|
Return to The Posture Theory home page Click here to see 19th century pictures of corset deformities Click here to see 17th and 19th century pictures of corset deformities
Some nineteenth century soldiers wore their belts extremely tight to look neat and trim . |
|
 |
|
While I was reading about nineteenth century corsets I found that the compression of the womens chests caused a tendency to breathlessness and palpitations, and faintness etc, but those symptoms were also being interpreted as a response to psychological problems, such as bad news. The modern psychological theories have evolved from that mistaken interpretation of cause. I also noticed that when corsets went out of fashion at the start of the twentieth century the women stopped fainting regularly, but, at the same time some psychiatrists were arguing that the incidence of such symptoms that were typical of the Victorian women of the nineteenth century declined because of advances in psychotherapy. The corsets caused health problems by compressing the waist on the outside, but pushing the stomach etc, up into the chest and crushing the heart and lungs, or downward compressing the kidneys and bowels etc, and the change in the position of the stomach etc was called gastroptosis, or, when multiple organs were displaced the condition was more generally called visceroptosis. At the start of the twentieth century there were hundreds of articles about visceroptosis in research journals, but as corsets went out of fashion the severity and of symptoms, and the frequency of them being seen by doctors declined. There were virtually no articles in research journals by the 1980's, and the word visceroptosis disappeared from many medical dictionaries, and tended to be referred to as an obsolete and irrelevant label. However, nowadays many men wear tight belts, and many women wear tight girdles etc, and the diseases are still common, but milder and the cause is undoubtedly the same, but patients are rarely told, even though x-ray evidence often shows severe displacement of the stomach etc, in which case they are often told that there is no evidence of physical cause ant that the symptoms are caused by emotional or psychological problems or stress, etc. There is also the general attitude that the cause can never be confirmed but that is false. It would be very easy to get 300 dogs, rats, or monkeys, and put 200 of them in corsets shortly after birth, and remove the corsets from 100 when they reached adulthood. The obvious outcome would be that the animals that did not wear corsets would be the healthiest and live the longest. Those that wore corsets until adulthood would be permanently deformed internally and would have many obscure and obvious health problems and die young. Those who had the corsets left on them permanently would be the sickest, and have the most obvious and severest symptoms and die the youngest. Presumably every sensible person would know that for certain, so the experiment isn't necessary, but it would probably be blocked on the grounds of cruelty to dumb animals. Unfortunately, if that experiment is not done, some doctors will continue to argue that the health problems are psychological, and that would be a much a much greater crime against humanity. For more information on visceroptosis see here |
|
While I was in the process of developing "The Posture Theory" I became aware that the symptoms involved were also generally regarded as the features of hypochondria and attributed to psychological factors. Many years later I found evidence that women of the nineteenth century suffered from a similar set of symptoms, where the symptoms were not the result of compressing the chest and abdomen because of poor posture, but because of the compressing effects of tight waisted corsets. These corsets had a more severe effect than poor posture, and produced a very significant effect on blood flow which produced a tendency to faint. The combination of symptoms were generally regarded as the features of hysteria and were also attributed to psychological factors. I therefore became interested in that subject and some of my findings which are extracted from "The Posture Theory" are presented on this webpage. |
|
The Posture
Theory And Corsets
|
|
Corsets And
Compression Of The Waist
|
|
|
HYSTERIA - A condition which was most common and most severe in the nineteenth century amongst women who wore whalebone corsets in combination with bustles and heavy frocking suspended by strapping from the shoulders, waist and hips. The tight waisted corsets compressed the heart and lungs and displaced internal organs, including the womb and ovaries and the kidneys and adrenals, and altered the pattern of blood flow throughout the whole body, and affected the nervous system resulting in over-reactions to all types of stimuli and a tendency to fainting and convulsions. The heavy frocking and straps disposed to varieties of spasm and paralysis. The combined effect produced the numerous aches and pains, symptoms, functional disorders and sensory disturbances which are the features of hysteria, and which may occur to some degree, as a result of any factor which compresses or displaces internal anatomy.The Posture Theory 5th edition (1996) p.6 |
|
Hysteria "involves a list of symptoms of all known diseases . . . It occurs most frequently among ladies who have been reared in luxury . . . It is a notable fact that hysteria rarely or never occurs among the women of uncivilised nations." Ladies Guide in Health and Disease, 1904 Hysteria is "the conversion neurosis in which a psychological conflict is converted into a physical disturbance." Reference: The Colombia Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, 1960 "There was a time when high-born ladies acquired the habit of fainting at will. It was probably a form of hysteria. Modern girls are too sensible for this." From: Modern Ways to Health (1966) Vol.2 p.680
|
|
|
|||||
|
Dear Author, for example: http://www.korsett.org/Lacie/BilderTK1/Lacie_09-15.jpg |
|||||
| Reply to
the correspondent, I agree with your comments but the problem is that when corsets were fashionable in the nineteenth century women wore corsets to improve their appearance and their self esteem without knowing the hazardous effects on their health, and of course the lucrative corset industry did not tell them. Moreover, women competed to have the smallest waist (as narrow as 10 inches diameter), and the narrower the waist the more horrendous the womans health problems and the lower the life expectancy (35 years for a 14 inch corset which was available off the rack - mass produced). Also I have suggested that corsets have a far worse effect on the health of narrow and flat chested women because their is much less chest space for the abdominal organs to be displaced upwards, so they are horrendously compressed. As you are aware corsets can reduce appetite but this is because they compress the stomach, and too much compression can cause serious digestive disorders. You also referred to the relief of back pain which can be obtained by the support of the spine provided by a corset. Properly used corsets have some benefits but the risks of over compressing the waist are quite extreme. I am making women aware of the hazards so that the modern attempts of profiting from their manufacture do not return the world to the global epidemic of womens ailments which were a feature of the nineteenth century where breathless women were all regarded as hysterical neurotics. I will consider publishing your comments with my reply on my website temporarily (or permanently) to make this matter more comprehensive (and will change your name) if you wish. |
|||||
| Dear Author
thank you for the response. And feel free to post It appears we almost meet halfway on the subject. I appreciate the intent of your thesis: However, with so little reliable historic information available (discounting EDM and "the Family Doctor"), it is difficult to determine if these incidents really occurred. Most (90%) of the historic pictures I have indicate rather modest forms of tight lacing. Have you read Valerie Steele's published books on the subject? Modern and historic corseting in general appears limited to 4" reductions, which is modest. A tight belt easily cinches the waist by 2-3". Tight jeans can do the same. I can comfortably move about without impediment. A greater reduction produces constraint and strained breathing, so I avoid that level of constriction. Judging from my own 19th c. family photographs I can see that the women were probably tight laced more than 4", yet these women produced healthy offspring and outlived the men by many years. I would suggest that the tight lacing itself certainly did not reduce their life expectancy. Austrian Empress Sissi, Lilly Langtry, Polaire, Jenny Churchill, Anna Freud, Princess Weida, etc etc all were healthy tight lacers, clearly indicating that tight lacing in itself is probably not unhealthy. Of course it can be if discomfort is ignored. Modern women, such as Spook, Lacie, Cathy Jung, Sylphide, Dita to name a few, all maintain waists of 17" or less. (see the L.I.S.A website) Spook's slow progress towards the world record in reducing below 13" seems to indicate that the anatomy is self limiting, preventing injury. I have on occasion laced tighter than I should have, and experienced some discomfort, upon which I'd relax the lacing. I would suggest that problems probably only occur when these warning signals are ignored. regards, Name retained |
|||||
| Reply to
the correspondent Thank you for your enquiry Members of Royal families wore 13 inch corsets in the seventeenth centuries because they were the only ones who could afford them prior to the invention of the sewing machine which enabled mass production and brought about the epidemic of serious and fatal womens diseases of the late nineteenth century where women fainted with the slightest heat, exertion or emotion. Women would think that because they could feel no pain the corset was not the cause of their health problems so it was not until a series of public debates that the effects of corsets were eventually acknowledged and had them banned in 1900 which then brought about their decline in usage more or less completely by 1914. The problem with tight belts and corsets is not that they compress the waist but that they restrict the normal expansion and contraction of the waist which accompanies breathing and this causes respiratory and digestive inefficiencies which result in disease. The debates were similar in some ways to the tobacco debates where people provided examples of men who smoked a packet of cigarettes per every day and were still alive at ninety, but of course smokers generally were more sickly and died much younger than non smokers which was the real issue. The other similarity was that women wanted to look more attractive so it was easy for the corset industry to play on this knowing that women wanted to disbelieve the adverse effects on their health, in much the same way as smokers want to believe that smoking is not the cause of lung cancer, or that it will effect other people but not themselves. The fact that brought the corset era to its final end was indicated by women who had to discard their garments to work in farms and factories while all the men were away fighting in world war 1, where they were not healthy enough to work while wearing a corset, and as you are aware, the end of the war was followed by the loose waisted Charleston fashions. There is too much information on corsets and health for me to discuss by correspondence but much more is readily available with supporting references in The Posture Theory and if you are interested the ordering information is available at the end of The Posture Theory homepage. |
|||||
| Dear Author, Thank you again for your response. It would appear that we are engaged in a traditional "corset controversy" exchange! I appreciate your correspondence on this matter as it is a very important question in my opinion, especially as corseting clearly is making a very strong come-back as indicated by long waiting lists for the corset makers, who are rapidly increasing in numbers. Still I believe you are focused on the extreme cases, not the ordinary wearer. I would agree that 13" would be a rather brutal constriction, but so very few women would have been laced to that extreme. Even "Spook" who is rather slight is taking a long time to get to 14". For myself, I only lace to 22" (from 25-26"), hardly anything extreme, and I'm very comfortable in it. No breathing or digestive issues at all. > Women would think that because they could feel no pain the corset was > not the cause of their health problems so it was not until a series of > public debates that the effects of corsets were eventually acknowledged > and had them banned in 1900. That is one view - proponents of corsets indicated and Valerie Steele shares this view, is that the limited understanding of medicine in those early years caused corsets to be blamed for everything. For example tuberculosis was equally prevalent amongst men and women, in fact tight laced women ironically appeared to be less affected! Even the anti-corset Robin and John Haller (The Physician and Sexuality in Victorian America - '74/Norton ISBN 0-393-00845-1) admit that many of these diseases could not be correlated to corset wear. I agree that breathing and eating ability are reduced as a function of tight lacing, but it is very progressive. Meaning, anything less than a 4" reduction has little or no effect, whereas 5" is constrictive, 6" or more is inhibiting. Also the corset style is a major factor. e.g. hourglass styles, leave the ribcage unaffected (Spook), whereas wasp waist styles (e.g. Lacie) focus on compressing the ribcage to create the tapered figure. > The problem with tight belts and corsets is not that they compress the waist but that they restrict the normal expansion and contraction of the waist > which accompanies breathing and this causes respiratory and digestive > inefficiencies which result in disease. Women generally breath with their upper chest, as they have to during pregnancy as well, so I do not see this as an issue. > The debates were similar in some ways to the tobacco debates where > people provided examples of men who smoked a packet of cigarettes per > every day and were still alive at ninety, but of course smokers > generally were more sickly and died much younger than non smokers which > was the real issue. I agree that the smokers argument is false as correlation with lung disease has been clearly confirmed many times. However, there is no such confirmation or correlation of tight lacing and women's health issues, certainly not for moderate lacing. Even the present day extreme lacers are free of issues. I have searched in earnest to find reliable documentation of confirmed corset induced health issues, and all I can find are skin issues (chaffing, irritation) and temporarily reshaped ribcages, some reduction in breathing and eating capacity, nothing life threatening. e.g. Anna Freud, excessively tight laced for decades (1880-1900), showed no figure enhancements during the 1920's after she had stopped tight lacing. I just compare corseting and pregnancy and the conclusion would be that nature during pregnancy puts considerable more stress on the organs and body than corseting. Here is where the smokers analogy does not fit well. It would appear rather that nature has provided sufficient flexibility to allow for either pregnancy or tight-lacing without ill-effect. > The other similarity was that women wanted to look more attractive so it > was easy for the corset industry to play on this knowing that women > wanted to disbelieve the adverse effects on their health, in much the > same way as smokers want to believe that smoking is not the cause of > lung cancer, or that it will effect other people but not themselves. I agree with the commercial point of your argument as the corset garment industry was large enough to have economic significance. However, the adverse health effects are immediate and clear for the smoker, not so for the tight lacer. Simply look at modern day lacers, where we can follow and monitor any ill effects, without reinterpretation, and there simply is no evidence of any issues. Cathy Jung's husband Dr. Jung MD is certainly cautious regarding his wife's well being, yet he feels confident that no harm is done. A precautionary CT scan that was done on her while corseted showed some repositioning of the internal organs, but much less so than during pregnancy. > ...and as you are aware, the end of > the war was followed by the loose waisted Charleston fashions. True, but I don't think they were very flattering.. The post world war II fashion, the "New Look" returned to corseting indicating women's interest in more flattering and feminine fashions. > The Posture theory ordering information is > available at the end of The Posture Theory homepage. I will order a copy! kind regards, Name retained an inch lost is an inch gained |
|||||
| Reply to
the correspondent Thank you again for your response My final comments on this issue are that the reason, in my view, that the link between the effects of corsets on health is so difficult to identify is because compressing the very flexible human torso does not immediately cause pain or disease, as occurs when someone hits their thumb with a hammer and knows exactly what caused the pain. The effect occurs gradually and subtly over many years so that the wearer does not notice it. This is the same reason why the link between posture and health has been and continues to be a subject of dispute despite the fact that, in my view, their is a massive overwhelming amount of evidence of the long term impairment that poor posture has on health. Regarding evidence of corsets causing health problems, my book includes photos of corset deformed pelvic bones where the smaller and deformed pelvic outlet does not provide babies with enough room to exit the womb resulting in extreme birthing problems. The stomach is pushed from the horizontal position to the vertical position, the bowel is zigzagged instead of being festooned, the spleen is sometimes completely dislocated from the upper abdomen and descends into the pelvic area, and the liver is sometimes virtually split in two by long term tight lacing, with the nineteenth century German doctors calling the condition schnurleber. Your other comment about the human body being flexible enough to make room for pregnancy is considered on The Pregnancy Webpage which is part of The Posture Theory website. This shows how the enlarging womb of pregnancy does compress internal anatomy, and for a large percentage of women is a major, if not the sole cause of the common symptoms and complications of pregnancy which become more common with larger wombs, which is why women bearing twins and triplets are proportionally more liable to complications. However this is again a matter of much dispute because of the obscurity of the link between cause and effect, but there is of course the common factor that anything which compresses the internal anatomy, posture, pregnancy, or corsets, is likely to cause the same sort of symptoms and diseases. The reason these matters form part of The Posture Theory is because they bring all the evidence together and make something obscure more obvious. Of course some women appear to be unaffected by corsets, but in these cases I suggest that it is because they are naturally small waisted, or only use slightly tightened garments, and because they naturally have large chests which allow room for the internal anatomy to move upwards, and because they only wore them for short periods of time. My book provides evidence for people to think about and decide for themselves. |
|||||
|
|
|
