This could be the best $69 you’ll ever spend on your ‘downstairs’ wellness
Many women neglect their pelvic floor health, often performing Kegels incorrectly, which can lead to dysfunction and discomfort. Smile Makers is addressing this issue with The Pelvic Partner, a user-friendly device designed to improve pelvic muscle awareness and function. Priced at $69, it offers biofeedback without apps or subscriptions, promoting proper contraction and relaxation of pelvic muscles.
- ▪Pelvic floor dysfunction affects millions of women across various life stages, not just older adults.
- ▪Smile Makers aims to normalize intimate health by offering aesthetically pleasing, accessible wellness products.
- ▪The Pelvic Partner uses 360-degree squeeze-sensor technology and provides vibration-based biofeedback to guide proper muscle engagement.
- ▪Traditional pelvic trainers often only measure force, but The Pelvic Partner emphasizes full muscle relaxation as part of healthy function.
- ▪The device offers a cost-effective, evidence-based alternative to clinical pelvic floor therapy.
- ▪At $69, The Pelvic Partner is designed to be an intuitive, app-free tool for improving bladder control, core stability, and sexual function.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Shopping This could be the best $69 you’ll ever spend on your ‘downstairs’ wellness By Kendall Cornish Published May 1, 2026, 4:30 p.m. ET New York Post New York Post may be compensated and/or receive an affiliate commission if you click or buy through our links. Featured pricing is subject to change. Most of us treat our pelvic floors like that one gym membership we pay for but never use — we know it’s there, we know it’s important, but operating it? Forget about it. For years, we’ve been told to “just do your Kegels” while waiting for the kettle to boil, resulting in a collective nation of women pulse-squeezing their nether regions with the discretion of a pooping newborn.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at New York Post.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from New York Post
