I've had another dalliance with 'Shapewear' today, in advance of attending a wedding at the weekend.
This month has been a bit of a bugger in terms of waistline management, with a string of social events, a family wedding a few weeks ago and the last six days were spent on a mini-break in our little caravan, during which all dietary/calorie restrictions were suspended.
As a result, a few pounds have sneaked on and taken up residence around what I laughingly call 'my middle' meaning that my spring wedding outfit, which fitted just fine a few weeks ago, is now definitely on the 'snug' side.
My existing shapewear is black, which will be no good under white trousers, so I reluctantly concluded that I would need to spring for white underpinnings, and set off in search of same this morning.
Predictably, it didn't quite go according to plan.
For a start, there seems to be no such thing as white shapewear. The only choice, other than black, is a sort of flesh colour, although it's not a flesh tone I've ever seen on a living person.
Alternatively, the same pinky/beige shade is also called 'nude', although again, it's not a colour I would ever associate with any unclothed human body.
While I completely understand that making 'one flesh colour suits all' would be a challenge, it is one which the designers of shapewear have spectacularly failed to meet.
Anyway, like it or lump it, 'flesh' it had to be.
Then there was the choice of which problem area I wanted to address. Apparently, shapewear is incapable of dealing with more than one...or perhaps the designers think that women only ever suffer from one 'out of control' body area at any one time.
This is blatantly bollocks.
As a pear-shaped woman, while I do have a discernible waist, I also have a stomach, hips, thighs and buttocks, all of which will require considerable restraint in order to fit into my figure-skimming trousers.
However, it is clearly beyond the wit of man (I'm making a wild guess that shapewear designers are probably men) to construct a garment which will slim and shape the whole torso from waist to thighs.
As such I was faced with the following choices.....
1. A rather flimsy-looking garment which claimed to eliminate VPL. To be brutally honest, visible panty line is the LEAST of my worries.
2. Medium control thigh slimmer. No mention of tum or bum.... but I'll wager that any woman who needs dramatically slimmer thighs, might also have some problem areas slightly higher up, in which case gazelle-like thighs might draw further attention to those.
3. Firm control waist cincher. Fairly hefty support round the middle but very flimsy around the nether regions.
4. Shape & Sculpt.... basically a buttock lifter, but with precious little support infrastructure round the front.
5. Firm control tummy tamer. Highly structured deep waistband, extending down to the top of the hips where it appeared to give up the ghost and revert to being simply stretchy.
By this time I was seriously considering buying all five in order to adequately cover all bases but thankfully I realised that trying to disentangle myself for toileting purposes would be flirting with disaster. So in the end I plumped (no pun intended) for the tummy tamer, on the basis that whatever's happening round the back can look after itself.
I haven't tried it on yet as I don't want to give myself a hernia before the big day but it's currently lying fleshily on the bed, taunting me with its tautness.
As I have said before, on countless occasions.... what could possibly go wrong?
2 comments:
You are a brave soul. I think I would just let it all hang out...some filmy summery dress that isn't fitted..but that's just me.
Hope you have a lovely time at the wedding.
Jane.... I am all in favour of letting it all hang out, but first I have to somehow persuade it all IN! Then be reasonably confident that it's not going to unexpectedly explode OUT at an inopportune moment.
I am seriously reconsidering my spring/summer wedding outfit choices.....
Post a Comment