Nothing but Seamed Stockings

[KittyT]

Definitely keep them! Besides, it's a pair of stockings! They don't take up any space

 

[Lady Day]

Aw you gals are such enablers-er, I mean so sweet

LD

 

[cecil]

Ahhhh! What luck! They are so cool. I would put one on, moon around my bedroom in it for five minutes, then take it off and never wear either of them again. Keeeep themmmmm.

 

[Lady Day]

Im sure this has been posted before, but while searching the Google I came across a relatively comprehensive glossary about stockings.

LD

 

[Tourbillion]

Never EVER buy from American Apparel! They charge more than lonesharks, and the quality is terrible.

Sorry to get in your face, but this is bugging me.

They charge more than "loansharks" because they are an American company with a vertically integrated business model that pays their workers fair wages and gives them benefits. I think this is a good reason to patronize them rather than shun them.

If you find them too expensive or low quality that is of course your choice.

However, $28 is still a lot cheaper then the $59.99 and up that Alexis4u is charging for vintage 50's and 60's stockings in my size. They might last more than one wearing too, which probably won't happen with vintage 15 denier stockings.

I'd maybe consider paying that much for service weight ff stockings, but not ultra sheer. They would be more vintage accurate and would last a while.

 

[cupcake]

Sorry to get in your face, but this is bugging me.

They charge more than "loansharks" because they are an American company with a vertically integrated business model that pays their workers fair wages and gives them benefits. I think this is a good reason to patronize them rather than shun them.

If you find them too expensive or low quality that is of course your choice.

However, $28 is still a lot cheaper then the $59.99 and up that Alexis4u is charging for vintage 50's and 60's stockings in my size. They might last more than one wearing too, which probably won't happen with vintage 15 denier stockings.

I'd maybe consider paying that much for service weight ff stockings, but not ultra sheer. They would be more vintage accurate and would last a while.

The thing that gets at me about AA is their unnecessarily sleazy advertising. Why must I be exposed to breasts (And then some) when all I want to buy is socks?
I'm definitely all for a company that doesn't outsource it's manufacturing to east asian factories with workers under the age of 10!

 

[exquisitebones]

The thing that gets at me about AA is their unnecessarily sleazy advertising. Why must I be exposed to breasts (And then some) when all I want to buy is socks?
I'm definitely all for a company that doesn't outsource it's manufacturing to east asian factories with workers under the age of 10!

agreed. I find it hard to shop with AA though, as stated there quality is complete rubbish, its on par with Forever21's sweat shop clothing.
Everything I have bought from AA has NO JOKE... side seam holes, where the serging was done wrong and there is a hole in the side seam.

I would laugh it off if it were one or two, but every single item I have for me or from the kids line is like that.

Not to mention their sexist ads are completely off putting. there are several american made companies you can buy from that are not so ... low grade


- - -

On the Subject of paying $60.00 for vintage stockings, there are several GOOD repro sites out there that sell them under $20/pr and they look like the real thing and are FF.

 

[Lady Day]

Everything I have bought from AA has NO JOKE... side seam holes, where the serging was done wrong and there is a hole in the side seam.

Not to mention their sexist ads are completely off putting. there are several american made companies you can buy from that are not so ... low grade

Okay ladies, lets stop bashing AA. Although I have never bought anything from them, I would have to agree with Tourbillion. An American business that builds fair wages and bennies into their business plan is worth supporting. I mean, they must be doing something right, they have had quite a bit of expansion in the last few years.

Exquisitebones, are you sure you were not at a seconds or rejects rack?

As for their risque advertising, I remember reading an article with the founder where he stated, and Im paraphrasing, 'Yeah we do skin tight thin shirts, but thats what sells. And its my job to make/advertise what sells.'
You dont have to agree with that, but fair enough, right?

Did you all write the company and tell them you were dissatisfied with their product? Unlike many other companies (I read someone mentioned Forever 21, and I notice a lot of gals still shop there) this company has a face. You have a real good chance of getting an answer to your query.

Okay, back on topic.
I also got these stockings in the group I bought. Im think late 60s-70 because of the overlocking and lack of a real top to the stockings. What I cant grasp is the no toe part. Any ideas?

LD

 

[jetgirl]

Maybe for a dancer? Modern or a ballerina? If they are a little heavier, they might have been worn as practice wear, leaving the ball of the foot free or worn over the toe shoes. Just a guess.

 

[exquisitebones]

Okay ladies, lets stop bashing AA. Although I have never bought anything from them, I would have to agree with Tourbillion. An American business that builds fair wages and bennies into their business plan is worth supporting. I mean, they must be doing something right, they have had quite a bit of expansion in the last few years.

Exquisitebones, are you sure you were not at a seconds or rejects rack?

As for their risque advertising, I remember reading an article with the founder where he stated, and Im paraphrasing, 'Yeah we do skin tight thin shirts, but thats what sells. And its my job to make/advertise what sells.'
You dont have to agree with that, but fair enough, right?

Did you all write the company and tell them you were dissatisfied with their product? Unlike many other companies (I read someone mentioned Forever 21, and I notice a lot of gals still shop there) this company has a face. You have a real good chance of getting an answer to your query.

LD

Nope not seconds or rejects. we ordered them into my boutique as blanks. also a large portion of our screen printed line came like this. And while it is an american company, paying living wages, I am saying there are oher companies.
and I could speak days on the subject of the founder and his views towards female workers. but I am done and we will put it back on topic.

But I have seen nothing but poor quality come from AA.

 

[KittyT]

Sorry to get in your face, but this is bugging me.

They charge more than "loansharks" because they are an American company with a vertically integrated business model that pays their workers fair wages and gives them benefits. I think this is a good reason to patronize them rather than shun them.

I agree with Tourbillon. While you're correct that the fact that they're an American company is a good reason to give them business, I find their advertising downright offensive and often bordering on light pornography. In addition, there are also reports that the company owner is a super sleazy dude.

However, $28 is still a lot cheaper then the $59.99 and up that Alexis4u is charging for vintage 50's and 60's stockings in my size. They might last more than one wearing too, which probably won't happen with vintage 15 denier stockings.

Sure, but AA is selling seamed nylon stockings, not ultra-rare fully-fashioneds, usually with incredibly hard-to-find heel designs! There's a huge difference. In addition, I believe you can get a pair of modern fully-fashioneds, made in the USA, from Magnolia hosiery for around $20. Why pay more for something that's not the real thing?

I personally find that vintage FF stockings last as long as my regular stockings, provided that I care for them - wash them with hosiery wash first, don't walk around barefoot, and put them on with gloves.

 

[cecil]

On the Subject of paying $60.00 for vintage stockings, there are several GOOD repro sites out there that sell them under $20/pr and they look like the real thing and are FF.

I've never paid over $15 for vintage FFs. You ladies need to look harder!

 

[Lorelai99]

Magnolia Hosiery??

Those of you that have ordered from Magnolia Hosiery and are tall (I'm 5'10")I have a question... did you order the regular 3975 and are they long enough? Or did you order the 3975 XXL? (which they are currently out of)

Also what color is their Beige? Some stockings look crazy on me as I'm pale...

 

[LizzieMaine]

I'm 5' 6", and the 3975s are too long for me to wear with a panty girdle -- they're practically opera length, and I have long legs for my height. So I'd suspect they'd fit just fine on you.

I find their beige to be a a tad on the reddish-tan side. If you're pale, the seam and heel will be quite prominent.

 

[Goldfish]

I don't know why it's different for me, but I have
Interlock Pencil Skirt
Rib U-Neck Tank (3-Pack)
Unisex Mélange Jersey Short Sleeve Deep V-Neck
3 pairs of Polyester Solid Thigh-High Sock
... bought from local stores in Germany & US ebay sellers like 2 years ago.
I wear all those items a few times a week, the socks almost daily and I wish I could tell you that everything has fallen apart, but it all looks fine. No unfinished hems, colour changes and all that.
And I am a high quality junkie and a klutz that usally manages to somehow put holes in clothes after 1 day of wear.

I, for one, can't quite decide. We see images every day of airbrushed, photoshopped models placed in the most sexual of positions—remember Dolce & Gabbana’s “gang rape” ad? And thanks to technology, models are nothing more than objects to be shaped and molded by marketers, fashion editors and photographers. Moles and acne are erased, eyes enlarged, ears trimmed, hairlines filled, teeth straightened and necks and waists lengthened and stretched. "We're always stretching the models' legs and slimming their thighs," a Manhattan photo retoucher recently told NEWSWEEK. And in some cases hands, feet and even legs are replaced when a subject's parts don't add up to a perfect whole.

So why then am I so offended when I see real-looking women who choose to display themselves for American Apparel—the rare company that doesn't airbrush, manipulate or otherwise alter the photos in their ads? Shouldn't I view them as brave, sexual, confident? Refreshing, even? Hall, of Adrants, says it's easier to detach ourselves from more mainstream fashion images that are so overproduced "they're almost fake … It's like you don't even believe there's an actual person involved in the creation of the ad." With American Apparel "that's like some girl that could live next door to you."

Former porn star turned Ph.D. sexologist Annie Sprinkle says American Apparel's promotions tap into American culture's contradictory views about sex. "They can be fun, sexy and positive," Sprinkle says, or they can be a turnoff—depicted as dirty and ugly. "But that's why it's a great ad campaign," she says. "As a feminist, I like the ads and I like the graffiti [the New York billboard was defaced with]. It makes us think about how we view sexuality."


How we view sexuality has certainly changed: we're no longer living in the days of free love, yet we're bombarded by sexualized images just about everywhere. And younger Americans who've grown up in a MySpace world aren't shy about sharing our own most intimate secrets … with everyone who has an Internet connection. It turns out the photo in the controversial American Apparel billboard in Manhattan was a self-portrait shot by the model herself, 24-year-old Kyung Chung, an amateur photographer living in Paris. "The fact that some people chose to project 'victim' onto that image—an image that I took of myself—is only an indication of their own distorted perceptions about women and sexuality," she tells NEWSWEEK. Ah, beauty … or exploitation: it's in the eye of the beholder.
source

 

[Lorelai99]

I'm 5' 6", and the 3975s are too long for me to wear with a panty girdle -- they're practically opera length, and I have long legs for my height. So I'd suspect they'd fit just fine on you.

I find their beige to be a a tad on the reddish-tan side. If you're pale, the seam and heel will be quite prominent.

Thank you for your help!!

 

[jessesgirl08]

best colors

i am really fair skinned and pretty new to stockings i usually wear fishnets but i would like to try something new, so what shades are best for a fair skinned gal?

 

[KittyT]

i am really fair skinned and pretty new to stockings i usually wear fishnets but i would like to try something new, so what shades are best for a fair skinned gal?

A nude that matches or is just slightly darker than your skin tone.

 

[Lauren]

I wasn't quite sure where to post this, but here's a scan of stockings from a catalog from Winter 1939-1940. There's more about it on my blog here.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I wasn't quite sure where to post this, but here's a scan of stockings from a catalog from Winter 1939-1940. There's more about it on my blog here.

Excellent stuff! I have a pair of cotton stockings in a strange sort of ribbed windowpane knit that would have fit right in with these, and are probably from the same era.

I'd think one would want to wear these sorts of stockings with a very plain, tailored sort of dress -- if you wore them with a print or a plaid, people would fall on the ground and have seizures whenever you walked past...