Following on the ‘pants’ saga, I recently purchased a pack of “high legs” from everyone’s favourite knicker shop.
Very handily they have a “knicker guide” on their website to point out the benefits of each. High leg apparently means “sits just under the tummy button with good bottom coverage and a flattering high cut on the legs”.
I will agree with the flattering high cut on the leg.
“good bottom coverage”? Oh no, I don’t think so!
I don’t know who they are trying to kid, but if you try a pair on, as I did they have more material at the front than back, resulting in the front view of the pants sitting just under your tummy button as described, but the top of the back sitting just above (there really is no polite way of saying this) your builders bottom crack.
So you have a nice high-waisted coverage at the front and pants suitable for hipsters at the back. If you try to adjust to get higher coverage at the back, you get a nice flappy bit of material underneath your gusset. Tres chic!
If I buy pants I want good coverage front and back please.
Also on the backside coverage issue, they do not fully cover your backside cheeks either. I have checked with a pair from a pack I was given last year (still in the pack) and the width of the gusset on the pair bought recently at the back is a good 2cm each side NARROWER than last years pair. I know there’s a recession, but really! These knickers do not give good bottom coverage, they are simply a wider version of a thong.
I didn’t buy a thong I bought knickers that were clearly advertised as giving good bottom coverage.
Like I said before NOT EVERYONE WANTS TO WEAR A THONG, so please stop trying to force everyone too.
Finally, what on earth is a brazilian brief?