| Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Fri, 07 March 2008 22:28  |
|
A simple question thats probably better answered by someone old enough to remember the golden age when all women wore stockings daily.
Born in 1961, I cant really remember the 'pre tights era' but I wondered if stockings had the same mystique and allure that they have today in an age when they were common place ?
Is part of the attraction to them there comparative rarity perhaps, if they were everyday items would they lose a little of their appeal ?
I'd be interested to know what others think 
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sat, 08 March 2008 05:04  |
|
| Tetley wrote on Fri, 07 March 2008 22:28 |
Is part of the attraction to them ( stockings ) there comparative rarity perhaps, if they were everyday items would they lose a little of their appeal ?
|
I'm not much older than you Tetley, so can't vouch for the ' Golden Age ' of stockings being all that we think it might have been ... but I definitely think you have a valid point, relative to the present, that rarity is part and parcel of their appeal 
Difficult to explain ... but .. you can pass 1000 and 1 women out in the street, and not really take much notice .. but you spot someone sporting FFN's or RHT's ... and straight away, that one woman stands out from the crowd ... she becomes .. intriguing, because she's wearing something outside ' the Norm ' ... something that straightaway seems to define her personality and sense
of ' individualism ' ...
She may, or may not, be immediately ' stunning ' ..in the broadest sense of the word ... but somehow, you see her as a ' kindred spirit ' ..and all because of her .. rarity, and the fact that she chooses to express a side of herself regardless of whether it's ' fashionable ' or not 
It's as simple ( or as complicated ) as that ..  
[Updated on: Sat, 08 March 2008 05:06]
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sat, 08 March 2008 08:06 |
|
As you know my wife does wear stockings, well if you think it is only for the camera, it isn't. We have to say that ff and rht stockings are generally worn when we go out in the evening, or somewhere special. The price alone dictates that.
Recently we visited out local theatre, and as always Les made the effort and wore a lovely pair of ff nylons. When we were in the bar area I noticed a woman in her mid to late 60's, with her husband. She looked down at Lesleys legs, and the look of disgust on her face, if the earth had opened up we would have been there. She nudged her husband, but it was hard to gauge his thoughts. That sort of reaction, although in the minority, does make Les feel a little uncomfortable for a moment, but then she says, 'it's her problem, let her deal with it, I'm comfortable with what I have on, I dress to please me, not her'.
It isn't easy to spot everyday stockings, and most ladies do not go down the road lifting their skirts as if to say 'look what I have on'. Discretion plays a large part, and it is great to leave people guessing.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sat, 08 March 2008 11:00 |
|
| Lincoln Lady wrote on Sat, 08 March 2008 08:06 |
...looked down at Lesley's legs, and the look of disgust on her face... That sort of reaction, although in the minority, does make Les feel a little uncomfortable for a moment, but then she says, 'it's her problem, let her deal with it, I'm comfortable with what I have on, I dress to please me, not her'.
It isn't easy to spot everyday stockings, and most ladies do not go down the road lifting their skirts as if to say 'look what I have on'. Discretion plays a large part, and it is great to leave people guessing.
|
Unfortunately, stockings have been largely hi-jacked by an unimaginative porn industry and it's tended to label, quite unfairly, the ladies who wear stockings as 'not quite nice'.
This of course is quite ridiculous and any lady should be free to wear whatever she wants without drawing unkind comments or looks.
Very well said - bravo Lesley!
Ken 
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sat, 08 March 2008 15:43 |
|
Greetings Tetley.
Allow me to add some to Dirk and Lacewing's comments which are most valid and hold truck. And I do like what Lincoln Lady said about dressing for pleasure.
Guys do and always have come in two basic flavors, at least in the western world and this has been well documented: they are (generally) either breast men or legs and ass men. The latter tend to be more cerebral with deeper and wider eyes. There are of course always exceptions. So the mystique of which you speak has been around for a very long time. Back in Victorian times, the mere sight of an ankle was enough to cause severe arousal and was not an uncommon tactic employed by a lady or two.
Hosiery and especially stockings has a societal "hang up" in general because as I've railed about numerous times the general public has/have little concept of self worth nor self esteem and increasingly, incredibly less imagination. Yet, as related by Lincoln Lady's experience, these simpleton's reactions are so programed as to be nauseous to anyone who has a modicum of independent imaginative intelligence.
Porn has been around much longer then the majority of many would believe and has always been a source of "ills" concerning the effects on society. Actually, porn is as old as prostitution which is as old as the beginning of organized society. The current perceived subversion concerning porn and stockings is just reflective of the current times which with we find ourselves and it is increasingly easy for the minions to blame the porn industry for stockings have a related connative reputation. Then again, look at those involved drawing those conclussion based on their collective imagination(s).
Sigh, just a sign of the times I say. Fortunately, there are places like SHQ and the attendant intellectual sorts with which to interface.
Yes, that sound you hear is applause. I'll now stand up and continue my clapping...
Fine Regards,
Dworkin
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sat, 08 March 2008 16:11 |
|
To answer Tetley's original question before this gets hijacked by one of the SHQ diversions!!!
I was but a boy when stockings were everyday wear, but my love of legs and stockings came from this time. When friends of my older sister visited and their skirts rode up enough to show some stocking top I experienced my first arousals!!
My favourite was when cycling to school in traffic, I could ride up the inside of stationary cars and peek in often to see ladies who's skirts had ridden up enough to show a lot of stocking top. I still remember one very attractive MG Midget driver who must have been an early short skirt convert who had all of her stocking tops and quite a length of suspender strap on show while waiting at some traffic lights. Cycling was quite difficult for some time later!!
So no, for me whether they are commonplace or rare, stockings still have the same appeal!!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sat, 08 March 2008 23:56 |
|
Hi Tetley & SHQ Members,
I'm one of those older gals that grew up in that old gold stocking era when nearly all females wore gartered stockings. What was the mystique and the mystery that held the male and his wondering eyes and mind to a pair of glistening stockinged legs. What was the outer limits, the one step beyond, the don't tread on me area, the no fly zone or the space between half heaven and half heartache? A place that has existed ever since women wore garters and exists today in the women that still do. It's the eye catcher area or the twilight zone between the hem of a dress or skirt and the top or welt of the stockings. Just that bit of soft feminine skin concealed above a gartered thigh and traveling in the minds eye farther north will be as beautiful and mysterious today as it was during times past. Have you ever heard of the brand of stockings called Eye Catchers? They were on the ball or spot on as our English friends would say about the reasoning behind that name. Look at a lady in stockings. I mean real RH&T or Full Fashioned hosiery. Start at her feet and see the way the material hugs the curves of her foot. Notice how the reinforced sections cling to her toes and heels and adds allure or actually illuminates the shape of her foot. The contrast in color that draws attention to the eyes. That contrast is hot and lovely or torrid and sexy all at the same time. The way the material hugs an ankle and calf or glistens in the sunlight! These things are the allure and mystique of stockings and as long as there are places like SHQ and bold strong willed women who could care less about what other people think then the passion will never die. I'll also say this. There is a class of younger females that are starting to notice and wear gartered stockings. And believe me these young dolls know what buttons to push as well as the women did years ago. A woman does not have to flaunt herself or intentionally show off. We can remain ladies and let our legs in fine nylons do the walking and the talking!
Love You all,
Susan-HanesBaby
CSB-Classic Stockings Beauty
09/30/2002
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sat, 08 March 2008 23:59 |
|
| Quote |
Recently we visited out local theatre, and as always Les made the effort and wore a lovely pair of ff nylons. When we were in the bar area I noticed a woman in her mid to late 60's, with her husband. She looked down at Lesleys legs, and the look of disgust on her face, if the earth had opened up we would have been there. She nudged her husband, but it was hard to gauge his thoughts. That sort of reaction, although in the minority, does make Les feel a little uncomfortable for a moment, but then she says, 'it's her problem, let her deal with it, I'm comfortable with what I have on, I dress to please me, not her'.
|
Bravo, Lincoln Lady! You're absolutely right and I second that. I personally have never had the 'look of disgust' partly because most of these dull people have seen the other half (all 20+ stone of him usually with a nice suit and a skinhead haircut but not the tattooed knuckles) and thought that it was not a good idea to start an argument. Something about a man who could probably pound several shades of s**t out of someone is enough!
Quite why an item of hosiery which was certainly worn by my grandmother (RIP now, unfortunately) should induce such looks of disgust is beyond me. Has the porn industry REALLY given stockings such a poor image? I hope not.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sun, 09 March 2008 16:50 |
|
reetings there All.
The following is more a response directed toward Susan's comments and questions which, by the way, make some excellent points.
This may turn a few off but bear on here and I'll try not to drift. The attraction for a particular item as a turn on, in this case, a penchant surrounding the allure of stockings and even hosiery in general most often has basis related to an event or series of events that occur early in childhood, as early as infancy even more often before self awareness. As example, one that used to be much more common, the attraction to latex rubber was associated to the changing of diapers: stimulation while changing became an association as diapers used to include rubber sheets and pants, long before plastic or disposables. This physically occurs more in males just because of the physiology involved, in the way the human body is constructed. This is an association via a physical sensation. Now, were this to occur say while a woman was changing a diaper while attired in stockings, there could be a visual stimulus. Combine the two, a sexual physical stimulation, no matter how minor (humans in particular are capable of this response almost from birth) with a visual cue and the result is imprinting.
This is one reason men are soooooo attracted to breasts; there is very much an intimate association here straight from the womb. The same is true with females though due to the differences in the female/male wiring, this rarely manifests itself in the same manners. This particular trigger in males is also triggered again when testosterone kicks in.
The attraction to hosiery has an association that is usually not able to be traced back to the source and as hosiery in most forms of society is one of the items that is supposed to be "hidden", it could easily take on the aura of mystique. That is further enforced by societal values as intimate lingerie or to be mare basic, underwear is not supposed to be in the open so to say. With this in mind, a peek holds a subtle and loaded attraction.
This is just one example and I've attempted to stay focused without veering too far into the "fetish" realm. This is one of those subjects that has many a theory and has no real conclusional answers as this is one of those inexact "mind" science things and all depends on who you talk to. Imprinting is one of the more accepted concepts with a multitude of deviations available, many of those ideas dealing with deviations which, at least currently, the vast majority of the society with reinforced collective limited vision considers the majority of us. Freud might have been a “Father” of modern shrinkdom but he was not always right and I myself choose to deviate from more then a few of his concepts.
Hopefully, this might explain one possible aspect with regards to Susan’s observational queries. I have no memory or memories of the genesis concerning my particular imprinting or from where they arose nor am I sorry for possession of any which include many. Freud might have, nay, would have had much to say, however I say simply,
Enjoy!
Dworkin
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sun, 09 March 2008 19:04 |
|
What's ironic about the porn industry is that aside from being very popular and successful, the majority of porn show models and actresses who don't even wear hosiery. I feel that stockings are only shown in foot/nylon fetish-based porn, and nowhere else. And most nylon fetish porn are more focused on tights (pantyhose) and barely with stockings. Leg/foot fetish porn is probably 30% bare legs - even when hosiery is in a segment, chances are 99% that it'll get removed and bare legs will be the finale.
And yet with all the porn with buttocks and women's breasts and underwear (especially thongs), stockings get a negative connotation. Meanwhile thongs are shown or mentioned on network television ("The O.C." had a really good scene) and sold everywhere.
x
Mike
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Sun, 09 March 2008 21:21 |
|
I think one look at the way stockings and suspenders are worn on the body may hold a clue to their mystique.
In young women of a school age, over the knee socks are often worn and men, regardless of what they say, are often attracted to much younger women. These younger women nearly always wear over the knee socks and there is a recurring image of innocence associated with them.
Now to relate this to stockings and suspenders. What is a stocking but a longer, sheerer and often black version of an over the knee sock. There is the link here in the male mind. An innocent young girl becomes a woman only when she dumps the over the knee socks and graduates to the stocking. Coupled with the alluring image of the naked flesh at the thigh, between the darker stocking and the genital area (yes, it is) and the feeling that if the male hand can traverse as far as the naked flesh part, then it sets up an image of something quite sensual and mysterious.
Tigths can never have that sort of appeal, since the groin area is covered by nylon and remains off limits. They also look quite functional but little else.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Mon, 10 March 2008 02:15 |
|
Oh yes!! T***ts cam in when I was 21 or 22 but stockings always held a fascination for me.
As a teenager, there was the tactile thrill of feeling a girls legs - modern hosiery does not have anything like the same feel. And then the hand moved upwards, feeling the welt and the bare flesh beyond. I won't continue!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Mon, 10 March 2008 06:59 |
|
Alan is right on. I was a teenager late 60's and remember exactly what he is hinting at while dating my girlfriend (now wife, does not wear now  )
If someone can find the words to the 1959 Frankie Avalon song "Bobby socks to stockings" we would see that a girl became a sexual object when she grew up enough to wear stockings instead of bobby socks.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Mon, 10 March 2008 07:02 |
|
Try this for a short version from YouTube
www.youtube.com/watch?v=r611vnIby4A
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Mon, 10 March 2008 22:44 |
|
Hi All.
This part is more of a response to Mich’s comments about pantyhose/tights lacking appeal. I offer the following:
Mich, you offer yet another view which fits, certainly to and within our contemporary time(s). Tights, in a more, perhaps darker, sinister but equally contemporary manner have an application here. They are also part of the parts that are "off limits" and certainly limit access in a physical sense, much more then a garter/suspender belt with knickers/panties. I'm reminded of two humoral incidents related in print, one at Zona, the Girdle Zone about severe attempts by a young fellow to gain access to those "off limit" parts by a full, long legged panty girdle. There have been many thwarts by this and similar garments as I'm sure some here at SHQ might attest. The other comes from one of Xaviera Hollander's books (The Happy Hooker) when wearing pantyhose/tights, an amorous encounter was thwarted for similar reasons though the circumstances were much different. She called them passion killers.
Pantyhose/tights have a psychological context here, related to more current times. The wearing of this garment returns a female (in some minds) to a "virginal" state by placing the object of interest out of reach, at least easily. There are some suggested moral and religious tones involved along with other themes but there is no doubt that generations now see pantyhose/tights as an erotic bit of apparel. This may seem alien to those of us from the "Classic" era, particularly when there are those that find these garments uncomfortable or in some cases useless (as in finding a pair that fit) but we are from a different time. Hell, I refuse to have a cell phone and choose to drive older model vehicles and still refer to my drums as a set, not a kit. Then again, I am an old fart in many a ways. The pantyhose/tights folks have simply had nothing else to compare them to in their adolescence and developmental years resulting that there would be many to find these garments erotic, exotic, much the same as they would find thongs so. This is what they grew up with.
Perspective is dependent on many influences and much of that is influenced by age. I still have tele that requires manual tuning (no remote!) We see things differently and those younger think stockings are as archaic as my tele and have no application. We have the benefit of experience and hindsight and damn few of us had any of that when younger. I would have a hard time explaining why some things are but I do understand them. I don’t like sports but understand the popularity even should I have a difficult time explaining.
I accept these contemporary items as being a turn on to now a huge number of the population and can not dismiss them. This is one of those things that is in the realm of “to each their own”. Personally, should any of the “younger” generation consider wearing hosiery, pretty much in any form, I consider most of such to be an overall positive effect. That any could find them exciting reflects their particular circumstances. Again, I understand it but could fill volumes and not probably explain it. But, I do accept it.
Fine Regards,
Dworkin
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Tue, 11 March 2008 17:36 |
|
I think t**hts are the modern equivalent of the chastity belt, in that a man has to do a fair amount of work in order to get into the parts covered by nylon/lycra. Stockings offer a certain ease and herein lies the problem. For a woman to wear stockings, it suggests that she is more confident with her sexuality that she doesn't NEED to limit access to 'private parts'.
I'm not sure that stockings had the same mystique as they do now. One reason is that years ago, stockings were ubiquitious. If a woman was wearing hosiery, it was stockings because there was nothing else around. Also, the stockings age (the 1940s - 1960s) was an age where behaviour was more repressive (or so I believe). Women had a certain decorum. They didn't wear underwear revealing clothes like they do today. If a woman dressed, it was quite smart and usually less revealing. One only has to look at the clothes worn in TV series like Mad Men to realise that women didn't advertise 'availability'.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Wed, 12 March 2008 03:53 |
|
According to my husband, stockings always had the allure for most men, even when all women wore them. It was the mystery and variety of what lay beneath the skirt, as well as the natural sensuality of a nyloned leg and the taut suspenders traversing the naked flesh. Of course men's love of them didn't need to be expressed through an SHQ, just because they were readily available everywhere.
He says too that women were by no means as uptight in the 50's and 60's as people think now. They knew the art of stockingtop-flashing through leg-crossing, emerging from cars, cycling, etc.. It was rare on any day, he says, not to get at least a glimpse of stockingtop and/or bare flesh, often a flash of a suspender, and plenty of 'bumps', which women in tight skirts didn't worry about showing. After all, stockings weren't tarty - nuns and royalty wore them! Fashion histories show that in the late 1930's women wore their skirts so tight that, in the words of one fashion writer, 'the suspenders might as well have been worn on the outside'. The fear of showing bumps and shapes is very much a modern phenomenon, due to women feeling 'different' if they wear stockings.
If one looks at the 'girly' mags of the post-war era, like 'Spick' and 'Span', all the girls are raising their skirts and showing stockings and suspenders. Do you think they'd have concentrated on that if men didn't love stockings?!
[Updated on: Wed, 12 March 2008 04:03]
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Wed, 12 March 2008 04:26 |
|
Yes Tetley, stockings have always had a wonderful appeal and to this very day am obsessed with it! For the first ten years of my sex life(age 15 to 25) all the women wore stockings everyday, everywhere and so when you got lucky, the smooth nylon encased legs were there to see, touch, feel, lick and grope! I loved it! During three of those years I was living in Wiesbaden, Germany and their matching lacy garterbelts, bras and various lingerie in all the colors of the rainbow were a total joy for me. I was a driven man, seeking the colors of the rainbow 
Before I was sexually active I was living in Orleans, France with my parents and I was eleven or twelve years old when we went to Paris for a weekend. We took a bus tour of the city and some very nice French woman who was seated in the first row asked me if I wanted to sit on her lap so that I could see better. Well I figured out right off that if I pushed back while I was sitting on her lap, her skirt would slide up just enough and then I would put all of my 80 pounds or so of weight on her legs and she wasn't able to pull her skirt back down even though she tried. Thus, I could look down and see the tops of her stockings, the tips of her garters and all the way down her legs to her sexy high heeled shoes. I don't recall any of the sights of Paris but I will never forget the view I had for several hours. It was my first encounter with seeing and 'sort of' touching a woman wearing stockings and I was hooked!
It was only about a year later that a older French girl who was a neighbor took me to her parents garden house and we had sex. She was about 15 years old I think ...maybe even older, I just didn't ask. Like most boys that age, I was tireless but not able to finalize things, so to speak. Thinking back as I often do about her, maybe that is why she picked me at that age.
Our parents would all get together on Sundays during the summer about once or twice a month in the garden and ate various picnic type items that everyone brought with them while the children went to play. Josephine and I would slip away and find our own entertainment. I was learning back then that women were pleasant to the eye but I had no idea that they could do such wonder things but I knew immediately that I loved it!!!!
So one Sunday Josephine came with her family as always but she was still dressed from church and had on her Sunday best which included stockings and heels!! I clearly recall my heart pounding and I couldn't wait for us to slip away. The anticipation was a killer! As it turned out her parents only stopped briefly to say farewell to everyone as they were moving to another city. I think it was the first time in my life that I instantly became depressed! They only stayed about 15 minutes and then there were a lot of hand shakes and hugs and off they went, leaving me with a case of severe frustration and depression that Sigmund Freud would not have been able to cure! So near and yet so far from what would have been my first 'stockings' sexual encounter! I wanted her so bad!!!! 
Thus I suppose, became the foundation for my sex drive and an incurable obsession with stockings! Even as a young adult I could never imagine that anyone would invent the "Ultimate Curse for Men" .....pantyhose/tights!!! I know that a women must have invented those gawd awful things, as no man would ever commit such a crime!!
I don't think I have ever recovered and I find that I am still trying to offset that great loss of Josephine in her stockings some five decades later. Sadly, there are so few women today who are confident enough to be so bold and to think for themselves and the joy of their man. So Tetley, the answer is an unequivocal yes to your question. I wish you better luck in finding such a woman than I have had in more recent times.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Did stockings always have the same mystique ? |
Thu, 13 March 2008 23:02 |
|
|
Susan, You capture the mystery of ff stockinged feet quite nicely.
|
|
|
| | |
Current time: Sun Jul 6 08:47:39 BST 2008
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01968 seconds |
