In Defence of Crotchless Knickers

Ok, so we infinitely prefer the term ‘ouverts.’ There’s something innately sexy about the French vocabulary, and referring to knickers as ‘open’ as opposed to ‘crotchless’ just feels so much more beautiful. Nevertheless, crotchless is most likely more well-known - hence the title of this post and perhaps another small factor that makes them sound negative, and well… just lacking. 
But they aren’t lacking. That’s the whole point. Yet they still seem to so often be viewed with hesitation, and as something cheap and nasty. This is a subject which has irked me for some time and surprisingly is one of the primary reasons some people have described what I do as ‘shocking’. Recently I had drinks with a friend that resulted in an entertaining conversation whereby she told me that although my lingerie was beautifully designed, it was a little ‘extreme’ for her (not sure she is ready for the wider world of pony play and butt plugs just yet!).
For me ouverts offer a beautiful frame for your most intimate area, a chance to cover yourself up a little when you’d ordinarily be naked - giving women the opportunity to control the way they look in a intimate situation and adding another dimension to play. They are a practical way to be naughty and look provocative at the same time - what’s not to like?
Perhaps it’s because these kind of knickers were previously only really available in tacky fabrics and unimaginative designs. Things have changed. It’s not the knicker, it’s the design. Sex doesn’t need to be sleazy, and neither do ouvert knickers.
Photo Credit: Photographer - James Lightbown

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published