Bras

(actually though I've never worn 19th c dress and that may be more restrictive than the earlier styles, even for working class women)

I totally wear mine for patriarchy-compliance reasons to be honest.
When we did the Resisting Femininity thread it was the line I could not bring myself to cross.
I can give up make up, high heels, long hair, jewellery, hair dye - all those things but I couldn't get rid of the Good Bra.

And having had experience of other styles of underwear when I used to do historical re-enactment, I think that the relative comfort of even a well-fitted high quality bra is overstated. I've worn various corsets, stays and laced bodices and I've found all except the very shape-distorting upper class ones of some periods (eg the very long bodied Elizabethan ones) to be more comfortable than underwired bras.

There is this myth now that bras are very natural and comfortable but it's rubbish, really. A friend once sent me a Maidenform ad that used the slogan 'The bra for the way you are!' where the text was all about how Maidenform bras just follow your natural shape, and it was an amazing piece of cognitive dissonance - even the NAME Maidenform told you what it was doing (ie making your breast shape maiden-like) and yet it was insisting the opposite of reality and people were buying into it.

Add a pair of tight jeans that squish your bottom and tummy and you have the contemporary version of the clothes that have always pushed women's bodies out of shape, only today they are not seen for what they are.

A plain supportive bra is fine it prevents unwanted comments and male attention (ideal world it would not matter)unsdupportive pretty tat purely for objectivation is wrong

Women in history didn't tend to live much past 40, and wore a corset or banding which supported.

I

I've never thought about why women wear bras just assumed you need to. I suppose without them, everyone would have saggy boobs so it's partly about looking better. It's also more comfortable. I'm only a 34A but wouldn't like to run without wearing one.

The bra was invented by a woman and was considerably less restrictive than previous underwear so I'm sure it was liberating at the time!

obviously that last sentence only applies to women with smaller breasts.

I do wonder what our bra-burning foremothers think of us today, when they see all the money women spend on decorative bras to please men. They must be so sad.

Why do women with less than a D cup bother?

To make their breasts stick out so that men can see them? So that men are treated to eye candy as far as the eye can see?

I'm ashamed to say I wear a bra, even though I'm less than a D-cup. I stopped for a while, and got quite into wearing cool layered clothing so that my nipples weren'T obvious. I wouldn't be surprised if bras damaged the health of our breasts to be honest. If we were supposed to wear them, we'd come equipped with one, wouldn'T we! Like balls, I reckon breasts are supposed to be kept cool and bras overheat them.

Anyway, I read somewhere that if you wear a bra your breasts actually lose their ability to support themselves and become saggier than they would have if you'd never begun wearing one.

I am a 32C & i can go bra free & do if they are all in the wash but i am a runner & you definitely need a sports bra for running. also i frequently run for a train, bus, up stairs & its not comfortable without a bra particularly around my period when my breasts are sore.

i dont like it when my bum fat moves as i run - with breasts it is just the same.

to me bras are like shoes - the body is designed to work without them but it is more comfortable with.

Correctly fitted bras should not be putting excessive weight on the shoulders. The breasts should be supported by the chest band, the shoulders only provide support. My H-cup norks don't make my shoulders hurt as my bras fit properly.

Breast tissue needs support. I needed a bra when I was less than a D cup (long time ago now), just to keep them supported as I e.g. run up stairs.