I Tried The Dakota Johnson-Approved Granny Panties Trend At NYFW & I'm A Convert
Briefly

I Tried The Dakota Johnson-Approved Granny Panties Trend At NYFW & I'm A Convert
"In pop-culture canon, rom-coms often portrayed women who wore granny panties as spinsters (hello, Bridget Jones). It was a cautionary tale. If you wanted romance, trading your belly-hugging lingerie for slinky thongs was a must; Otherwise, you'd be deemed unsexy. Let's deinfluence that. Granny panties, especially if you get the right fit, can totally be un-grandma-like, despite their moniker. They're also hella comfortable. They cover the right places, without you worrying about sucking anything in manually. It's essentially shapewear, but minus the tight feeling."
"Despite its many attributes, it's a garment that savants rarely gravitated toward - until 2023, that is. The turning point came when a slew of former thong advocates started swapping the wedgy-inducing piece for the full-coverage underwear. That list includes Florence Pugh, Dakota Johnson, Emily Ratajkowski, and Elsa Hosk, aka fashion's foremost trendsetters. Johnson, for example, rocked granny panties several times, including under a lace dress and a leather jacket for a cool-girl edge. Pugh, meanwhile, also rocked the lingerie multiple times in monochromatic looks."
Rom-coms long portrayed women who wore granny panties as spinsters, positioning thongs as the necessary choice for romance. Granny panties, when well-fitted, can feel un-grandma-like and provide substantial comfort and coverage without compression. The style gained mainstream fashion traction in 2023 as many former thong wearers, including Florence Pugh, Dakota Johnson, Emily Ratajkowski, and Elsa Hosk, adopted full-coverage underwear. Celebrity appearances featured granny panties under lace dresses and with monochromatic looks. A personal experiment during New York Fashion Week involved wearing black Intimissimi granny panties under a see-through lace dress paired with a black moto leather jacket for balance and edge.
Read at Bustle
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]