[Ansteorra] Undergarments and stuff

[Chris Zakes]

At 11:33 PM 9/20/2006, you wrote:
>On Sep 20, 2006, at 2:47 PM, Claude Anthony Penny wrote:
>
> > I know that Victorian panties were split in the crotch, so that one
> > didn't have to rearrange all of the layers, when one went to the
> > necessary.  I keep wondering if any underpants were used, for
> > ladies and
> > small children, in much of period.
>
>Not for small children. Both sexes appear to be dressed in simple
>tunics.  The kid needs to go, put him outside the door of the cottage
>in the cabbage patch ( I think that was the plant). No diapers, no
>underclothes to get messy during toilet training. I still don't
>understand how that fits in with swaddling the babies, though.


<chuckle> I guess you've never raised kids. That technique might work 
for a child who has been toilet-trained, but for an infant? They go 
when they need to go, and there's little or no warning beforehand. A 
diaper (or something that serves the same purpose) would be necessary 
or you'd be cleaning the floor an *awful* lot.

         -Tivar Moondragon