When it comes to underwear, the world is firmly divided into two camps.
Those who own and indeed advocate for wearing a g-string, and those who take offence at the very thought of a day spent wondering exactly how far a piece of fabric can travel upwards before it becomes a health hazard. I’m in the latter camp. And not through lack of trying. There isn’t a g-banger on the market I haven’t had a crack at (pun intended), usually off of a recommendation from a friend. “This microfibre/organic cotton/cheeky cut/Brazilian style is SO comfy,” they say. “Honestly, you won’t even know you’re wearing a G-string.” Lies. Bald faced, ugly, uncomfortable lies that I’m sure are due to their chosen model moving so far up their bottoms that they’ve lost the ability to think straight.
Here are 4 other reasons that g-strings are 50 shades of wrong.
The Comfort Factor
They are not and will never be comfortable. I get the design. My thoughts are that the ‘butt piece’ (don’t google that) is supposed to sit over the crack region and not in it. But does this ever happen? It does not. Like The Very Hungry Caterpillar, that string is gobbled up by two very hungry bottom cheeks and remains kind of ‘inside’ for the period of wear. That means that your underwear is exposed to all kinds of naturally occurring but still pretty foul, bacteria which leads cleanly (but not in this case) to the next point; hygiene.
The Hygiene Factor
The magic disappearing string may supposedly eradicate VPL (visible panty line) but that smooth silhouette comes at a cost: the health and wellbeing of your lady bits. The design of the g-string means that it comes into very close contact with your ‘waste zone’ (there really is no clever way of describing it) and the area where the baby making magic occurs (again, hard to describe). This means that bacteria can be transferred between zones leading to infections like thrush and the humble UTI. Not fun at all. And completely the fault of the g-string.
The ‘No VPL’ Myth
I’m told by The International Federation for G-String Relations* that the primary purpose of the g-string it to eradicate all signs of underwear, particularly useful when wearing a figure hugging frock or just giving off the vibe that you’re a free-balling hippie who eschews underwear. News flash: It doesn’t bloody work. I cannot tell you the number of times I’ve been able to see the very visible outline of the tell-tale ‘T’ top of a g-string underneath a tight dress. No, you can’t see knicker lines but you can absolutely tell that a g-string is being worn and honestly, I think that’s worse. That’s not even mentioning the ‘untethered arse cheeks’ factor that comes with wearing a model of underwear that does not give any support to the fleshier parts of our anatomy. There’s also the possibility of the ‘Christmas ham’ effect, when the strings of your butt floss cut into the skin of your hips to create a ‘ham wrapped in string’ bulging which honestly, you never want to experience.
The Chafing of Your Lady-Bits Factor
It’s an uncomfortable topic, literally and metaphorically but it has to be said: g-strings can cause bum chafe. Yes, chafing of the bottom region thanks to the string rubbing against skin that generally doesn’t really experience the constant friction of material. Under boob chafe is uncomfortable, inner thigh chafe awful but bum chafe? It deserves a category all of its own. No adult should need to apply bepanthen between the cheeks. Ever.
There you have it. Four real reasons why g-strings are a carbuncle on the face of the underwear industry.
*May not be a real organisation