lingerie once again
24 Jul 2002 02:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cimorenethis is getting to be the saga of lingerie. i've always bought expensive bras, because i've never had a remotely easy time finding ones that fit. up until the last time i went shopping for them, we were talking hours in the mall and trying on everything in two or three different department stores (parisian is my personal favorite, a southern chain owned by saks fifth avenue which is the saks equivalent of a flea market, perhaps, but still a bit more expensive than the other local ones). so last night i decided to check at target since we were there anyway, and the third bra i tried on, which was by one of target's in-house brands (gilligan & o'malley, as it happens) actually fit, so i bought four of it.
so then today we braved the mall in search of underwear. at parisian, jockey didn't even carry their smallest size, and they were the absolute cheapest around. the next-best would've been, oh, 3 for $21. so i said, 'victoria's secret might not be this bad,' so we went there and they were having a sale, so i ended up getting 5 for $20, but that's not even the point.
no, the point is about the bras. they had my bras, literally identical to the ones purchased yesterday in target, including the one that i'm wearing. i mean, i am positive they were manufactured in the same factory. they've got the same ribbon bows, the same stitching, the same finishong on the little hooks and eyes on teh backs, they have some of the same colors that i bought. they are really totally the same. at target they were $11; at victoria's secret they were $30.
these look sort of like cotton, but they're microfiber, with a little ribbon rosette and zigzag stitching on self-fabric straps (as opposed to lingerie straps), soft-cupped, underwire. at victoria's secret they're 'body by victoria demi something or other.' i don't remember what they were called at target exactly, but the point is...
they're identical. i mean, victoria's secret has a reputation. they're a lingerie company, and when they come out with a new line, i have sort of vague visions of lingerie experts sitting around tables, writing with chalk and charcoal on tissue paper. computer models. pins and tape measures. i'd expect it to be cutting edge. i certainly would not expect them to just buy it off of some indonesian factory owner, and certainly not when they're calling it 'by victoria.' even though 'victoria' herself is obviously fictional, there's a certain implication here that... oh, hell.
anyway. victoria's secret is a great source for cotton panties, but i'd advise everyone to by your bras at target.
so then today we braved the mall in search of underwear. at parisian, jockey didn't even carry their smallest size, and they were the absolute cheapest around. the next-best would've been, oh, 3 for $21. so i said, 'victoria's secret might not be this bad,' so we went there and they were having a sale, so i ended up getting 5 for $20, but that's not even the point.
no, the point is about the bras. they had my bras, literally identical to the ones purchased yesterday in target, including the one that i'm wearing. i mean, i am positive they were manufactured in the same factory. they've got the same ribbon bows, the same stitching, the same finishong on the little hooks and eyes on teh backs, they have some of the same colors that i bought. they are really totally the same. at target they were $11; at victoria's secret they were $30.
these look sort of like cotton, but they're microfiber, with a little ribbon rosette and zigzag stitching on self-fabric straps (as opposed to lingerie straps), soft-cupped, underwire. at victoria's secret they're 'body by victoria demi something or other.' i don't remember what they were called at target exactly, but the point is...
they're identical. i mean, victoria's secret has a reputation. they're a lingerie company, and when they come out with a new line, i have sort of vague visions of lingerie experts sitting around tables, writing with chalk and charcoal on tissue paper. computer models. pins and tape measures. i'd expect it to be cutting edge. i certainly would not expect them to just buy it off of some indonesian factory owner, and certainly not when they're calling it 'by victoria.' even though 'victoria' herself is obviously fictional, there's a certain implication here that... oh, hell.
anyway. victoria's secret is a great source for cotton panties, but i'd advise everyone to by your bras at target.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 24 Jul 2002 01:33 pm (UTC)Either way it's American consumerism at its finest, wot.
My solution to the pantie problem
Date: 24 Jul 2002 03:42 pm (UTC)Cause now I can tell you the real secret to finding comfortable and reasonably priced underwear.
Go to the mens dept.
Mens cotton briefs feel great in the erm, lowest regions, the waistband is broad enough to be comfortable, the leg holes have good range of give for *bloated* times of the cycle, and best of all they're CHEAP! They come in 3-packs, 6-packs, even 9-packs! They last forever. I fluctuate between a women's 6 and 8 pant, and the brief size that fits well for me is 30-32 inches. 32-34 in Jockey, but I prefer Hanes anyway.
So now there's no reason to go anywhere but Target! I do keep a few pairs of the girly kind for playing in. But for day-to-day, I want COMFORTABLE.
I can't believe I'm posting this.
(no subject)
Date: 24 Jul 2002 04:52 pm (UTC)I've switched to buying only men's trousers, because they're sized reasonably (i.e., in units that actually *measure* something, as opposed to "8" or "10"). I can walk into the store and pick out what I need right away instead of trying on pair after pair of khakis or jeans before finding one that even comes close to fitting.
(no subject)
Date: 24 Jul 2002 05:21 pm (UTC)