I have a mug of tea, Fashionable Reader. I'm packed for FenCon. I'm ready to blog. (On the subject of FenCon I have managed to pack everything into a carry-on and a tote ~ although not the tote. Amazing. I never do that. The result is a sinking suspicion that I have forgotten something.)
So here we go, more on what's . . .
Bad for Boobs: Backless
In honor of the recent Emmy Red Carpet and the fact that the backless dress shows its elegent head all too often, I take this moment to remind all the well endowed of my readership that not matter how much we may like it, backlessness is not for us.
And here's why . . . No matter how much I may hate the hunt, no matter how much I may hate the heat rash and the red marks and the groves in my shoulders and the extra fabric ~ I wear a bra in public. Period. No questions, no contest, and with very very few (fully supportive) exceptions.
Backless dresses do not allow for a proper bra.
I do love the backless dress. I think it is a way to be sexy without being trashy. It certainly suits the well-toned back and nice little A or B cup, but the rest of us require support. Pasties and low-back halter-top under-wires just don't provide enough.
Hubert de Givenchy dress ca. 1958 via The Indianapolis Museum of Art
There are some lovely vintage looks that are backless, sadly I simply have to resist. I will sometimes opt for something with a lower back that I can still wear with a bra. But otherwise I suggest one leaves this style to the smaller chested amongst us.
On the bright side, my dears. For those of us shaped like Alexia, there certainly is a style to suit, it just happens to be over a hundred years old.
1880-1882 via Manchester City Galleries
I leave you with this ray of hope. Lady Christina showed the world at the Emmys this year that a lady with curves and an aversion to sun can rock the red carpet, making all those overly-tan size twos look, frankly, a little sad.