As a guy who's put a lot of work into the page *
, and who just thinks about corsets more than the average person, I'm of two minds about the idea of just cutting the "period dress" section. On one hand, yes, the garment's use in a lot of the period piece examples can't be said to be tropable—it's used because it's what women wore in the period represented by the film, and it's not really meant to say anything about anything. However, I think there's also a case to be made that whatever their primary function, corsets are inherently sexy—or at least, that they inherently serve as fanservice when visible, since a) their function is to shrink the waist and (often) to make one's breasts look larger, which are two things that are generally considered attractive and b) seeing one in a period work by definition means that we are seeing the character in a state of undress. It's also worth noting that corsets were not uncommon in early erotica (here
's a mostly SFW collection showing how it was used); while it might just be that "women in a state of undress" was enough for something to qualify as erotica, you could also make the case that they're worn because it's sexier when they do than when they don't.
This doesn't mean that we can't cut down some of the examples (particularly those that consist only of the name of the work) and maybe merge both sections and/or change the description to emphasize the sexiness aspect (I'm working on that at the moment and will post that version here when I'm done), but I'm hesitant to just cut down the second section of the page.
edited 17th May '12 2:16:42 AM by DoKnowButchie