I went out last night with two delightful young ladies--sisters, nineteen and twenty years old.

OK, get your minds out of the storm sewer--they're nieces, attending USC.

It was at the Beverly Center, and afterward, with another of their uncles, we wandered the mall. There was only one store open--Victoria's Secret.

They took us in and showed us the latest thing (at least it was a latest thing to me). Custom-designed underthings. And it's not just for teeshirts any more.

You pick out the color, and then you pick out a typeface and font and style and hue and sparkle quotient of letters, fill out the form in block letters in the boxes, and they apply them to the derriere upholstery in the proper order, to convey the intended message to your amour du jour.

Has Virginia heard about this?

[Update on Friday]

I should hasten to add, in defense of their honor, that I didn't mean in any way to imply that my nieces have amours du jour. As I said, we were in that particular store only because it was the only one open at that hour.

[Another update, spurred by another comment, an hour or so later]

Sigh...I should also point out that they showed them (i.e., pointed them out to us on the shelves). They didn't model them.

Didn't I already warn you folks about the locale of your minds?

Not so different than those Shirteeque franchises which were all the rage in the 1970s -- iron on letters, Star Wars stickers, that sort of thing.

I still remember the smell from the hot glue from my "Battlestar Galactica" t-shirt.

I had a few iron on Star Wars shirts, the image faded really quickly. Perhaps I wore them too much, perhaps they were low quality, still to a 10 year old kid they were the best.

Display underwear to the 'amour du jour'? Of the day? Lots different from Star Wars tee shirts.

The nieces are in the sewer with Victoria's Secret.

I didn't say (and certainly didn't mean to imply) that the nieces had amours du jour.

Is America a great country or what!

What, no photos?

What, no photos?

ed: Yes, sex is just SO evil. Let's make them wear burqas and chastity belts instead. Would that work for you?

Good point, Janessa. Why have any sense of modesty or decency? Why, thats one step removed from iron panties and giant potato sacks!!!

And so many women wonder why they never find happiness in their lovelives. Here's a hint, it ain't due to a lack of profligate partnering and cute come-ons on the undies.

That'll snag one of the good ones for sure!

Personally, I find it disturbing when people automatically assume that girls who want to be/know how to be sexy automatically lack modesty and decency.

Every healthy man I know would like nothing better than to marry a woman who is *scorchingly* sexy, who knows when and where (and with who ;) to be sexy.

Any man who assumes that sexy -> indecent -> whore has *very* deep problems.

Greg: Thank you, that was my point.

Mr. Simberg, my apologies for any false accusations. I have to agree with Franklin in the main. And it was YOU who brought up ladies' underwear, which may remind some of Star Wars, but you must know that others will have other associations.

Greg, there's more to health than sex.

Janessa, it would work for me if there were less attention paid to these attractions. It speaks of dysfunction in human relations. I'd have the same comment for men wearing burkhas or decorated underwear.

To return to Virginia Postrel's subject, it strikes me there's way too much attention paid probably because society has solved, or is within sight of solving, basic problems of survival. If the consequence of this is to turn our attention to individualizing our underwear, or toilet brushes, reported to be Postrel's example, then we have trouble.

I just don't regard the theme of the book, as described, with the sense of triumph or of discovery others mention. To me it's blindingly obvious that if we don't have any thing important to do we turn to satisfying our petty selves. Out of an atmosphere of boredom came many of the world's problems.

Ed: Once again, the desire to be sexually active or to refuse to be ashamed of one?s sexuality is NOT dysfunctional. People who THINK the desire to be sexually active is wrong and/or who regard those persons who don?t regard as sex as dirty and wrong as abnormal deviants are ACTUAL dysfunctional ones.

If you've got some hangups with sex, well that's your issue. But don't expect the women of the western world to renounce all lingerie as dirty and wrong just because you say so.

Janessa:

You're putting words in my mouth like crazy.

I'm not talking about women, about sexual 'activity', or suggesting that everyone must do as I say, more than anyone else who voices an opinion is.

Your need to quarrel with somebody about this is so revealing of some deficiency I think this is one of those situations where no one needs to say anything else. I'm gone for the weekend.

My apologies again to Rand Simburg. And family.

Ed,
"To me it's blindingly obvious that if we don't have any thing important to do we turn to satisfying our petty selves. Out of an atmosphere of boredom came many of the world's problems."

In what case do you think this was true? o_O

And why are you dismissing human beings as petty? O_o

Quite frankly I do not see anything wrong in anyone doing something blameless to make themselves happy. Quite frankly, whether or not boredom was the reason for the world's problems(Something I neither dismiss nor endorse until I hear the supporting reasons), I myself am inclined towards the feeling that people being able to amuse themselves in the manner of their own choosing is more likely to hold such boredom at bay than cause it. ^_^

The post highlights what most people don't realize about how we are viwed in Europe concerning X-rated activity. Over there showing or depicting a murder makes a movie X-rated. Here showing sex makes it X-rated. Which would you rather have your kids watch?