Okay, there's used undies and used undies. There's "I'm not wearing panties" and then there's "period underwear." Anyone who has worked sorting donations at a thrift store has particularly strong feelings on the subject of used underwear. Especially dirty used underwear. (And while we're at it, how about not throwing in dirty disposable diapers? Whoever succeeded me at Help the Aged, Camden Town will thank you.) Even clean old underthings though are a relative proposition: grayed and frayed, with stained gossets and stretched elastics. Someone can use them, the thinking might go - but how about taking that generous impulse and translating it into the minimal expense of a three-pack of new jockeys?

We've all held onto undies past their prime. In my case, I find it very hard to throw out something that was at one time expensive and still feels "special" - especially if the matching bra is still operational. Throwing such things out can be hard (a few drinks helps) and donation may seem a viable alternative, but understand what was for you a romantic splurge, a compendium of daintiness and all things pretty and adult, is in fact a ratty scrap of synthetic lace now missing its bow. Launder and save those sets with maximum sentimental value and let the rest go. Into the trash. Then dump coffee grounds on them just in case you're tempted come laundry day.

There's the other side of the question: do people buy them? That's what Pleticha set out to discover. And she was on the other side of the dirty-drawers divide: Think less saggy jockeys than Sam Baker-Anthony-Michael-Hall in Sixteen Candles (recently reprised on Glee): a sexy lady's used undies are the stuff of fetish, right?

One of the girls [a friend] met at that party sold her panties on the site for $200 a pair. I'd heard rumors about this kind of thing for years, but here was proof it was possible. Two-hundred bucks for underwear? I wasn't up for posing in my panties, but I could totally do that! Unlike sex for money, selling used underwear didn't feel inherently sleazy or immoral. And sure, a guy buying panties online might seem a little off, but in the words of my friend the Craigslist gigolo, "Just because a guy's a panty-sniffer doesn't make him a bad person." After years of flirting with the idea, it was time for me to find out: can a girl make easy money off her dirty laundry? And how much money are we talking?

So she posts a Craigslist ad.

"I'm a college girl who just started school in the city and really need some cash for books and stuff. I have a bunch of panties I don't need any more - some are super-cute, some are kind of old! It's $25 for the not-so-nice pairs, but I have some more expensive lacy stuff too. Serious inquiries only please!"

Instead, dudes want head-shots and extras. Not shocking, maybe.

This was the sketchiness I was hoping to avoid, but I was desperate for a sale. I had posted my first ad nearly a week ago, my asking price had dropped from $100 to $40, but still no takers. I didn't like this kind of bartering. Not only do I suck at negotiating, but it was making me feel like a whore after all. I'd envisioned a wallet full of Benjamins and a drawer of new panties. I hadn't envisioned myself - and I'm cringing as I write this - making extravagant promises about how "juicy" my panties were. I was selling myself. It felt gross. I got very close to forgetting the whole thing.

She ultimately sells a few pair, but isn't sure the hassle is worth the money.

I still don't have a problem with the idea of selling my panties - if it were just that. But it's not. It's teasing and marketing myself, and ignoring upsetting propositions in the name of a buck. The e-mails are still coming in as my last Craigslist post is set to expire, but they're going unanswered. From here on out, I'll just have to do my laundry.

Well, I guess we know who buys those old panties at the SalVa! And, when you think of it that way, maybe it sort of is an act of charity? It's also maybe why only the granny-panties are left. Ew.

I Did It For Science: Selling Panties On Craigslist

A velvet-trimmed cream cone bra, the Sun tells us, has "come to light" and is going to auction in the UK. A guy from the auction house actually says, "Marilyn is an icon of the 20th century and very much loved by many people - not least for her marvellous cleavage." Oh, and the bra might have been worn "under her iconic white dress, most famously pictured blowing up around her waist above a hot air vent, in the iconic film the Seven Year Itch." There does not appear to be any evidence to support this. But they're probably right, I'm sure she only owned one bra, and the studio wouldn't have provided costumes or anything.

If you, too, wish to be loved for your marvellous cleavage, here are the "cunning secrets:"

1. Reinforced extra straps "running in a triangle from the centre of the bra over Marilyn's shoulders lifting it similar to how a suspension bridge works."

2. Underwire. Yes, this is a "cunning secret."

3. "An extra pair of added cups" - read: padding - that added an inch.

Or you can just show up at the auction and shell out some two thousand pounds for your own piece of the "2-D Sexy Icon" industry!

Monroe Wonder Bra Is Revealed [SunUK]

It's true that the coverage surrounding Secret Life of Syrian Lingerie: Intimacy and Design book has largely focused on this notion of lingerie as an expression of sexuality denied women in everyday life. The ability to - and more, to the point, desire to - buy racy underthings seems to the average Western reader like a sort of freedom, or at the very least a sense of self-expression or gratification. But, says MMW's Krista, this kind of thinking only serves to simplify the reality of the situation and, in some way, play into our notion of an exoticized temptress.

What could be a more titillating image than that of a Muslim women (presumably veiled, of course) picking out something sexy to wear when in her private harem home? It might as well be proof of the Orientalist fantasy of the seductive, exotic temptress that exists within every Muslim woman, if only we could unveil her. (*shudder*)

What's more, she adds, the "sexiness" is not for the women's sense of selves, but rather, mandated and cast in terms of pleasing their husbands.

it soon becomes clear from the article that Muslim women apparently "value sexy" only in a patriarchal and heteronormative context in which "sexy" really refers to whatever their husbands want. Mohammad Habash, the (male) head of the Damascus Centre for Islamic Studies says, "Islam orders the woman to keep herself pretty for her husband, that's well-known," implying that female sexuality equals "pretty," and that this "pretty" is only important insofar as the husband acknowledges it. One woman interviewed for the article reinforces this perspective, stating that "Muslim wives must be desirable and pleasure their husbands so they don't stray," and that it is essentially the wife's responsibility to mould herself into the object of her husband's desire. If he goes elsewhere, it is probably because she did not "value sexy" enough.

I think she makes a really strong point, especially in regard to Western coverage of the phenomenon - and I count myself guilty in oversimplifying the issue. However, I also think, at least in my case, this arises not from wanting to perpetuate an "Arabian Nights" fantasy, as much as hoping that women in other parts of the world can take pleasure in an self-expression that's not a normal part of their public lives. Basically, lingerie's fun; I'm glad other people can enjoy it, too.

In some ways, I think Krista strips the women of too much agency: while she's absolutely right to point out the problematic cultural imperatives at work, by her argument, these women are denied any of the freedom which we were probably too quick to assume. I mean, I find it hard to believe that every single one of the women shopping for the rococo underthings in the described bazaar does so joylessly, or doesn't feel remotely sexy doing so. There are a range of people, of marriages, of dynamics, at work, as in everything. Perhaps we should not assume these women are doing this for themselves; but we also shouldn't do them the disservice of assuming they're not, surely?

Sexy Things: Women Or Lingerie? [Muslimah Media Watch]
Related: Undercover
Sugar & Spice

Remember in Working Girl when Alec Baldwin gives Tess sexy lingerie for her birthday and she says, "Mick, just once it would be nice to get something I could wear outside the house."

And apparently men are so crap at buying underwear for the dames in their lives that London's John Lewis store has set up a "lingerie academy" to prevent the purchase of Pussycat Dolls-esque monstrosities in random sizes. But seriously, is it really that hard? Apparently so!

According to the academy's mastermind, Maria Walker, men's problems fall into a few categories: buying for themselves rather than their recipients; cluelessness as to size; and generally being intimidated by the setup of the creepily-named "Intimates" departments and Victoria's Secret bordellos, and the fear of looking pervy. Then too, the mechanics of fit and hoist, or underwire and cuppage, are a language that's mysterious even to women.

So, in a panic, guys go with what they've been told is "sexy," almost never what we'd choose. Think red, black, thongs, and a lot of teddies. Says Walker,

I saw a programme recently called Britain's Worst Husband and these men were sent into a high street shop to buy lingerie and they all came back with red and black lace. Every one. We have some beautiful things in red and black, but you have to make sure of the quality and you have got to look at your partner's colouring. Someone with dark hair and olive skin would look wonderful in red but if you're blonde...

Rather than guessing at sizes (which I can tell you from my time in retail, men never know even if they think they do) the academy recs that guys get camisoles and panties and stay completely away from thongs, however much they want them. They also have to coax some guys out of the weird virgin/whore complex that presupposes that racy lingerie suggests "mistress." I would personally add to this: if there is any danger of receiving lingerie, ever, beat into the buyer's brain the brand you wear: it's so hard to find stuff that works with the vagaries of individual breasts there's no point taking a chance on a line that cuts small through the back (ahem, Elle MacPherson) or inconsistently in the cup (yes, looking at you, Gap Body.) Because the thing about lingerie gifts is, even if they kind of suck, most of us will wear them just to be good sports. Like faking orgasms, this kind of white lying runs the risk of fooling a guy into thinking he's done an awesome job and repeating the error but I do feel it's one of those occasions where prevarication is kind. Unless, you know, we're talking about a raccoon suit or some other outlier - which disciplines the academy does not appear to address.

How To Buy Underwear For Women [Times of London]