Talk:Panties

message: In Japan, panties (pantsu) are commonly depicted as being a highly flirtatious, naughty element to a female's persona.
I thought it was pronounced "pantii".
"In Europe, panties are called knickers"... shouldn't it be "are also known as"... firstly there is more than one language in europe, but also in brittish english they are called knickers among other things, such as panties or pants (confusingly for americans)
:"pantii" may exist but it isnt the most common form of the word.  Japanese doesnt usually have /ti/ anyway.  —Soap— 17:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Just noting that I was wrong, I found "pantii" in a paper Japanese dictionary I have at home.  (100 million Japanese could probably have told you the same thing, but this page doesn';t seem to be watched very much.) —Soap— 11:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Undated section

message: This article needs some pictures of women wearing panties. Not only for plain enjoyment, but because it makes sense to show the reader how they're actually used and how they look when being used. For every article, it is best to create the page as if your explaining the topic to aliens. In other words, create the article so someone who has no idea what the topic is can understand completely once he/she is finished.
I totally agree. I don't mean to offend, but people should be able to see how they look like. Some freely distributable and sharable pictures could be included. Gentlelife (talk) 14:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: Knickers vs Panties: I maintain that there is a difference.  THEY SHOULD DO AWAY WITH THE WORD "PANTIES"
Though (in Britain) the term < Knickers > has remained in fashion to describe female underwear, including modern brief styles such as thongs, the term stretches backwards in time and generally has the "feel" (no pun) of a fuller garment with considerable weight and looseness of fit (hence the somewhat sexually-loaded "ring" about this term, when spoken).
The term < panties > is generally more modern and describes briefer garments that became fashionable circa the 1960s. In fact, this term has run out of date in Britain and is more associated with the USA and elsewhere. Fetishists possibly use this term, more than do modern wearers.
Note: for Britain, I preferred the term < pants > (before its use became corrupted as a modern slang adjective), as I find the -ies ending somewhat familiar and twee.
Signed 
81.109.65.216 20:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I cede to you sir. This article has been in this state of proposal for far too long. A vote needs to be called asap and I would give a yes vote after reconsidering the matter at hand.Irishman76m (talk) 19:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Knickers vs Panties 

message: This section seems to have been written by a fan of asian culture. Seems out of place in this article and should be removed. Anyone opinions?
No objections.213.48.73.89 19:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Re Asian culture - agreed, fwiw. Leegee23 (talk) 17:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References in popular culture 

message: I followed Disposable panties from an article about Postnatal, thinking I will see something about baby diapers instead it directed me to ladies panties. Is that right?--TheEgyptian 17:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disposable panties 

message: Panties is generally referred to in the 21st century as a way of describing female underwear, not both male and female so merging it to include it in a unisex general article is not accurate. (♠Taifarious1♠) 08:09, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Panties in the 21st century 

message: "String bikini panties are the most commonly worn type in the United States"?
I doubt that.  This may refer to thongs, which are popular among young women, but I would guess some type of brief is the most common overall.  I'll try to research, maybe there are some sales figures by type somewhere. Gr8white 23:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most commonly worn? 

message: The section on types could use a major overhaul.  There isn't even a mention of the classic brief, which has fallen out of favor but is still advertised extensively (and probably worn mostly by older women).  Also, 
"high-cut" is not the same as "control top" as implied; "high-cut" usually refers to a type of brief that is cut higher on the sides than the classic brief (roughly equivalent to "French cut").  This is one of (if not the) most popular styles in the US and elsewhere, and has nothing to do with hiding obesity.  (Control-top briefs are usually considered shapewear.)
Basic types IMO:
:Brief
::Classic (Full)
::High-Cut (French-Cut)
::Boyleg
:Hipster
:Bikini
::String?
:Tanga
:Thong
:G-String
These may overlap to some extent. Gr8white 01:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types 

message: I can find no evidence to support the claims made in this section. To me it looks like vandalism and as such I am going to remove it, if anyone can find sources you are free to put it back in.
----
Many female celebrities wear briefs; for instance, Paris Hilton wears plain white hi-cut Hanes briefs. In an interview she said, "Somtimes I wear thongs or bikinis, but I mostly wear briefs, because they are so comfortable, in all honesty, I have mostly either "Hanes" or "Fruit of the Loom" plain white hi-cut cotton briefs in my undies drawer. people think if your [sic] a celebrity your undies have to be thongs or something, but my undies are about comfort, I don't care if they come up to my belly button when I wear them, I like my undies."[attribution needed] Angelina Jolie also said that she wears hi-rise briefs for comfort regularly.[citation needed] And Jessica Alba said she wears Fruit of the Loom briefs much of the time, even pop star Pink said all she wore were plain white Hanes cotton briefs: "They are comfortable and I like white undies; I won't wear any other kind of undies."
----
Irishman76m (talk) 19:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celebrities who wear briefs 

message: *No they shouldn't be merged together as panties represents thongs, knickers, g-strings etc whereas knickers are just knickers. Panties is an americanism whereas knickers is britsh and europeon. --Scorpio95 00:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging

message: Is panties an encyclopaedic term? Hakluyt bean (talk) 19:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Panties... 

message: This picture is one of three types of drawers that the 1919 book Garments for girls  shows how to sew (the other two types are bloomers and closed drawers).  Wikipedia doesn't seem to currently discuss open drawers.  
A manual of needlework, knitting and cutting out for evening continuation by Elizabeth Rosevear page 62 has this:
:Open Drawers. -- Girls generally begin to wear open drawers when they are about nine or ten years old.  Open drawers are not cut down at the hips, and the band is made all in one piece of the material.  The backs and fronts of the legs are not joined together, but hemmed separately, or lined with false hems.  The fronts, in children's sizes, are seamed together for about 2 inches, in women's sizes a little more.  A button and buttonhole are placed at the ends of the bands, or two tape strings.  The legs may be constructed as for closed drawers, i.e. as knickerbockers with bands, or they may be made up with a deep hem, and narrow tucks above.  The drawers are gathered or pleated into the bands at the waist and legs.  Women's drawers are very seldom made up as closed, but nearly always as open.  
The American practitioner, Volumes 13-14
1892
http://books.google.com/books?id=X4BYAAAAMAAJ
pg 335-336
Dr. E. R. Palmer
Article: Kentucky State Medical Society
Stated Meeting, Louisville, May 4, 5, and 6, 1892 has this:
:I saw in a paper the other day that ladies in a Canadian city had a grand convention, and had celebrated their magnificent resolve by building in a public square a bonfire, being fed by the corsets they had been wearing.  It was a revival of the old tirade against the corset.  I have not forgotten what Thomas said, that women should burn their open drawers instead of their corsets.  The idea of a beautifully dressed woman with trail sweeping the streets!  The idea of that mode of dress being countenanced by the profession!
:While the profession are warring against corsets, is it not ridiculous, not to say criminal, for us to take the position that the corset is harmful and the open drawers is not?  The knights of old used to protect the genital organs of their wives from receiving germs during the day when they had gone to business.  If it is gonorrhea, it is due to external infection, and I hold that infection takes place as frequently in this as in any other way on account of the delicate organ being unprotected.  
For girls: a special physiology : being a supplement to the study of general physiology
E. R. Shepherd
http://books.google.com/books?id=Up0MAAAAYAAJ
1882, pg 145 has:
:Many physicians oppose the wearing of closed drawers by women.  In bad cases of leucorrhoea the odor arising from the discharged confined from the air in this way becomes extremely offensive to the patient at least, and may extend beyond the confines of the dress, and when she comes near the stove or register, if at no other time, to be detected by the bystanders.  A free circulation of air by open drawers is wholesome to the parts, as well as a deodorizer.  It is well enough for little girls, and even advisable for them to wear tight drawers, but it is probably best for young ladies and women to wear them open. 
(As well, The psychoanalytic review, Volume 6
By National Psychological Association for Psychoanalysis 
http://books.google.com/books?id=Qp1IAAAAYAAJ
July, 1919
pg 248 mentions open drawers and far too much information on the mechanics of urination and clothing for females)
John doe 758 (talk) 03:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Open Drawers? 

message: Revamped the History section, as it cited conflicting (and, I suspect, amateur) sources of information. Also removed references to Catherine DeMedici as an early inventor of women's underwear, as all I could were either uncited information or links leading back to this article (Catherine's own article makes no mention of what I assume would be considered a momentous invention), I'd consider it folklore until shown some actual proof. 24.96.254.10 (talk) 22:26, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: Apologies gents (and I'm assuming it's gents who've been working on this article), but where did the second paragraph  come from? I'm tagging it for a citation as, being Australian, I can assure you that "knickers" is used far more frequently than "undies". "Undies" (or under-chunders) is typically used for the male equivalent, as is jocks. Try googling "Don't get your knickers in a knot". --Iryna Harpy (talk) 09:35, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undies in Australia? 

message: i want to remove panties in different colors  titled picture , it has already been used in Lingerie article.Farzana zardari (talk) 06:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Closing discussion, as it's a waste of time started by a blocked editor. Grayfell (talk) 22:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  the first picture 

message: G-string panties expose buttocks so I think we should give an alternative photo of G-String photo, Tanga Panties photo can be given.Farzana zardari (talk) 06:48, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, why? Did you have a specific image in mind? Grayfell (talk) 06:49, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

text: Still oppose. That photo is terrible, and starting new accounts to try and add it to the article is sock-puppetry. Stop pinging me about this. Grayfell (talk) 10:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

text: Closing discussion, as it's a waste of time started by a blocked editor. Grayfell (talk) 22:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  G-String Photo's Alternative 

message: Please leave my edit alone. I was NOT adding original research. I was trying to rearrange the information that was already there. Fangusu (talk) 01:21, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As I've already noted on my own talk page (where you left the identical comment), what you are stating is incorrect. You are changing definitions and reworking already unsourced content. All of the content in question needs to be reviewed in light of the fact that it can't be attributed to any sources. The definitions for cuts of garments are not likely to be consistent from country, hence trying to create a single definition per cut of garment is WP:SYNTH. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:50, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

text: For goodness sake, any contributor would be able to discern the changes to definitions. I'm not going to indulge WP:TEDIOUS questions with a point-by-point analysis. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:52, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind. I've tagged the section you worked on, as well as the following section, as needing more references and just needing references (in that order). The article isn't up to par outside of personal understandings of styles, nomenclature, etc. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:07, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fangusu 

message: I think that Boyshorts should be merged to Panties. The former article, while not shabbily written, is a stub, and I do not think it is possible to expand it. More importantly, there are only two references. DJ Autagirl (talk) 22:58, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and  Klbrain (talk) 23:28, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Boyshorts]] to [[Panties]] 

message: There seems to be some disagreement about whether the lead should describe panties as "underwear" or as "underpants". The article underpants cites Collins Dictionary which says that underpants is only used for men's underwear in British English, but can also mean either men's or women's in US English. Since Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia, MOS:COMMONALITY suggests using "underwear" or "undergarment", since that is agreed on by sources as appropriate. Grayfell (talk) 03:30, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Per MOS:ENGVAR, "underpants" doesn't accommodate Australian and New Zealand English as the term is fairly much exclusively used for the men's variant, unless in reference to the generalised concept of all undergarments (i.e., "Have you packed enough underwear [singlets, bras, long johns, thermal vests, etc.] for the trip.") I would suggest sticking with "underwear", although I'd be okay with "undergarment" if other editors deemed it to be a better choice. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:14, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

text: There's an IP hopper who has been pushing this (and something similar on Camisole for years. Meters (talk) 04:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Underwear vs underpants 

message: @Iryna ,in Indian English women's underwear is called Panty. References are : http://www.tradeindia.com/fp1455038/Bra-Panty-Sets.html https://underwearguides.wordpress.com/2015/05/16/the-secret-behind-womens-bra-and-panty-sets/— Preceding unsigned comment added by Senthoora poove (talk • contribs) 16:07, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Per my edit summary, even referenced it is WP:UNDUE for the lead (and fairly much irrelevant anywhere else in the article). This is English language Wikipedia, meaning that it is an encyclopaedic resource for Anglophones. India is not an exclusively Anglophone nation-state, therefore it serves no DUE purpose to elaborate on what an English language WP:COMMONNAME usage of a word is in countries where it isn't the native language. For that matter, it is just as significant to represent :Singapore, the :Philippines, :Hong Kong, etc. It's WP:OFFTOPIC. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:41, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian English 

message: Which kind of panties (Panties#Styles) are also called "culottes" (Culottes#Contemporary French under-pants)? --5.170.9.126 (talk) 20:53, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which kind of panties are also called "culottes"? 

message: Please add the following wikilinks in 'Wearing style' section:
* shapewear
* girdle
* tap pants
5.170.9.126 (talk) 21:06, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2016 (wikilink adding) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Panties. 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/20110829022738/http://lingerie.lovetoknow.com:80/Women's_Panties to http://lingerie.lovetoknow.com/Women's_Panties
*Added  tag to http://ebooks.lib.ntu.edu.tw/1_file/etana/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:53, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Etymologically, this word is a clipping of "pants" with a feminine ending. As with "pants," it is virtually always plural. In the case of trouser/pants, this is likely due to confusion with the pre-existing verb pant (to breathe raggedly) and/or due to a derivation from a Comedia del Arte character (the Pantelione). What would be helpful in an article on the, erm, article, would be the introduction of the term.
I would suspect this is a classic bit of euphemism, probably due to a retailer. Prior to the wearing of reduced pants, women celebrated the bloomer as liberating. Earlier, the basic "shift" (something akin to a tunic/slip) might be a foundational garment. This means that the introduction of the term/article is probably quite, quite late in the west. 
I have no access to an online OED, but I'm sure someone does. It's a simple matter of combining that with etymologies found at AHD (Am. Heritage). Unfortunately, I cannot sofixit. 173.186.127.134 (talk) 15:27, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  No real help: history