normal (or will we say nice or pretty) or those who say it is only for sexual doings?

– The comment that if these girls do not flash their stockings very few people will know reminded me of my own junior and senior high school days. We did have a few “flashers” but my biggest thrill came from catching a glimpse up the skirts of a girl who wasn’t flashing.

This was in the early 1960s. Pantyhose were practically unheard of and every red-blooded young American male I knew was hormonally challenged. We lived to see a bit of thigh above the stocking, a dark band of welt, a gartertab or, if we were particularly blessed, the Holy Grail itself, a panty sighting!

Ah, those were the days! These formative years introduced me to the joys of women wearing stockings and fine lingerie. Slips and petti-pants were popular and most girls wore white, pink or blue nylon or satin panties. It seemed to me that the less attractive girls always wore cotton panties and to this day they are a huge turn-off for me. My high school girlfriends wore lots of lace under their dresses and it has marked me for life.

I don’t know if these two girls will flash or not but they won’t have to. I promise you most, if not all, of the young men will soon know that these two young ladies are “different”. And, vive la difference!

– When my daughter entered high school with similar uniform and decorum requirements, my wife and I had this discussion. After lots of talk, the decision was stockings.

Ultimately, we had this discussion with our daughter to get her feedback. We discussed the social and sexual issues. Our daughter made it very clear the age of innocence relative to teasing and come ons was much younger than when we attended high school. She told us we were naive.

She made it clear she had been deflecting unwanted attention since sixth grade. Because she was 6’1″ tall in 9th grade, she said any comments about a flash would be easy to deal with after teasings about her height.

Our daughter saw stockings as a way to make a fashion statement while wearing what she felt was a drab uniform. My wife was careful to make sure the stockings were very long to reduce potential garter exposure.

This was ten years ago. To fast forward to today, I saw an article in the Atlanta Journal this weekend on back-to-school clothes battles between 9-12-year-old girls, and their parents in suburban Atlanta.

“Tweens”, as the AJC called the young misses, are being lured by the fashion industry into wearing hip-hugging pants and belly-button-baring tops that expose six-inches of skin. The AJC said Britney and Christina influence them, and parents go along with it.

Parents of a fifth-grade girl sued to allow their daughter the right to wear one of the new short mini’s that is shorter than the school’s modesty test permits. Suggestive dress on 9s and 10s makes any discussion of potential sexual concerns of stockings on a 14-year old look old fashioned. I think the real issue is how parents reared their daughters, and how much discussion takes place on moral issues at home.

– I suggest that if girls are old enough to wear any form of sheer hosiery then they should be given the choice to wear what they are most comfortable with. However, stockings do have some practical advantages over p/h and things like this should not be overlooked.

– Because of the almost unavoidable sexual connotations, I don’t think 14 and 16 old girls should be wearing garter belts. Boys just aren’t raised like they used to be. These innocent girls could, at the very least, be in an uncomfortable position or, even worse, be in danger. At the risk of sounding old fashioned I think they shouldn’t wear them.

– I’m not sure about this one. On one level it is nice to hear about a school that insists upon skirts and sheer hosiery rather than pandering to the trouser scourge but I am not sure that S&S are really right for a school environment.

When I was at school it was quite unusual for girls to be allowed to wear adult hosiery, as many schools would only allow their girls to wear white knee length socks (in fact believe it or not I think that my local school still has a knee socks only policy). I guess the idea was that the socks were by definition a “childish” garment and subsequently meant that the young lady didn’t get too hung up on her appearance at too young an age. I am not sure that the theory worked, as white socks in themselves are now considered a bit of a fetish item and with hindsight it was a bit harsh to make the girls wear them right through the winter.

– This is a real poser. I think I’m a pretty modern guy, but when I talk to my daughters, who are nearly 17 and 15, they tell me I’m so fuddy-duddy it’s not true! My eldest daughter especially is a really great looking girl, with legs right up to her armpits, and wears skirts which should really be called belts, as they cover her ass and no more. Now there’s no point in me telling her to wear longer skirts as she would tell me where to get off, and remind me that this is 2001 and not the ‘old days’ as she calls them. She wears tights only very occasionally-she doesn’t like hosiery, saying it restricts her and she doesn’t like the feel of it. But the point is this: kids today are a lot more street-wise than they were years ago, and – in my case anyway, and if I or their mother were to suggest that they wore S&S, they would think we’re not wise, or perverts or both! It’s a sad fact, but there it is.

– As a school counsellor in training, I last night visited the new Junior High School where I will do my practicum at and I was reminded of just how short the girls like to wear their skirts these days.

– Girls under sixteen wearing stockings – DEFINITELY a ‘no-no’:

Teenage girls will admittedly wear short skirts and even my eye has tended to ‘wander’ in the direction of them, sheer hosiery is natural such as tights, but stockings, no!

This world is to progressive: look at modern day role models for teenage girls who give the wrong image, ie Britney Spears, female rap artists, soap stars and even children’s television presenters.

– The only way that a young lady should wear traditional stockings to school is to have a skirt of the proper length. Maybe this will be a good thing as I cannot for the life of me understand how a parent would let their daughter go to school wearing some of the outfits I see them wearing. Stockings or not the potential for “a view” is pretty risky and parents need to be responsible.

With respect to stockings as opposed to tights. Yes times have changed and the decision needs to be made by individual parents and their daughters. Young girls need to dress and behave as young ladies, which they rarely do these days.

I went to parochial schools through high school and the girls were required (under threat of suspension or expulsion) to have skirts at a specified length which precluded any opportunity for flashing.

Public schools in the USA are unfortunately another story. From what I have seen on the street and in the stores, the choice of hosiery is the least of our concerns.

Stockings in and of themselves do not have to be construed improperly and when the woman wearing them is discreet then others are none the wiser.

I’m 73 years old, and attended parochial school. When entering seventh grade, that is, at about age 12, the young ladies were required to wear sheer stockings with their blue and white uniforms. Bobby socks were allowed with the stockings. The advent of sheer stockings was a “right of passage” for most girls of the era. My twin sisters four years older usually came to breakfast with their stockings rolled into their bobby socks, and then pulled them up and fastened the four garters as they left the house for school. I well remember my mother supervising the operation to insure that the seams were straight and there were no wrinkles in the stockings. On many occasions, my sisters had to adjust the garters several times before getting my mother’s approval. I was an interested, but unnoticed, observer.

An unseamly appearance at a funeral?

– My wife returned yesterday from attending a large funeral. As many of you know she wears stockings every day. When she left for the funeral she took several pairs of black stockings with her. All were FFs, so all had seams.

I told her that I did not think it appropriate to wear seams at a funeral these days since they were sure to attract the attention of some of the mourners. I felt that the deceased and the deceased’s family should be the centre of attention. My wife agreed that her seams always attracted some attention but that this funeral would be so large that it would not matter.

Again, I disagreed. There would be media coverage and the usual group of paparazzi snapping away and an attractive woman in seamed stockings would be a natural subject for some of these photographers.

She disagreed with me. Her point was that this is the way she dresses and so what if her picture was taken it would only advance the cause of stockings wearing.

You all know that I am 100% in favour of stockings but this was a funeral! The actuaries tell me that my wife will probably outlive me by 10 to 20 years so it is reasonable to assume she’ll be at my funeral. I certainly hope she wears seamed stockings at my funeral. That’s what I have always loved her to wear. But, this was a funeral for someone else and I think that all the attention should go to that person and their family.

Well, she wore her seams. Pictures were taken of just about everybody and everything. (We don’t know if she was in any of the pictures. We’ll know in a few days as our company employs a clipping service. ) She said she got the usual attention at a reception held for family and close friends after the funeral. The “usual attention” means generally approving looks from some of the men and stares from some of the women.

But, in my mind the question still remains. Generally speaking, should seamed stockings be worn at a funeral? I am interested in your opinion.

– I don’t think there should be any problem with this. They’re black after all. In fact they might even strike a more formally elegant note, showing more respect for the deceased. If other people don’t particularly like it then I guess that’s their problem. Frankly I’m more offended by the wide variation in the way people dress at funerals these days — windbreakers, light-coloured clothing, men without ties, women with any old get-up on. No one seems to say anything about these.

– I have to side with your wife on this one. If I were the one going I would have chosen FFs as well. What I was curious to know, though, were they all black stockings or were they flesh tone with a black foot and heel? It sounds as if they were all black; meaning it would be hard to see the seams unless you were looking for them.

– A few years ago it was most likely that many women wore black seamed stockings at funerals. They only draw attention these days because they are such a rarity (unfortunately). I am sure your wife looks very elegant in seams, and I see nothing wrong in that in any place or situation.

– It just shows how society’s views on clothing change over the years. The Queen wore black fully fashioned nylons to Winston Churchill’s funeral in the mid sixties. I suppose nothing at all was said about this at the time. Now it is a matter of some debate as to what hosiery is suitable for such occasions. I would say real nylons should be worn without any problems at these ceremonies.

– I have questions about the question. I acknowledge my reaction would be very much like the original contributor if my wife informed me she was wearing FF stockings to a funeral. I’d see it as a potential – and unwanted – distraction.

However, is that because FF hosiery is seen so rarely today that it is mostly associated with sex? Or, is it just my thinking about the FF sexual connection that leads me to believe others would be distracted by FF seams?

This is a true domestic tranquillity issue!

– I believe your answer is right on the money. I believe people associate FF nylons with sex. Right or wrong. After all perception is greater than reality in most cases. I must admit, I would probably glance (not stare) at her seams, even if it was at a funeral, just because I rarely see them.

I feel that there is no problem with wearing seams/FF nylons to a funeral, as long as they were the proper black. If they were fleshtoned with black seam/heel, that might be considered a faux pas, but not all black.

Stockings under trousers: sexy or not?

– A question. In response to some of my posts a few people have indicated that they find stockings under trousers to be very sexy. To me it all seems a bit pointless – I don’t really see why it is worth bothering to put on a pair of stockings if you are going to wrap them away in trousers anyway. For me stockings should be an all or nothing thing and that has to mean wearing a skirt. But as we live in a democracy let’s put it to a vote. Are stockings sexy under trousers?

– Well personally it depends on how long the trousers are going to be on and under what circumstances they are going to be removed and the reason then becoming apparent as to why a female is wearing stockings. Not forgetting in which hotel room she is going to spend the night!

Then again I agree with you, trousers are not always the most glamorous garment on a lady unless she has the right figure and the garment is well tailored. But if she is going to wear hosiery, it must compliment and be pleasing to the eye in those few inches between the hem and the shoes.

Mind you, at least hosiery is a pleasing site on a woman in trousers as it is all to common too go without. It is obscene to see a man dressed in trousers and shoes with no socks, so why do women go without hose?

– My wife rarely wears slacks/trousers. When she does she almost always wears stockings with them. The alternative “pop-socks” are ugly, bare feet are rarely an option as she does not like the look or the feel

– A reason some people may not mind stockings under trousers is because they simply admire stockinged “feet”. Like me, they have a stocking foot fetish. So it really doesn’t matter a great deal if the woman is wearing a dress or pants. I do prefer women in dresses or skirts – since it creates an overall more feminine, stylish, alluring and sexy look – but it’s not so bad if they wear trousers so long as they wear nylons. But trousers without nylons (i. e. cotton socks or bare) … just isn’t on!

– I have one memorable memory of stockings being worn under trousers. This was the mother of one of my sister’s school friends in the mid 1970s.

A farmer’s wife, she was wearing tightish trousers, similar in colour, texture and appearance to jodphurs, and heavy duty lace-up shoes. It was when she bent forward that I noticed the outline of a heavy panty girdle with suspenders and an inspection of the gap between her trouser cuffs and her shoes revealed the heels of 30denier+ FF stockings. I remember being overwhelmed and curiously excited by the “heavy duty” nature of this outfit compared with the skirt and more feminine shoes she might otherwise have worn.

– Following on the “look” you described, check out the 1977 movie “September 30, 1955″ starring Richard Thomas for some absolutely stunning shots of the character’s shapely mother, wearing very tight jeans that end at her calves (almost like capris), and FF nylons with high-heeled sandals. Now that’s a look!

– I remember seeing a girl in her early twenties in 1988 at Wimbledon railway station wearing black trousers, high heels and FF hose, although I never knew if they were stockings. Sexy all the same!

– I have always loved the idea of stockings, suspenders and delicate panties under jeans. I think that it is the mix of the roughness of the denim covering up the sensual softness of the lingerie.

I went out with a girl many years ago who – when I danced with her at a party and put my hand on her trousered bottom – gave me the nicest surprise of a feel of a suspender strap! She smiled at me then and said that she was wearing them just for me as she knew I loved stockings and she had been trying to get my attention for a long time. My hand stayed on her bottom for most of the night!

– When I was a boy in the late ’50s, women often wore stockings under their slacks, especially when going to church functions on the weekend. I remember having fun looking for suspender bumps when the girls leant over, say at a picnic or a carwash.

– A nicely tailored pair of trousers that reveal about 2-3” of ankle, with the appropriate shoes does have appeal, and it is practical in some circumstances. Socks and runners are OK with jeans for casual wear, but I always used to wear tights under trousers. Now, stockings have replaced the tights, they are just as comfortable and practical. I would wear trousers a couple of times during the week, and casual ones on the weekend, and always with stockings.

Even the sight or glimpse of hosiery worn with jeans and pumps is a turn-on for me, but it must be sheer! Definitely a bare ankle or cladded in socks is a no-no!

A challenge regarding attitudes of women

– Another contributor has offered an opinion basically regarding why women wear lingerie and its effect. I disagree with his viewpoint. He feels my opinion is off-base. Fair enough, I am known for taking on a good challenge. I will also admit if I am wrong.

Let the polling begin. Please keep it civil without a bunch of attacks on the respondents or their opinions. I hope this will be educational. To all who know me, or know of me, I ask that this be a genuine poll by serious contributors:

PONT: The other contributor has the opinion that “if there were no men around women would dress in Mou-Mou’s. Women could care less about tactile stimulation whatever the hell that is” and “the only reasons women dress in silks, satins and laces at all is either because men design the clothes or they are dressing that way to attract a man. As soon as they have him its all gone. Hell, most women don’t even have orgasms much less all day orgasms. Sure there are a few exceptions but mostly women are only stimulated by talking to other women.”

COUNTERPOINT: I take the opposing viewpoint. I believe that woman DO in fact dress to please themselves, as well as those they are trying to attract. I believe that if a woman was stranded by herself, and could not be naked, (and without the pressures of competing in the business world) and she had a rack of feminine clothes on one hand and a rack of masculine clothes on the other hand that she would choose to dress in feminine clothes at least 50% of the time. I think it is inherent in a woman’s nature to dress in soft fabrics that look and feel better than coarse non-descript “mou-mou” outfits. Finally I do think that woman do have orgasms (in and out of the bedroom!).

I hope I am not wrong!

– My wife and I want to thank you in advance for this educational polling. We both agree in your viewpoint. We believe that women do enjoy the feel of soft material against their skin. Granted women do use clothing and accessories to attract men. But given the opportunity to dress up in a non male environment, women still would if just for their own self esteem.

– I always dress in what feels best to me. I have many skirts and dresses I love to wear because I love the feel of them. I have always liked lace just because it makes me feel good and it looks so pretty. I dress mainly to please myself, but this can also include wearing something special for my husband. But mainly I dress in soft fabrics and prints because that is what I love.

– I agree with you entirely and wanted to post a reply to the original post – but didn’t for obvious reasons.

I found the original quote that we only dress up because men (what decade is he living in?) design the clothes extremely offensive and narrow-minded. Women wear what they want for whatever reason. I like to dress up as it gives me a boost of self-esteem and confidence. As for male attention, I actually get more when I’m in the launderette and looking really scruffy.

I could go on for ages about this but I don’t want to cause trouble so I’ll keep it short and concise.

– Okay, time to add my two cents.

I think the original suggestion is correct on one count – there are always those women who will wear ugly, ill shapen clothing. This could be because they have horrid taste, or just don’t care.

That’s perhaps a segment of the population we should just discard for our purposes.

However, I must agree on the other side that women in fact dress to impress other women as much or not more than men. Women do choose clothing both by feel and texture. Why else would pretty underthings be made in silks and satins if the feel of them close to our skin was not appealing?

You don’t see lingerie made out of burlap, do you? The feel of fabric is not dismissed when we are shopping. I have turned my nose up at items that looked nice, but when I handled the fabric, it felt rough and coarse.

As for the assertion that most women don’t have orgasms, much less all day ones, seems a little extreme. What sometimes gets lost in this issue is determining which kind of orgasm you’re talking about. There are more than one, and some take a concerted effort by both parties to figure out how to make it happen.

And lastly, if I were stranded (where, would make a big difference) and given the choice as to my clothing, I think practicality takes precedence over fashion anytime. If I’m on a mountain and need to conserve energy, I would be dressing in layers, with Gore-tex and nylon, with plenty of water and food and creating a shelter out of what’s available until I’m able to get myself back on the trail and to safety. I know this is an extreme example, but I think a good one.

– Women dress for themselves. I’ve known women who dress very femininely – for themselves, and would hate to wear any article that came close to “men’s clothing”. Unfortunately this type of women seem to be fewer and fewer (or at least older in age), with more and more dressing in nondescript unisex clothes with possibly a tinge of femininity. Often it’s rather “unfeminine” slacks and tops made of natural fibres. Jockey cotton undershirts and pants that look very similar to men’s attire have been a definite choice for women who want “comfortable” underwear. Women may still ‘dress up’ on occasions and may also dress more femininely and sexually for men. But not as much as they used to.

As for orgasms, the myth of females not having orgasms is very much alive. I’ve known women who could have an orgasm merely by being touched on their arm or their side, and could have dozens of orgasms in one night – I kid you not! And, alas, I’ve known women who could barely reach orgasm.

– Time for my two cents worth. I dress for my comfort and enjoyment. It just so happens that the way I dress may also be attractive to men, and hopefully, also to women.

I’ve just returned from a three week holiday in the south of France, and I wore stockings and suspenders for the first time in a month today, since it was too hot down there. I really felt special today – and my husband is away on business, so it wasn’t for him!

Red and black: the colours of sin?

– My husband will not buy me stockings or lingerie unless I suggest something to him. He will not pick out anything for me as he is worried I won’t like it. Admittedly I do have my own taste in clothing, I love the colours, teal, turquoise, pink, mint green, so I tend to pick almost all my clothing around those.

How would I even begin to encourage him to pick out something for me in the way of lingerie or stockings? He won’t touch the computer himself and he made the statement “I’m not going to buy lingerie, I’m not like that…” How do I begin to help him see that just buying lingerie or stockings for me does not go against his religious beliefs?

– What religious beliefs would buying lingerie for you violate for your husband? Can you be more specific? You have said before that he has a religious bias against some colours. If he has religion-based objections to lingerie and stockings what is his basis for them? Is he citing a scripture passage? What is the passage?

If you are going to help him understand his “problem” he’s got to be able to do more than simply say, “that’s wrong” or “I don’t do things like that.” Try to get him to explain this to you in biblical terms. But ask him gently and with respect or you will make him defensive. Having him articulate his position will help him to see flaws in it.

– I know he associates the colours red and black with sin. I can’t give you any Bible verses that he has cited, because he really hasn’t used any. I think his objections are more of a personal nature. I know he was raised in a Lutheran church and from my own dad being raised in a Lutheran church I do know they had some strict beliefs but I don’t know the specifics.

– I hope you will permit one specific question. I am not a Christian, but nonetheless I am very interested in Christian beliefs, and am asking this WITHOUT intending criticism or mockery.

Why is it that the colours red and black, specifically are associated with “sin”? Surely all colours are part of nature, and therefore part of the design of the creator of the world (which Christians call “God”) I can understand the association of “scarlet” with sex, (ie the Scarlet Woman of Revelations) but not all red. And black is the colour worn by clergymen…

– You make a good point, about the colours of red and black. They are indeed part of nature. In my case I think my skin tone is just terribly pale for black and it tends to make me look too pale. My mom used to dress me in red a lot as a little girl so when now I just don’t care for the colour red. In many Christians’ minds is red is associated with the devil, as he is dressed in red as the artists portray him.

– Just a quick thought about your resistance to wearing red anymore and why black stockings do not look well on your legs.

You should get a colour chart that defines the “season” that is you, which is based on your hair colour and more importantly your skin colour.

The colour red in lingerie (or any other clothing) can be anything from a true-red to a cherry-red, or an orange-red to a blood-red.

You mentioned you have pale skin, which already suggest that your colouring is the season of “winter”, which means that you should only seek out “true reds”. Any other shade will make your skin colour look strange. Black (obviously being the opposite of your pale skin) does not work, but off-black stockings or grey would.

You also mentioned pastel colours and pale shades of stockings as preferences in earlier posts. These can work well if the colour “values” are correct for your season.

Men should also pay attention to their “season” when selecting clothes – most don’t.

The reasons women wear seams

– I am interested to know for what reasons you ladies decide to wear seamed stockings.

– It’s a statement to say “I am wearing stockings and I am proud of it”.

– I wear seams because they’re very eye-catching and eye-pulling. Pulling eyes up, up, up in search of something more. And besides, stockings with seams, especially FF stockings, are so much more interesting than the run-of-the-mill completely sheer variety!

-There’s more than one reason. First, I love the way they get admiring looks. If we’re honest what woman doesn’t like to be admired? Second, they make ME feel good, feel classy, and yes, feel sexy. Third, my hubby adores them 🙂

– All the other posts pretty much stole my thunder, but I’ll add my remarks nonetheless.

My legs tend to be rather shapely, and I have been told they are quite nice. I like the visual aspect of a seam up the leg – it elongates, it appears to slim, and if your calves are well defined it can call attention to a shapely ankle.

I wear FFs almost every day, and just recently was stopped by a man astonished at seeing the real thing on the street in 2001! He even went as far as to ask if they were pantyhose or the real thing! (Imagine hand gesture indicating garters… ) I think he was over the moon the rest of the day! LOL

I love to dress nicely, and adding a pair of classic FFs to a pinstripe skirt suit just finishes off perfectly!

– Stole The Thunder And The Lightning! Could not have said it any better! All we say is we agree and we are proud!

Dear ladies, I wish that I had your strength of character. Unfortunately wearing seams on a day to day basis is just not practical for me. They are relegated to infrequent occasions, and I wish that I could wear them more often. Having said that, it is the contrast (seam on the leg) that gives FFs their appeal.

Our group’s Statement of Purpose?

– My wife and I spent a few days this week meeting with a family foundation reviewing requests for grants. A request for funds from the foundation must meet certain guidelines but most importantly, to those making the funding decision, is a clear and concise Statement of Purpose. If the person or group requesting the grant cannot clearly explain his/their purpose in a paragraph or two we generally reject the proposal.

Later in the evening at a cocktail party for the Board of Trustees, my wife, looking more desirable than ever in a pair of cuban-heeled ffs and a positively indecent frock, asked me what the “purpose” of the Stockings HQ group was.

“Well,” I stammered, “Its the … ah… er. . promotion of stockings. Isn’t it?”

“That’s my point,” she replied. “You really don’t have a clearly stated purpose do you? Of course its for the promotion of stockings but to whom, how, why? Would you give a nickel to an applicant who presented that Statement of Purpose you just gave me?

“No, I wouldn’t. ” I sheepishly admitted.

But we don’t have a Statement of Purpose. We don’t. Do we? We’re just a message board aren’t we? Or are we more than that?

On the other hand, do we even need one? Aren’t we just too diverse a group to agree on one anyhow?

But maybe we ought to give this some thought? Maybe a clear Statement of Purpose placed prominently at the front page of this site would give newbies a quick overview of what we’re all about. Maybe it would help us all get a little more focused on our mission. And maybe just the process of writing one, in a collaborative effort, would motivate discussion, mutual understanding and promote a greater sense of community?

Now how could any of that hurt us? What do you think?

Give it a try! Post a reply to this or try to write a draft “statement” and post it here. If you are uncomfortable writing anything formal, how about giving us your thoughts about what our purpose really is?

– First time contributor here. Sounds like a good idea. There’s so much stuff on this site I was a little confused for a few weeks about what you all were up to. I had to read a lot of posts on all the forums before I got the hang of it. How about something along the lines of we are all here because we want women to wear stockings and we want to provide all the resources to make it easy for them to buy them, talk about them and learn how to wear them?

– During the mid-’80s, I participated in a consulting engagement for a major US real estate developer. McKinsey and Company, the pricey consulting firm of much ballyhoo, was the strategic consultant for the project.

McKinsey led the project team in a purpose-definition seminar. The outcome led to fast and precise development of guiding principles and values that enabled the development of a business plan in one-fourth “norm time” for developing a biz plan.

The bottom line – the project was a huge success in financial terms for the developer. After defining a clear purpose, achieving the goals became possible within the limited timeframe allowed.

– Ok, here’s a go:

“The Purpose of this group is to celebrate the beauty, elegance, sensuality and mystery of gartered stockings and our appreciation, admiration and respect for the women who choose to wear them. ”

– I like it but I suspect all the trannies and cross-dressers will not. But, maybe I don’t know enough about them. Does it offend any of them to say we have admiration, respect and appreciation for the “women” who wear them (stockings)?

– I’m not an expert on the CDs and trannies but it seems to me that their love of dressing “as” women is an expression of their love “of” women and all things feminine.

Those of us who are not CDs or trannies also appreciate the same things the trannies do. It’s just that we appreciate them on women rather than ourselves.

Sounds okay but a bit long. How about omitting sensuality and respect. For me sensuality is sort of implicit when you say mystery and respect is also implied when you say admiration. That’s just my two cents.