Joined: 29 Apr 2005 Posts: 2885 Location: southern utah, usa
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:38 pm Post subject:
Usquanigo wrote:
azraelle wrote:
Horsefeathers!
Please don't defame the Marx Brothers by bringing their excellent movies into this.
I was trying to be nice--but if you prefer, Horseshit!
Quote:
If "girl undies" were made of the same fabric as men's undies are, typically (100% cotton or 100% nylon) with little or no stretch and those Godawful 1 inch or even 1-1/2 inch waistbands that lose their stretch after awhile, then you MIGHT have a point. Fortunately, they are not, and you DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! SOME panties don't accommodate the male anatomy, and some DO. You just have to learn to pick and choose (and learn what to look for). Which means swallowing a bit of male pride when you go shopping for underwear.
So.... all men's underwear are Fruit of the Loom "Tighty whiteys" or designer briefs, which are just the same design with a different color and name, OR the tried and true, ubiquitous "boxer shorts" then, right?
All made from cotton, with no longevity or comfort in mind at all.
I believe that I specified EITHER 100% cotton OR 100% nylon. I also made no mention of styles--I was fully aware of the styles in your link. However, I was also aware of the typical PRICES charged for them. Why in God's name would I willingly pay $22 (plus shipping) for ONE PAIR of pouch thongs, when I can get a comfortable equivalent at WalMart for $3 to $5?? Or better yet, 3 for $6 to $8??
That's just ONE example. If you google a little, you can find LOADS of sites, with all manner of underwear and lingerie for guys. Thongs, gstrings, bikinis, briefs, boxers, boxer-briefs (aka box-cut, or boyshorts), and more. You can find ALL materials, cotton, silk, satin, leather, vynil, etc. You can find all levels of opacity from near transparent to totally opaque, as well as pretty much all manner of colors and designs (flags, rainbows (if you are so inclined), metallic shimmer, etc, etc, etc).
Rather than telling us that we need to "swallow our male pride", perhaps you could try to man up a little, and do some research, and wear something actually made for you. You can't use the excuse of cut/style, or material. Everything women have, we have, but made for our particular equipment. In fact, we might even have MORE options, since we have the pelvic equivalent of pasties as well (the so-called "backless sock").
I have a pair of these - http://www.teddygirl.com/pouch-short.html, and other than being larger than average and having to stretch the pouch out a little (because if I upsize, the waist is too large on me), they are some of the most comfortable things you could imagine wearing. And when I wear either my linen pants, or my satin-like shorts over them, the feeling is actually quite pleasant. They aren't the greatest example because they are somewhat cheaply made, but the point is, we have the options you seek, made for US. You just need to look a little.
But, you seem to prefer dressing in drag more than anything else, and just use other aspects like cut, fit, finish, etc as an excuse for your preference.
And as a matter of fact, I, personally, DO prefer to at least partially dress in "drag" as you prefer to call it--although, accuracy bids me to inform your judgmental soul that the term "drag" refers to males that are impersonating women--and I have never had such a desire, nor have I ever attempted such an act--if for no other reason, than that I consider it grossly disrespectful of women! And I'm not turned on by it either.
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 Posts: 411 Location: The Sprawl
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:58 pm Post subject:
So now it's suddenly about price? lol
No "dude" (and I use the term loosely), you ARE turned on by wearing women's clothing. That's the reason you do it. Well, that and you are *able* to, which implies you aren't working with all that much (negating the need for the equipment room designed into men's versions). It's not about price, it's not about style, it's not about comfort, it's about pleasure. You wouldn't be looked down on *quite* as much if you were at least man enough to admit that.
And yes, I am judgemental. I'm human. What's your point? It's obvious you are hurt and offended by reality, but I can't really help that. EVERYONE is judgmental, even you. Your response shows it.
That's not the same as oppressive though. You can dress in drag if you want, it's no skin off my back. Just don't berate us and say that we are wrong or missing out, or need to swallow anything (we'll leave that up to you ). I'm point out the FACT that your are incorrect in your assertions on the matter. I wear gstrings (occasionally), and lingerie too. Not all the time, but I do, for my girlfriend, they just happen to be made for a man.
Joined: 29 Apr 2005 Posts: 2885 Location: southern utah, usa
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:06 pm Post subject:
Didn't say that I wasn't turned on by wearing women's clothing. I said I wasn't turned on by the concept of impersonating (or attempting to impersonate) a woman, which is the definition of "dressing in drag". No skin off my nose if you don't care for it--just quit trying to denigrate it by use of inaccurate terms calculated to inflame prejudice. Jackass.
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 Posts: 411 Location: The Sprawl
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 6:42 pm Post subject:
lol Nice. You start with the attitude, but don't like it thrown back. How fitting.
Simply put - "Cross-dressing is the act of wearing clothing commonly associated with another gender within a particular society." And in modern useage, dressing in drag is used interchangably with cross-dressing. And no special deferance is paid to the type, location, or amount of said clothing, simply that it IS clothing, and IS "for" the opposite gender of the wearer. So wearing women's panties does mean you ARE cross-dressing. Even if you don't like the sound of it.
Oh yes, women's under can be quite comfortable if roomy enough to support a man's genitals, although gstrings can be a bit akward. BTW I happen to be wearing ladies white cotton briefs at the moment.