Read on Twitter
man a really dumb take I saw today is that 15th century artists drawing ~reubenesque~ women and today's media push for big booties is the same. Like, 1) there's a difference in beauty standards in art & in real life 2) clothing has never been as tight-fitting as it is today
It used to be that to achieve the perfect figure (as a person seen as a woman by society) you could just wear bigger bustles, fatter bum pads, the largest petticoats, the widest crinolines because it would all be hidden under clothes anyway
You literally *couldn't* make clothes that are as tight-fitting as they are today. Even the corsetry of that time was nowhere near what we nowadays think of when we think of corsets because you cannot get the level of tightlacing modern corsets can achieve w/o modern technology
Sure 1940s girdles seem weird and uncomfortable to modern eyes but, like, today you have to just be smooth and roll-less. You have to have the perfect body. Whereas w/ a girdle and similar corsetry you can have hip rolls etc - you don't have to change your body 2 change yr shape
I'm in several historical costuming and historical everyday wear groups on facebook and recently there was a post on which many people with breasts commented that they actually choose to wear historical corsetry instead of modern bras bc they feel better in them (not look, feel!)
(and not as in "oh I feel sexy in this", they were all talking about how the historical corsets & related underwear helps them stop slouching or are just more supportive of their breasts etc which is why they choose to wear them)
Anyway what I'm trying to get at is that I have opinions on historical undergarment and you all have to listen to me yell them into the void every so often
