I think it's kind of cute. I like all kinds of underwear, though, and don't feel like it's my job to have an opinion about what a dude wears, but if I found these on a fellow, I would laugh and be delighted.
I'm not sure how kind my laughter would be.
I love this. Talk about simplicity of design.
3 -- even by "InduStry"?
I can't decide what I think of this.
Y'know, I saw that this morning and thought, "Huh, that seems like the sort of thing that gets Unfoggedblogged. Maybe I should put up a post about it." But then I figured I really didn't have anything to say about it, so I didn't.
Now I can see that shouldn't have stopped me.
All non boxer underwear is teh gay. But as evidenced above, girls like it, so choose wisely Grasshopper.
I didn't open on Gay Street, U.S.A. I opened on Main Street, U.S.A.
Homophobe.
People don't realize how much we bloggers agonize.
Don't click on 4! w-lfs-n is trying to poison us, through our EYES!
Before following the link, I assumed you were talking about this.
One thing I like about this site is there aren't any "open threads". I mean, come on, Atrios, all your threads become nonsensical gibberish bearing no relation to the post within twenty minutes. You might as well put up a link to something amusing.
TLL is right -- men's briefs are among the dorkiest garments in fashion history. Have some self-respect, brothers.
Are we assuming that this is bought to be seen, and whomever buys it expects to make an impression on someone who will be seeing him wearing it? Or is there a significant "what I'm secretly wearing" component?
Hm, i think you'd get laughed at.
The "Male" role is about not being too frivolous. You can wear a red tie, but not a red suit. I think its tied to displaying that you're responsible & job holding.
At least there's no Superman pattern... right?
is there a significant "what I'm secretly wearing" component?
That applies more to the guys who are wearing women's panties.
Would this elicit laughter and delight from the laydeez, or just laughter?
17: you mean the guy in the lower left of the picture at the top of the article?
Huh. I own bottom-center, and have for a couple years at least. 2xist makes incredibly comfortable underwear.
I had a bright red pair of briefs—odd the way the word is plural—in the seventies, I'm sure a family gift. And I was laughed at on reveal, not unkindly. But that was the end of that.
Ask Sean Penn. He seems to be an underwear expert these days.
Do you have something against international klein blue, JM? I just like the site; I'm indifferent to the color.
Novelty underwear, for decades the butt of jokes and the joke of butts...
Rimshot!
McQueen and TLL are right: briefs are telling, and they say nothing good about the wearer.
Holy crap. Just noticed the photo caption:
LOCKER ROOM LANDSCAPE Top row, Diesel, Frank Dandy Superwear, Ginch Gonch; middle row, Frank Dandy Superwear, Andrew Christian, American Apparel; bottom row, Ginch Gonch, 2(x)ist, Dsquared.
26: Is this true of boxer briefs as well?
18 - I have a friend who would like that. Role-playing "pirate and captive" is her favorite sex thing. I think she even has a special costume for her husband. I'm not sure because I change the subject whenever it comes up.
26: And I suppose you enjoy the floppy feeling when playing sports?
briefs are telling, and they say nothing good about the wearer.
Symbolism.
Boxers = "I am primarily concerned about my own comfort and convenience" = potential infidelity!
Whereas briefs = "I like to keep strict limits on where my wedding tackle goes, despite the inconvenience this may cause me" = loyal, committed, unlikely to stray, self-sacrificing.
28: I'm conflicted about boxer briefs because they are conflicted about themselves. On the whole, I think they lean more towards the "boxer" style than the "brief" style, so I don't find them so ridiculous.
I don't really give a damn what underwear I wear, so I tend to wear the underwear that ladies tell me they like. Within reason, obvs.
31: If you're not long enough to tie yourself off against your leg, embarrassment about underwear is not your primary concern.
I'm not sure because I change the subject whenever it comes up.
I do love the Beckster.
I object not on the eww, tighty-whities front (newsflash: sense of humor can apply to clothes) but on the eww, designer tighty-whities front.
Boxer briefs seem like the worst of both. tight from the briefs, and too much material from boxers.
I guess I like the idea of ridiculous underwear because it means the wearer doesn't take his package too seriously. Male hyperidentification with the wang is the cause of 9/10s of the ends of relationships. Lighten the fuck up about your masculinity.
I have some ridiculous underwear, which I wear mostly so I can walk around thinking, privately, "My God, my underwear is ridiculous." It feels a lot better than walking around in Serious Sexual Panties thinking whatever people who take sexuality seriously think.
Boxer briefs seem like the worst of both. tight from the briefs, and too much material from boxers.
They're actually the best: they keep you in one place without being restrictive the way that briefs are. Briefs ride up your crotch and your asscrack. Boxer briefs mostly don't.
35: Of course I can't do that, I usually wear shorts for exercise. At least briefs accomodate the waist-wrap.
short-legged boxers are the best for comfort.
as a child I demanded to wear underroos over my diapers.
As a fan of, um, specialty underwear, I must say I kind of like some of those from the article.
These, on the other hand: http://www.manties.net ...
Like taking conference calls from home - you can sit there earnestly discussing bond rates and credit derivatives while thinking "Aha! But I am not wearing any pants!"
Full-on boxers leave me feeling a bit freer than I care for, and then occasionally things get jostled just right that you sit down and nearly rupture a testicle. I find this less than optimal. So boxer briefs it is, unless I'm wearing sufficiently tight pants to secure teh junk.
Veering off-topic, A Softer World recently started putting hover text for the strip, and it's killing me.
Unfogged reveals to me home truths about my character--I realize that I would be taken aback by funny underwear on a fellow if it were of the "I'm hip because I have ugly/retro/kitsch "design" underwear" variety...particularly if I got crashingly drunk and accidentally slept with someone who works in marketing or similar. Yeah, I'd mostly expect this stuff on "hip" young professionals who want to kid themselves that they don't really work for the Man, like the design staff at Target for whom I temped some years ago. ("Yes, I design sweat-shop produced stuff sold in a large store that screws over its employees, but secretly I'm a punky rock'n'roll rebel, as you can see by my retro-ish seventies-color-scheme underwear, if you can see it, so to speak") Or maybe a particularly snotty kind of upper middle class college student. The merely colorful is okay, I guess.
Really, if i could find linen boxers, I would be really happy, even if it had MICROMACHINES printed all over.
2xist makes incredibly comfortable underwear.
Their t-shirts are my favorite. Perfect black t-shirts.
28: Boxer briefs are acceptable in the event of a boxer unavailability crisis. In extreme situations, you can go commando, but only if you use a bidet. Briefs-wearing is worse than infidelity.
I think the person described in 49 by Frowner describes me very well. I'm particularly annoyed by the 'I'm hip because' formulation.
50: Linen boxers are fantastic stuff. Banana Republic made some several years back and they were my favorite underwear until they developed excessive holeage. If you can find any around, do tell.
53: Well, I guess we'll just have to avoid having sex, then. It'll be difficult, but think of all the angst and recriminations we'll save.
Silk boxers are the best, best sometimes they're, uh, a little too comfortable.
50 . I found a wonderful pair of linen boxers while traveling in Canada about ten years ago. It was at the big Canadian department store, whose name escapes me. Now worn to a very thin perfection, and used sparingly but lovingly.
We didn't have so many oldsters around the last time we discussed underwear.
Boxer briefs are better than boxers for one simple reason: NO SEAMS.
I'd wear any of those briefs pictured--I like some of them more than others--but I probably wouldn't pay full retail price for any of them. Basic black briefs for the win.
Bad idea from the early 90s: Flannel boxers.
Although they were suitable for wearing with worn-ass jeans.
At least I thought they were suitable.
55: I don't think I'm ready for marriage, sorry.
53, again: Besides, most design types aren't exactly falling all over themselves to hook up with humorless hippies, either. Consider how demoralized you'd be, waking up with your snazzy retro-print underwear entwined with fair-trade produced, natural-dye-dyed, coarse-weave drawstring ones or something. "Want to go out and dumpster some breakfast?" your companion of the previous evening would ask, and it would be screamingly creepy all around. Sometimes it's helpful when our clothing sends certain messages about our lifestyles and priorities.
So maybe this is an argument for wearing underwear outside clothing.
61. I have been known to go commando with my flannel lined jeans. Much better than flannel boxers and regular jeans.
What was with all the flannel in the 90s, anyway? We people, we are strange.
54: eBay is a wonder of the modern world.
I have been known to go commando
Known, by whom?
63. So maybe this is an argument for wearing underwear outside clothing.
Not so fast, Madonna
64 sounds like a very good idea, but I've never gone with the lined jeans - seems too specialized. More importantly, I'm a big fan of unionsuits. And those things never ride up.
What was with all the flannel in the 90s, anyway?
My wife comments all the time on the number of flannel shirts still in my wardrobe (mostly tasteful, LL Bean-esque plaids, not oversized, grungy ones). To me, they're just sensible winter-wear, but she thinks... I don't know what. I guess she thinks, deep down, that I should be wearing dress shirts. Which I hate.
Does it go without saying that she's also a bit bemused by the unionsuits?
So maybe this is an argument for wearing underwear outside clothing
It seems as if your outer wear likely sends the same message in this case.
How old is underwear as a concept, anyway? looking at the coarse-fibered garments of some periods I would think something was necessary, but people may have just put up with the chaffing.
I can remember from school only that Santa Anna was identified, trying to escape from San Jacinto disguised as a straggler, by his silk underwear. Were the Texans pulling everybody's pants down?
67. Linen boxers, or the jeans? Boxers, now by hand only. Jeans, washed after one wearing. Is there such a thing as TMI?
68. Some secrets are not to be shared, Ogged.
I still wear flannel. Flannel shirts are my standard thing during the winter.
I don't know if I really needed to include "still" in 75.
Good. Now teo and I can spot each other at the next meetup without checking underwear.
I've always thought washing jeans after every washing was nuts (I understand TLL's extenuating circumstances) - their whole charm is the wear-em-forever style that is inherent.
My HS girlfriend washed her jeans after every wearing b/c she liked the tightness (these were just Levi's, not designer jeans, but it was the 80s). Nuts.
All I can think is that underwear better not make your paramour giggle. Blah, blah, pushing acceptable gender boundaries, blah blah, but if she starts laughing when you take off your pants, you're probably out of luck.
53: i'm afraid i'd enjoy your screamingly creepy company, ironically. i fancy myself a hipster on the weekends.
I've always thought washing jeans after every washing was nuts
It does seem a bit OCD. Also, you never get to wear them.
I wash jeans like wool trousers or suits: only occasionally, and either in cold water with woolite or dry-cleaning.
if she starts laughing when you take off your pants, you're probably out of luck
You'd be surprised
Good boxer briefs (ones that lean toward the boxer end of the spectrum) are nice because they combine the relative dignity of boxers with greater ass-flattering action.
48: Weirdly, the woman in the left two panels of this strip is either someone I know or a dead ringer for someone I know.
Also off-topic, wasn't someone asking about Hartman's Law the other day? Wrongshore, maybe?
Anything that means there are fewer tighty-whities out there I'm all in favor of. (Except banana hammocks, which scare me.)
79, I'm concerned about my company having a lot of irony-value...although I did have a friend in college who was an exceedingly traditional conservative Lutheran (who later went to seminary) and I did enjoy horrifying him with my (really very ordinary) "And then the police broke up the protest and I got hit in the stomach with a baton"/"And then last night I decided I wanted another eyebrow piercing so I took out my trusty safety pin..." stories. He, of course, enjoyed being horrified. It was a charming bit of role-play all around, and neither of us had to dress up like a pirate.
As far as I know, he wore boxers, though.
83: Definitely true. Especially if the man has well-developed legs.
Being attractive to women is so gay.
Hmm. We may have hit on your problem, conflating 'girl checks me out' with 'gay.'
Boxer briefs are by far the superior undergarment! They are not restrictive like briefs, nor do they look idiotic and dorky. Boxers? A bit too much freedom there at times, have to batten down the hatches a bit more than that.
A bit too much freedom
I contend that there is no such thing.
Freedom is just another word for nothing else to lose.
I don't understand how you boxer people put up with the dangling and twisting. I like to know that if I sit, I will not damage by business. Restrictive is good: it prevents crushing injuries, and also reduces skin-on-skin abrasion while running.
I'd like to speak up for irony and silliness in underwear. Silliness especially -- it shows vulnerability, which is sexy. Usually by the time you see someone's underwear, they're making themselves vulnerable to you physically. So why not emotionally? Why insist on keeping up the he-man drag with boxers or sensibly-colored boxer briefs? (He-man drag has its own advantages, of course.)
I like it when a guy is wearing something like the styles pictured.
And any color is better than white. White looks dingy after just a few washings.
And any color is better than white. White looks dingy after just a few washings.
Not if the person wearing them has also had at least a few washings.
97, that's a good point, as is AWB's comment somewhere up above. It's obviously situational/social-circle-al...in the crowd with which I run, wearing something silly/amusing/conceptual or performing masculinity in a deliberately non-he-man way isn't actually about being vulnerable or charmingly nerdy or even, really, about challenging gender conventions but about coolness points. The hipster/activist norm of masculinity is already the vulnerable-off-kilter-indie-movie-Harold-and-Maude routine (at least 'round here), so what's happening is nonconformity to, er, mainstream norms as a move to conform to more restrictive and more self-impressed hipster/activist norms.
Seriously, one of the ways hipster/activists genuinely sell out (as opposed to just getting a job with health insurance) is to play with gender norms while young and then switch into patriarchal/Dad-is-boss/my-career-comes-before-yours/hitting-on-the-barrista mode once they've gotten tired of experimenting or once they've realized that being the authority figure whose career comes first, etc, is more fulfilling.
So I'm not impressed by young fellows with carefully scripted vulnerabilities and cute little mannerisms that indicated that they don't do traditional masculinity; but I would expect this to vary a lot by social circle.
So I'm not impressed by young fellows with carefully scripted vulnerabilities and cute little mannerisms that indicated that they don't do traditional masculinity
Longer version of this comment?
Carefully scripted conspicuous consumption is not deep. If you're trying to make your underwear ironic, just go get the job with health insurance already.
96: I don't understand how you boxer people put up with the dangling and twisting.
Dangling is a good thing; twisting, not so much. But in the absence of high degrees of angular momentum, serious twisting is unlikely to occur.
I like to know that if I sit, I will not damage by business.
This is why the Intelligent Designer put the business on the front side and designed us so we sit on our backside.
Restrictive is good: it prevents crushing injuries, and also reduces skin-on-skin abrasion while running.
As far as crushing injuries go, nothing short of a cup will adequately guard against those. And if I plan to do any running or other vigorous physical activity, I will certainly select something that provides more support. But in all other cases, freedom is good.
100: Do you then watch for those making less of a statement as possibly more likely to be organic/authentic and likely to be in for the long haul? The operative word in your 2nd paragraph is switch; many long-haired freaks morphed into corporate tools in seventies & eighties, no doubt scoring more style points both coming and going in the eyes of the undiscerning than steady-as-she-goes types.
Sorry to hear about your undersized junk, MAE.
From the title, I assumed ogged was talking (sort of) about this.
101, not exactly, but sort of.
The thing is, once you're at the point of consciously performing vulnerability, well, that's not a place where it's possible to stay for too long, since you tend to end up consciously performing vulnerability in order to manipulate people (hence the tooliness of some guys who call themselves feminists) or you are able to analyze things enough to stop being so vulnerable, or you get pulled down into pathology.
Vulnerability is only fun when it's pretend, you might say. It's fun for white straight guys who will be professional/creative types later on to pretend that they are little trembling fawns precisely because they are headed for big money whiteguydom and the contrast (the social condescension, so to speak) is a kick, but if you're actually all little and trembling and you can't change it, it gets exhausting, scary and depressing.
100: patriarchal/Dad-is-boss/my-career-comes-before-yours/hitting-on-the-barrista
Hang on, why is "hitting on the barista" part of that package? I'm asking for, um, a friend.
108: She gave me a free cookie first, I swear!
see, i agree with 97, and with 'don't take your package too seriously.'
but its true i don't have a huge interest in using my clothing to fight the patriarchy.
I just want to wear fun stuff, and it that means i have to break gender norms, well thats ok since they're probably dumb.
i just don' see clothing choices creating free childcare or whatever.
107: I don't see how vulnerability comes into things.
104...I think the operative word is "perform", since that's where it gets all infinite-regression-y, since everyone is performing all the time.
People making less of an obvious statement usually interest me more, yes--although that's really specific to a scene which values flamboyance.
It's not even so much the switching over to corporate patriarch--that's merely bad for society, like so many things. It's the "I can dabble around in these exciting alternative lifestyles because it's not for real for me".
112:pretend vulnerability. consciously performing vulnerability.
107 should be attached to that grant application.
Hard to separate the patriarchal from the merely uncool, is it?
"I can dabble around in these exciting alternative lifestyles because it's not for real for me".
You mean, like someone who wears their purple briefs inauthentically?
Vulnerability can be fun when it's pretend, or it can be a turn on when it's real. And I find even the performance of vulnerability sexy; not everyone does, and that's fine. As far as politics goes, inviting someone to laugh at your package isn't going to get us to free childcare, but it does show an ability to dodge gender norms just a little bit, and that can be a little bit admirable.
Vulnerability is only fun when it's pretend, you might say. It's fun for white straight guys who will be professional/creative types later on to pretend that they are little trembling fawns precisely because they are headed for big money whiteguydom and the contrast (the social condescension, so to speak) is a kick, but if you're actually all little and trembling and you can't change it, it gets exhausting, scary and depressing.
Yeah, just another example of confidence being a quality that is generally attractive and self-reinforcing.
There can be no inauthentic wearing of underwear! It is your innermost layer!
120: I thought that was my integrity.
So since there are good odds i'll end up with a good 401(k) in 40 years, i shouldn't be allowed fun clothes and should stick to my khakis and grey flannel suit, out of equality concerns? that makes some sense, i guess.
You know what Tarquin the Proud said in his garden with the poppy?
"Boxers suck."
111, Let me reiterate, o ironic weekend hipster, that this is all specific to a particular hipster-activist setting; it is not universal. Let your conscience be your guide.
116, If I encountered a twee lil' activist fellow in expensive purple underwear, I would think he was most likely a self-impressed prat who would advocate silly politics because he was essentially just playing at activism until he went back to get his marketing degree. Authentic/non-authentic? Isn't everything all flat and postmodern now and there is no "authentic"?
I think we should start planning for the Frowner-Yoyo wedding now. We'll seat guests based on how ironic their underwear is.
125: is `commando row' on the brides side or the grooms?
I think we've learned what we always knew:
confidence=good
arrogance=bad
purple assless boxer briefs=only for the vulnerably brave
You people aren't even trying. No one has mentioned either Noriega or Prince.
121, I have a 401K...or is it a 403b? Whatever you get when you're working at a public university.
I will go so far as to say, though, that if you are a hipster activist in your early twenties who claims that you are never going to sell out to the man while somehow having lots of money for expensive beer and designer underpants, er, well, that sort of speaks for itself.
And if you're working as a creative for a major corporation with nasty labor and environmental practices while still telling yourself that you're a punky rock and roll rebel who is sticking it to, rather than working for, the Man--well, I can't help you.
My contention is that the people I meet who would wear hipster retro underwear generally fall into those two camps. But yoyo, oh yoyo, I don't meet everybody--I'm sure your heart is as pure as Epp's soap, because you're an Unfogger.
Commando = wedding party. Neither Noriego or Prince are invited to the wedding.
Wait, I thought I was already married to Chopper but he had never chopped around me and I had never frowned around him and so we had never figured it out--or at least that's what someone said. Does this mean yoyo is Chopper, or am I just non-monogamous?
116 is pretty funny, but actually I can totally get how one would.
All of these performance issues (ha!) are part of why my basic mode of dress hasn't changed since early 1987. I add new elements gradually and only when I'm certain that I'll feel as un-self-conscious in them as I do in cargos, a henley, and a tasteful plaid shirt.
Something that hasn't been clear to me in this thread: virtually all boxers have at least a tasteful pattern on them, and many are more interesting. But that doesn't seem to raise any of the issues people are seeing with the tighty-nonwhiteys. Is that right? Is it just a given that boxers can be semi-funky without signalling much of anything?
My contention is that the people I meet who would wear hipster retro underwear generally fall into those two camps.
Right. Frowner's making an empirical claim. Like ogged's claim about women and makeup, or B's about male self-described feminists, it's either a useful rule of thumb or it isn't. Frowner seems to think it is for her. Insofar as she's best positioned to review her own life experiences and note where they've been excellent and where deficient, I think it's going to be hard to argue her out of a position about her own life.
132: They've been lying to you all this time. There is no such thing as a tasteful plaid shirt.
132: Is it just a given that boxers can be semi-funky without signalling much of anything?
Any pattern beyond stripes or plaid will land you in the Frowner Purgatory, I think.
Given my name i think i'll have to swing back and forth between you and my corporate yuppie/trophy wife. i may have been the cause of all the frowning, oops.
Something that hasn't been clear to me in this thread: virtually all boxers have at least a tasteful pattern on them, and many are more interesting. But that doesn't seem to raise any of the issues people are seeing with the tighty-nonwhiteys. Is that right? Is it just a given that boxers can be semi-funky without signalling much of anything?
This does indeed seem to be the case.
It's not the pattern, it's the briefs.
if you are a hipster activist in your early twenties who claims that you are never going to sell out to the man
That spells "prat" right there. No need for the purple undies.
There is no such thing as a tasteful plaid shirt.
Uh oh. Um, I guess I can claim to be wearing them ironically.
133, I would add that things might be totally different in a very slightly different setting--for example, if I were to sleep with a really boringly serious communist (and I know a pretty damn cute one) and it turned out that Mr. Braudel-plus-Marx-plus-the-humanist-controversy wore purple underwear, I would be both very surprised and oddly charmed. Or hey, maybe hipster-activist types are different in Chicago or Atlanta.
136, I will have you know that I frown because I like frowning. The frown is the expression of the exploited proletariat with whom I am expressing my solidarity.
Given my name i think i'll have to swing back and forth between you and my corporate yuppie/trophy wife
Swing both ways, eh?
And if you're working as a creative for a major corporation with nasty labor and environmental practices while still telling yourself that you're a punky rock and roll rebel who is sticking it to, rather than working for, the Man--well, I can't help you.
Unless you charge your $40 ironic underwear on the corporate expense account. Then you really are sticking it to The Man (while helping the rich white Designer Man).
Also, I think it's a bit far to claim that someone who is vaguely hypocritical in their fashion choices and/or has some expensive underpants will necessarily make bad policy choices. But maybe that's just my Pumas and 401k talking.
142. sure, sure ... but are you expressing your solidarity in designer underwear, or not?
The rich white designer man is very likely gay. Its all cool.
I think this is all about clothes as tribal markers vs. clothes as just some fun decoration. I try to signal too much so as to avoid signaling anything at all.
144, The masses do not have designer underwear.
(Let the blatant untruth of this--give the various diffusion lines and the loose meaning of the word "designer"--ride)
The underwear linked here has nothing on this stuff.
145: The rich white designer man is very likely gay.
And therefore possibly fascist! Back to square one.
I think Frowner gets it exactly right. It's not that there's anything wrong with dressing like a hipsterm exactly. It's not a bad aesthetic. It's when the aesthetic is imbued with faux-intellectual meaning; by purchasing these $200 jeans, I demonstrate that I am nattily defying authority. I'm not wearing this colorful underwear because I like it; I'm wearing it because it signifies that I am ironic and deep. I am real, and down with the common people; don't ask how I'm paying for my beer and cigarettes and apartment.
This goes double if you're tenure-track junior faculty. Dude. You are not against the Man; you are licking the Man's boots to a spit-shine polish.
I have a hard time taking fashion that seriously. I'm not sure it's a good proxy, but someone who is worried what his underwear says in its ironic whimsical moments is probably someone I'm going to have a hard time getting along with.
Look. As Lenin once said:
"I can't--(Maxim Gorky, Lenin, Oxford University Press, pp. 44-5)listen to music too oftenwear purple undies, it affects the nerves, makes you want to say kind, silly things, to stroke the heads of the people who, living in a terrible hell, can create such a beauty. Nowadays you mustn't stroke anyone's head, you'd get your hand bitten off, you've got to hit them over their heads, without any mercy ..."
Shit! I looked at 147 for 5 seconds, and now I'm gay.
My wife is gonna be so pissed.
When's the next meetup with Labs?
Uh oh. Um, I guess I can claim to be wearing them ironically.
Tight jeans, a scruffy pair o' Chucks and a PBR in hand will help your case. Underwear optional.
Exactly. Hitting! No mercy! That's how I live my life of sticking it to the Man. No music, no underwear.
I am real, and down with the common people;
Is that like being down with la gente?
Also, the last link in 147: are those the names of the guys or the underwear styles?
152: Maybe I can ask my new friends the hipsters for advice.
155: Why do you need them? w-lfs-n still reads his Unfogged e-mail, I think.
Aren't hipsters wearing purple underwear while working in the market department engaged in Gramsci's long march through the institutions?
(BTW, I googled "Gramsci long march", and almost every hit is a crazy right-wing site ranting about evil leftists.)
156: Are you seriously suggesting I ask w-lfs-n for fashion advice? Also, the hipsters seem to know a lot of girls.
155: You should, they put out.
For other advisory needs, I'm sure there's enough of a hipster contingent here at Unfogged even excluding the w-lfs-n-almost-hipster.
Freedom is just another word for nothing else to lose.
Nothing left to lose.
161: don't worry ben --- keep at it, you'll get there.
157: It would be more, I think, hipsters wearing purple underwear while teaching cultural studies/comp lit, or maybe working at the City Department of Heat and Light. I'm not sure Gramsci had marketing in mind when he spoke of institutions.
My slutty roommate is pretty close to being a hipster, and he totally has underwear like in ogged's original link. (I know because he wanders around the apartment in them.) He is already a borderline Republican, however, and plans to go to law school. I'm not sure he's self-reflective enough to be very ironic, but he understands "cool."
163, yeah, well, what matters intent?
164: If I remember correctly, he's exactly what teo is referring to by "seems to know a lot of girls"
Why do the heathen rage?
Ben is definitely a hipster. Look, if you have old ratty t-shirts from when you were a kid, and you didn't pay too much for the tight jeans, wear them and enjoy. But if you bought the pre-distressed ironic t-shirt for forty bucks at the mall, the irony is on you.
It may no longer be so much fun to drink PBR, but luckily, there's still Meister Brau.
165, Aren't hipsters wearing purple underwear while working in the market department engaged in Gramsci's long march through the institutions?
I took this to mean "when people talk about "the long march through the institutions" they mean marketing and corporations"...that's not how I've seen the term used, so I was just funnin' around. As a non-academic, I am allowed to do that. I can even play with ideas about intent even though I know that intent doesn't matter/is impossible to determine/isn't very useful. It's a riotously exciting life, let me tell you!
166, obviously because they don't have attractive underwear.
he's exactly what teo is referring to by "seems to know a lot of girls"
Not necessarily exactly; I don't know these hipsters well enough to understand the dynamics of their interactions with all these girls. It's quite possibly the same sort of thing, though.
Neither Noriego or Prince are invited to the wedding.
Hey, I remember that episode of Dynasty.
If Frowner is deciding all this about people based on their undies then I have no idea how anyone ever dresses to impress her.
It's all about the boxer briefs and, when those are not available, the boxers. I have a pair of boxers with glow-in-the-dark ghost eyes all over. I adore them. Also a pair with jack-o-lanterns!
O Frowner! You take everything so seriously!
It may no longer be so much fun to drink PBR, but luckily, there's still Meister Brau.
I don't know where you are, but here PBR is still the dirt-cheap beer that's not brewed by Budweiser or MGD. That's why it's still the hipster brew of choice, even though a normal non-price-driven fad would've died out ages ago.
171: I'm shockingly easy to impress, actually. And very gullible. Usually not about clothing, though.
But by the time I know all the details, as it were, about the underwear--why, by that time there are other factors to be impressed by. Or unimpressed, as the case may be.
Glow in the dark ghost eyes rock.
167: It's a weird moment when you grab an old T-shirt from college to wear to the gym, and you realize the shirt is ten years old, and you are now one of those alumni.
The beer geek in the phil dept told me that actually, of the shit beers, Miller High Life and PBR are the best.
176: Who was I arguing with at Catherine's about the relative merits of High Life and Miller Lite? Because I'd like to claim victory.
O w-lfs-n, that's because the rest of my life is full of light-hearted witty repartee. I turn to Unfogged for discussion of serious matters.
Huh. I remember Meister Brau being cheaper, but it looks to be owned by Budweiser. And wasn't typically sold anywhere but grocery stores. Anyway, I think I'm taking the side of the hipsters here, though I obviously can't claim to be one.
O Frowner! You take everything so inconsistently!
And since Miller tastes like shit, PBR is the best.
Clear-bottle beers alwasy have an off taste, either from the effects of light or from the preservative (rumored to be formaldehyde). That's why they give you the lime with corona.
I agree with this beer geek.
My brother, on the other hand, can't stand PBR, since it has an actual taste. He prefers cheap beer that has no flavor.
of the shit beers, Miller High Life and PBR are the best
Glad to know that's still the consensus; I used to go from Regenstein to Jimmy's after closing, about 11, have two or three Miller High Lifes (Lives?) and go home to my room at Drexel & 57th. Night after night, Summer 1979.
182: Sucks to be him, but that confirms my opinion that PBR is the only cheap beer with some hops flavor. It's not bad when the excellent microbrews are temporarily out of your price range.
Uh, PBR is brewed by Miller. Pabst is just a marketing/licensing front company at this point. (chart from Brewery Age magazine of the current largest US producers is here)
175: Is that some sort of faux pas? I prefer the personal history t-shirts.
It's a weird moment when you grab an old T-shirt from college to wear to the gym, and you realize the shirt is ten years old, and you are now one of those alumni.
I was going through my t-shirt drawer the other day and came across a Bears shirt from their 1988 tour.
186: No, just a tangent, brought about by thinking of old shirts. It's not wrong, it's just weird when you realize you have items of clothing 2.5 times older than your college experience was long, and you feel like you just graduated.
185: But it is a different recipe, and since MGD/High Life doesn't taste well to me for whatever reason, it's the best cheap one you'll find out there. The idea of PBR marketing is pretty ridiculous though, I'm glad they've gone with a very light touch thus far (apart from some alternaweekly ads for local bands that are conveniently forgotten).
Sure, it tastes different. I was reading into 173 that it mattered who the manufacturer was, for whatever business-opposition or political reasons.
It might be weird. But no way in hell am I getting rid of my old college t-shirts!
I'm not going to comment on underwear. We are having blue jeans day at the office today. I'm not sure who is responsible for people -- women especially, sfaic -- not wearing jeans all the time, but they should come to my office right now and reconsider.
72, 132: Hilarious. My wife showed up this afternoon with 2 shirts she bought for me. Dress shirts. Not exactly standard, under-the-suit shirts, but apropos of this thread, hilarious.
Miller High Life is the Champagne of beers, my friends.
194: Wear them. Champagne of bottled beers.
Miller High Life is the Champagne of beers, my friends.
Pfff. Champale is the champagne of beers.
I'm sorry, but all radicals must pay tribute to their forefathers, the sans culottes, by going commando, obviously. Hey, maybe that's why they have more fun, all the flashing!
their forefathers, the sans culottes
Because of their sins during the French Revolution, they're in limbo now.
You people all need to get the sticks out of your butts. (Except for Stroll and AWB.) Those briefs are fabulous. I'd be totally thrilled.
That said, most guys don't really have the bodies to look great in plain white briefs, and boxers are, well, adequate and kinda puffy/frumpy. Boxer briefs are the preferred choice.
But if someone wore something awesome like the stuff in the link, they'd be way at the top of the list.
You people all need to get the sticks out of your butts.
But that's what's holding up the underwear!
You can have my stick when you pry it from my cold, dead butt.
most people don't have the bodies to wear a plain white t-shirt. but a t-shirt with totally insane designs, on the other hand . . .
I think I'd better pace myself, JRoth.
198. MAE, they must do the limbo under Apo's butt stick, but only as demonstrated by the link.
202: No, tshirts of all kinds are fine. But you know perfectly well that a plain tshirt over a li'l beer gut is more beer-gut revealing than a tshirt with an amusing image on the chest to draw the eye upward.
I dunno, I think if your gut shows through an item of clothing, it's going to keep doing that regardless of the amusing image. But I'm in favor of amusing images for their own sake.
I didn't say it wouldn't show; I said amusing images draw the eye upward. Not that having a beer gut is a bad thing, especially.
Fair enough. Let's put on some fancy underpants and drink a case of PBR.
That sounds like a good time, actually. I could really stand a drink.
208. Please, it's not a beer gut. The correct term is liquid grain storage facility. I read it on a t shirt.
211: In my case, it's a mama belly.
in any case, b, if I had pbr enough, and time.
I'm just trying to be amiable, ogged. It's in August. Want an invite?
I wasn't scolding; "and time" just made me think of it.
we'll all wear fancy underpants and drink PBR.
The groom wears fancy underpants and one of those tuxedo shirts.
189: Try being that age and being in college.
Enough said about that, though.
That said, I totally agree with b on the sticks in butts and the beer guts being a-okay. You're not going to get kicked out of bed for wearing ridiculous designer underwear unless you somehow feel uncomfortable about it.
God knows, minimizing underwear-related discomfort is a good thing, but if you can wear those briefs without feeling like you're about to have a threesome with Mork and Mindy then I think you should wear 'em, by God. A little more color in this world is never a bad thing.
218. I like to think of Jesus wearing one of those tuxedo t shirts...
215: I assume we're all going to be invited.
224: an acquaintance of mine won a hot body contest due entirely to his having a pair of cock boxers similar to those in the link (he looked nothing like the model, believe me). $100 cash money. Underwear like that can be an investment, my brethren!
B: is this instead of, or complementary to, the drinking mentioned in 210?
(It's awesome, don't get me wrong. Perhaps I need to make some purchases.)
Scratch 232: The hockey shorts are for Idealist, these are for Dr. Slack.
Idealist is a Canadian?
No, nor a hockey player. But I am as much a Canadian as I look like the guy in 226, so it's all good.
238: Now that's what I'm talkin' about. Beautiful.
This all needs to be added to that spreadsheet ...
Crap, I didn't mean Idealist. I meant Idontpay. Can someone fix that for me?
And apologies to the gentlemen--it's not that I confuse you as people; it's that initial "I".
248: You mean both instead of and complementary to? Ummm...
I cannot decide who deserves these.
244 is wrong. The correct selection for Smasher is obviously this.
McGrattan (sorry, they lack a properly Scottish pair).
Crud, I don't remember who the male soccer fans were during the World Cup.
230: It's possible that these are a better w-lfs-n pair, but *someone* needs the jock in 230...
258: arthegall. (Was a male soccer fan. I have no opinion as to whether those manties fit him.)
I've shot my wad, people. Someone else is going to have to peruse that site and see if they have any associations I've missed.
260: Yes! Okay, Arthegall gets the soccer pair in 258.
Oh, if those ones in 244 aren't going to 'Smasher, I'll put them to good use over here, I liked them.
And I enjoyed the rest of your choices B, very apt.
They are pretty cool, I'm glad someone picked 'em up.
I was afraid B had turned into a bot. Thank god she started incorporating communication into her spam.
Nothing to add, except I would've thought these for Standpipe...
dude, the search results for "unisex underwear" are soooo unsexy.
I'm bummed that I couldn't find an appropriate pair for Emerson.
This place claims to sell linen boxers but damned if I can find them on the site.
Deja threadjack: a few weeks ago I was searching for the rule that states any grammatical correction must contain a grammatical error. AWB pointed me towards Language Log, where I was only able to find "the Nitpicker's Law" which I thought was a bit drab. Today Crooked Timber links to this LL post, which recommends "Hartman's Law of Prescriptivist Retaliation". I much prefer that.
Also, I am wearing some pretty superheroic H&M red underwear today (under my pants, sadly) but I can't find a proper H&M underwear gallery online to link to.
I guess it's cock shots for me!
I would like some time alone with the guy modeling the underwear B picked for me.
Also, while I like a guy with a prominent batch I find the "show-it technology" logo to be really way more than I needed.
281: That's the one I was thinking of!
Heh. I like that pair, sue me.
Your taste in men is a little weird, though. That kid definitely has something wrong with his forehead.
What's wrong with it is that it's not pressed into McManly's belly.
I think his forehead is distorted from doing that thing with his stomach.
I've got to admit that I associate boxers with paunchy little old men in plaid Bermuda shorts. I find them the antithesis of sexy. In my youth, I would have instantly assumed that this was a male whose mother bought his underwear.
Fortunately, the Biophysicist does not favour boxers. It would have put a damper on our first meeting...
There are boxers, and then there are boxers. Cute, more form-fitting ones, as opposed to the baggy old-man ones, can be found. I have often wondered if part of the preference for boxers is a desire by men to wear whimsical underwear sometimes. My ex liked them because he could get ones with little penguins and polar bears on them. Now that dudes can get whimsical briefs, though, we'll see if there's a change in underwearing behavior.
There is no finer undergarment than the simple pale blue, relaxed fit boxer, with the elastic strong enough for suspenders but gone slack enough to be comfortable. A pair of those, a pair of well-worn black Gold Toes and a La-Z-Boy makes for a day well spent, I say.
Huh, Tweety. You didn't look 65 in that video.
262 -- An addition to the collection? I already own soccer-themed underwear, although not as tiny as those. Jaysus.
My old roomie in NYC used to have a pair of undies that had an Escher pattern on them. And some with dolphins. I envied his underwear collection. He was forced to wear a suit to work when his consulting company rented him out to a bank, so this - and the profoundly ugly ties that he bought from street vendors - were his bit of rebellion.
The Biophysicist does not have any theme underwear, tho' he's got some in electric blue.
Off track: B and I both seem to favour briefs over boxers, which reminds me that we both like Peeps. I should mention that the bestest place to find stacks of abandoned Peeps is a major supermarket in an area with a large Jewish population. I'm hoping the sugar high will wear off by tomorrow...
I've got to admit that I associate boxers with paunchy little old men in plaid Bermuda shorts. I find them the antithesis of sexy.
Boxers are the only way. IME, the ladies overwhelming prefer boxers to the whitey tighties.
Finally, we disagree. Briefs and boxers are no longer your only choices. Try some boxer briefs; you might like them.
My enormous schlong needs to swing wild and free.
You know, the more I think about it, the more I wouldn't mind most of those patterns in boxer briefs. (Except for the InduStry one; why not just paint "I'm a tool" on your ass and be done with it.)
Perhaps the problem is that male models modeling briefs are essentially risible.
Except for the InduStry one; why not just paint "I'm a tool" on your ass and be done with it.
I don't think that's where you paint "I'm a tool".
m, this machine breeds fascists
I think the reason that wearing vaguely gender-bending clothes is hot: i learned it from girls in suits. By wearing a classic item associated with the other gender, it points out one's nonconfomitiy to that type (eg, curvy chick-ass in suit trousers=?!?!?) thereby demonstrating that one is, in fact, of one's own gender.
I mean, the signals about your actual gender are overpowering the superficial ones pointing in the wrong way. Just in the same way that slumming proves you're rich.
1) Tight fitting boxer briefs are *not* interchangeable with boxers in social settings. (Of course, you wouldn't walk around in boxers in most social settings either....but in a college dorm w/ co-ed bathrooms and sleeping over in boyfriends/girlfriends' rooms, it's one thing to see guys in boxers; another thing entirely in briefs. The tighty whitey wearers seemed to get this; the boxer brief crowd didn't.
2) Isn't this a pretty natural outgrowth of the penguin-and-polar-bear boxer thing?
306 -- The thing is, just generic soccer-themed underwear seems (is) a bit vulgar. Like walking around with a shirt that just has a big picture of a soccer-ball on it: teh l4me.
Team-based themes are the only way to go, but those are usually expensive -- paying through the nose for some tiny team-branded underwear doesn't seem like the way a grad student should be spending what little money he has.
