# Talk:Metal corset

This article is currently in very poor shape - I'm not sure it needs to be a separate article from corset. Specifically, I would like to see references - particularly for the assertion that they were worn as anti-assassination devices (how many medieval and Renaissance women had to worry about being assassinated?!), but also I would like to see references defending the historical existence and use of metal corsets: I had understood that, like chastity belts, the existing examples are of Victorian provenance.
Katherine Shaw 13:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The historical existence is a corset cover, for political wedding. To carry 40 pound of silver brocade and/or gold brocade, you have need of a strong foundation. Do you doubt?
Today metal corset (cover) is a extreme underground fashion. http://www.candsconstructions.com/images/C&S0307as.jpg
It is important as separate metal corset (cover) from all other articles, because it easy to get many fantasy references. And they exist as a rare fashion, when whalebone was to soft. Your wish to mix some rarely corset covers by the corset article will ruin  the corset article.
http://www.staylace.com/gallery/gallery57/index.html

Håbet 14:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree this article should be merged into corset
--Bettinaisabel (talk) 19:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't know how many scholars still believe that they were used specifically as corsets.  There's the corset cover theory, but there's also the medical theory found here: http://books.google.com/books?id=uk6I0-MDXVQC&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=iron+corset&source=bl&ots=zYI7Rld56V&sig=QZSJy5v1E7GTaphEHG6SU3eRG3M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ec54T4-OF4rGtgfhlKWNDw&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAjgU#v=onepage&q=iron%20corset&f=false (Sorry about the long URL.  Wikipedia wouldn't let me post the shortened one for some reason.) It definitely doesn't need its own page, but I don't know if it should be merged into corset.
Kate (talk) 22:14, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Just noting that an article rescue and total rewrite has been carried out as of September 2015. The previous article was extremely unacceptable, including serious copyvio. Mabalu (talk) 13:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Metal corset/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 23:00, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I'll review this article. FunkMonk (talk) 23:00, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

"introduced them to fashionable France from Italy." Fashionable France seems a bit too loaded.
How could de' Medici have invented this if she supposedly just imported it form elsewhere?
Approximate date for then it was introduced? I see you have it in the intro, but should be in the article as well.
"with fetishistic writers" What is that exactly? Link? Especially since the term is used many times throughout the article.
"Steele has stated that some of these are more recent fakes" How recent?
"At least one early scholar claimed" How early?
"the excessive regularity of the garment's structure" What is meant by regularity?
"David Kunzle, in Fashion and Fetishism, has also noted that there is no literary evidence to indicate that metal corsets were worn.[10] He has suggested that such garments might have served the same purpose as the deliberately uncomfortable, tortuous hair shirt, combining a fashionable silhouette with either penance, or for masochistic gratification, and might have been worn in convents.[10]" I'm not sure if this is a contradiction, but is he implying that they were never worn, and then that they were?
"the early 21st-century tight-lacer Cathie Jung had a silver corset-cover" 20th it would seem?
"noted that this mythical royal connection captured public imagination" When, if no contemporary writers seem to mention them?
"that there is no literary evidence to indicate that metal corsets were worn" You should perhaps specify worn as fashion, since it seems they were clearly worn for medical purposes?
It seems the scope covers two separate subjects (dubious fashion corsets/actual medical corsets), but this could be reflected better in the section names. For example "history" seems to only be about fashion corsets, so perhaps it should be renamed accordingly?
Perhaps the Kahlo painting could be shown here?
The York corset is supposedly a fashion item, or what?
"although this is now considered a myth." Only the intro states it this securely, not the article body.
When did medical corsets stop being used?
"Metal medical corsets were still being made in the early twentieth century." If Kahlo got one as late as 1944, it would seem it was in use later than the early twentieth century?
"Some of the more decorative and extreme examples" You don't use these words to describe the corsets in the article body.
You there, Mabalu? FunkMonk (talk) 18:58, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


### Response
Firstly - not sure why I only got notified of this 3 days later... strange.

"introduced them to fashionable France from Italy." Fashionable France seems a bit too loaded.
Took out the word "fashionable."
How could de' Medici have invented this if she supposedly just imported it form elsewhere?
Adjusted wording
Approximate date for then it was introduced? I see you have it in the intro, but should be in the article as well.
Fixed
"with fetishistic writers" What is that exactly? Link? Especially since the term is used many times throughout the article.
Rewrote sentence
"Steele has stated that some of these are more recent fakes" How recent?
Date added
"At least one early scholar claimed" How early?
1938, have rewritten sentence
"the excessive regularity of the garment's structure" What is meant by regularity?
The mechanical nature of the garment.
"David Kunzle, in Fashion and Fetishism, has also noted that there is no literary evidence to indicate that metal corsets were worn.[10] He has suggested that such garments might have served the same purpose as the deliberately uncomfortable, tortuous hair shirt, combining a fashionable silhouette with either penance, or for masochistic gratification, and might have been worn in convents.[10]" I'm not sure if this is a contradiction, but is he implying that they were never worn, and then that they were
Kunzle is very speculative. He admits to the lack of contemporary evidence, and THEN makes it clear that he is participating in "pure speculation," something I make explicit in the following sentence.
"the early 21st-century tight-lacer Cathie Jung had a silver corset-cover" 20th it would seem?
Both 20th and 21st century, so have clarified. She's still going.
"noted that this mythical royal connection captured public imagination" When, if no contemporary writers seem to mention them?
Because the myths were made up by later writers, and THEN captured public imagination. Rearranged sentence to clarify.
"that there is no literary evidence to indicate that metal corsets were worn" You should perhaps specify worn as fashion, since it seems they were clearly worn for medical purposes?
Fixed
It seems the scope covers two separate subjects (dubious fashion corsets/actual medical corsets), but this could be reflected better in the section names. For example "history" seems to only be about fashion corsets, so perhaps it should be renamed accordingly?
I have merged the sections, which actually seems to work better and more cohesively.

Perhaps the Kahlo painting could be shown here?
I want to, but was hesistant as I wasn't sure if it could be rock-solid justified as fair-use.
The York corset is supposedly a fashion item, or what?
The Museum do not say explicitly either way. I suspect medical/support, but that would be my own OR/speculation. It is presented here without comment as an illustrative example of a surviving historic metal bodice, and is the only such decent modern image to be available with Commons clearances
"although this is now considered a myth." Only the intro states it this securely, not the article body.
Not addressed yet. FunkMonk (talk) 16:49, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
When did medical corsets stop being used?
I genuinely have no idea, for all I know they are still in use in certain circumstances, but could not find anything to clarify this.
"Metal medical corsets were still being made in the early twentieth century." If Kahlo got one as late as 1944, it would seem it was in use later than the early twentieth century?
Agreed, 1944 is still first half of 20th century, but agree it is more mid-20th.

"Some of the more decorative and extreme examples" You don't use these words to describe the corsets in the article body.
Fixed
I do hope that these edits work, please let me know what else you think. I am somewhat surprised that it took three days for me to get notified that I had been mentioned as the sub-page didn't show up on my watchlist. Mabalu (talk) 11:51, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Nice, there is one unaddressed comment I have marked above. Other than that, it is much clearer now with the new structure. FunkMonk (talk) 16:49, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
The unaddressed comment does seem to be dealt with in the Origins section, where it is explained that the de Medici story is mythical and why it is considered mythical. I can look for extra sources for this if required. Mabalu (talk) 00:18, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
I guess that would be where you say "this mythical royal connection". That's fine with me, so I'll now pass the article. FunkMonk (talk) 13:16, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Metal corset. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150929173328/https://museum-at-fit.culturalspot.org/asset-viewer/iron-corset/fgHPM7b4_RZXRQ?hl=en to https://museum-at-fit.culturalspot.org/asset-viewer/iron-corset/fgHPM7b4_RZXRQ?hl=en
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:28, 29 June 2017 (UTC)