Question about male underwear

[yuumirei]

All the stories that I've read have the part when the male character take off his underwear. But I still confused about it.

I searched on google but the answer isn't satisfied me enough. What is the different between "boxers", "briefs", "boxers briefs", "speedo", "boxers trunk", "boxers short" ;-; ?

 

[KeithD]

The difference is the cut of the material and you should be able to find photos showing the difference on the Internet.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

https://threadcurve.com/types-of-mens-underwear/

 

[djrip]

All the stories that I've read have the part when the male character take off his underwear. But I still confused about it.

I searched on google but the answer isn't satisfied me enough. What is the different between "boxers", "briefs", "boxers briefs", "speedo", "boxers trunk", "boxers short" ;-; ?

Shorts with a pee hole, tighty whities, bike shorts with a pee hole, Olympic bathing suit, longer and then shorter boxers

 

[MillieDynamite]

Men's undies, house those ugly pee sticks, don't they? We recently watched the fourth season of Star Trek Discovery, and halfway through, I realized why, unlike mum and dad, I like it. So few men, most of who are gay, and so many trans, queer, lesbian, and straight women. No straight white men in authority can be found. Just an observation, I have no idea how the show is still on the air, catering to 10% of the population. Do they even have underwear in the 32nd century?

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Just an observation, I have no idea how the show is still on the air, catering to 10% of the population.

10% of the population is still a huge number, so no wonder there. It believe the show will stay on, despite being a terribly written, franchise destroying piece of radical woke crap

When you mentioned underwear and future... Anyone remembers in Back to the Future, when Doc carries a suitcase of underwear, just "In case they don't have cotton underwear in the future"

 

[SimonDoom]

https://threadcurve.com/types-of-mens-underwear/

This is a pretty good chart to show the differences. A few more thoughts:

1. I grew up with briefs, as I think most American boys did my age or younger. The traditional white versions sometimes are called "tightie whities." They typically have a very soft, knit cotton or cotton substitute fabric, which has a certain elasticity so it can fit fairly tightly but comfortably. They hold the boys snugly against the body, so they're better if you are going to run or do other activities and want to avoid floppage. They have an overlapping fly design to keep a man's member from escaping.

2. Boxers are loose-fitting and longer, usually covering the top of the thigh or more. They usually feature a woven or similar fabric, which is less soft and elastic than a knit fabric but is better for more sophisticated patterns and designs. They provide little to no support, so if you, like me, grew up with briefs, they can feel a bit unsettling at first. You get more of a feeling of a "breeze" down there, with the boys running free. I've known some women who prefer boxers because they associate briefs with boys and boxers with men, and they think of them as more sophisticated. They can also be flattering on the body (especially depending on the body).

3. Boxer briefs combine some advantages of both. The fabric and fit are the same as briefs, but the cut is longer, covering the upper thigh snugly. They provide the same advantages as briefs while offering, to some people's eyes, a more flattering cut than the brief does.

4. Bikini briefs are briefs with minimal coverage and thin waist band. This is the style some people might call a "speedo," although I associate speedo with swimsuit, not underwear. The thong version of the bikini brief is smaller yet and provides thong coverage in the back, revealing the cheeks.

 

[Haulover]

This site describes and reviews men's underwear in graphic and photographic detail:

https://www.wearviews.com

 

[MillieDynamite]

10% of the population is still a huge number, so no wonder there. It believe the show will stay on, despite being a terribly written, franchise destroying piece of radical woke crap

When you mentioned underwear and future... Anyone remembers in Back to the Future, when Doc carries a suitcase of underwear, just "In case they don't have cotton underwear in the future"

Not all gay, lesbian, queer, transgender, or non-binary are sci-fi fans, nor do they all have memberships to Paramount +. Being I am what I am, I love that aspect of the show, but not so much the rest of it, though. It isn't Star Trek.

 

[Lifestyle66]

Not all gay, lesbian, queer, transgender, or non-binary are sci-fi fans, nor do they all have memberships to Paramount +. Being I am what I am, I love that aspect of the show, but not so much the rest of it, though. It isn't Star Trek.

Even some of us pee-stick owners (maybe I should say "carriers", since the wife owns it) enjoyed Star Trek Discovery. But then again, I am a geek, so go figure.

 

[TheRedChamber]

Not all gay, lesbian, queer, transgender, or non-binary are sci-fi fans, nor do they all have memberships to Paramount +. Being I am what I am, I love that aspect of the show, but not so much the rest of it, though. It isn't Star Trek.

Hey, some fans like boys, some fans like girls, some fans like Evil God Empress Michelle Yeoh. Shows got us all covered.
(Only seen first season. It was ropey, but once I started to watch it as 'not Star Trek' I enjoyed it a lot more.)

10% of the population is still a huge number, so no wonder there. It believe the show will stay on, despite being a terribly written, franchise destroying piece of radical woke crap

Careful! Terribly written it may be - Franchise destroying? We'll see, but they had four different goddam spin-offs on last year (ranging from goodish, to poor, to its for kids, to painfully unfunny). But if you throw 'radical' and 'woke' around then you're going to get the Star Trek has always been radical and woke crowd, and they'll kind of have a point.

Do they even have underwear in the 32nd century?

Come on! I don't want to be that kind of nerd who fact-checks people on obscure bits of Star Trek trivia or minor details that don't really matter, but come on, you're nearly a whole goddam millenia out! (Oh, wait parts of season 3 are apparently set in the 32rd century but presumably they took their underware with them?)

Oh and for your reference:

 

[BobbyBrandt]

Two comments for the OP:

First, consider not only the style of underwear but also the "why". As some have stated, briefs offer more support for the scrotum than boxers, but they have disadvantages related to the temperature of the testes and might have an impact on male fertility in some cases. Here is a link on the subject: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/does-underwear-style-affect-sperm-production/

Secondly, two types of underwear not mentioned are 1) a jock (athletic supporter), and 2) Commando (sans underwear). Both can play a role depending upon the story.

 

[nice90sguy]

I searched on google but the answer isn't satisfied me enough. What is the different between "boxers", "briefs", "boxers briefs", "speedo", "boxers trunk", "boxers short" ;-; ?

One important type of underwear missing from your list is "commando".

 

[djrip]

Oh and for your reference:

Oh that decontamination! I actually saw the pilot episode of Enterprise for the first time about a year ago. Got a good chuckle out of the necessity for a space Vaseline rubdown with a hot Vulcan.

 

[Euphony]

This is a pretty good chart to show the differences. A few more thoughts:

Excellent work done in your post: link for the lazy

What I find more valuable as an authorly discussion is general stereotypes/implications inherent in the various choices.

Only subtle character implications that leap to mind are:

Classic boxers: Older, mature man.
Boxer briefs: Used to be more the fit man's choice but feels more like default/standard these days.
Bikini, strings, thongs: Ready for love/action. Sure there's minutia among them I don't understand.
Jockstrap: Sports needing protective action soon to be performed.
Trunks, boxer briefs, midway: as w/the flossier options, sure there's difference. I see variations on same theme.
Briefs: Tighty whities, etc. Juvenile or settings in the significant past. Oldest men who grew up w/as predominant style and/or underwear as fashion choices ship has sailed.

Am I off anywhere?

Anyone have any more enlightenment/nuance (in a stereotypical sense) to share that adds characterization ?

 

[MillieDynamite]

Hey, some fans like boys, some fans like girls, some fans like Evil God Empress Michelle Yeoh. Shows got us all covered.
(Only seen first season. It was ropey, but once I started to watch it as 'not Star Trek' I enjoyed it a lot more.)


Careful! Terribly written it may be - Franchise destroying? We'll see, but they had four different goddam spin-offs on last year (ranging from goodish, to poor, to its for kids, to painfully unfunny). But if you throw 'radical' and 'woke' around then you're going to get the Star Trek has always been radical and woke crowd, and they'll kind of have a point.


Come on! I don't want to be that kind of nerd who fact-checks people on obscure bits of Star Trek trivia or minor details that don't really matter, but come on, you're nearly a whole goddam millenia out! (Oh, wait parts of season 3 are apparently set in the 32rd century but presumably they took their underware with them?)

Oh and for your reference:

According to Gene Roddenberry, in the future, you don't have zippers, buttons, pockets, or eyeglasses. They will be unnecessary. Why would they still need underwear? Once he was gone, those working on things didn't follow all the rules so close.

Women don't carry purses (or clutches or big ass bags). However, they do wear makeup. So there must be a convenient button somewhere that applies touch-ups via transport tech.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Streaming audiences are much smaller. There's a lot more narrow-casting going on now. That's a good thing. Streamers can make money with shows that something like one percent of the population care about, so we can have a lot more variety.

Which pretty much is Star Trek these days.

As expensive as the special effects are, these shows must bring new people in and retrain others to the service. If they don't, gone in 60 seconds. Remember Sense8? Great show, LGBTQ, and so forth, and so on, two lousy seasons and gone with no conclusion. To be fare, if I need to be, they did get a finale movie, but Jo and I have yet to see it. We dumped Netflix for two years because of they canceled it.

 

[TadOverdon]

As expensive as the special effects are, these shows must bring new people in and retrain others to the service. If they don't, gone in 60 seconds.

That's surely so. If a show brings a couple of million dedicated new subscribers to the service, though, for most of the newer streamers that's gold. At least until recently, a lot of people didn't tend to cancel their subscriptions when a show finished. They're like gym memberships. It's not like the old days when national broadcasters had to satisfy sponsors that they were charging high rates to by promising tens of millions of viewers. Totally different revenue model now.

The CBS/Paramount network supposedly only had a couple of million subscribers for the first couple of years, and aside from their movie library the Star Trek shows are the only strong draw they have so far. That thing is their brand.

 

[creative1772]

Not all gay, lesbian, queer, transgender, or non-binary are sci-fi fans, nor do they all have memberships to Paramount +. Being I am what I am, I love that aspect of the show, but not so much the rest of it, though. It isn't Star Trek.

you're right. it's a very depressing show. the star trek from the 60s was optimistic about the future. discovery is much more bleak in tone. Perhaps it's a sign of the times?

i for one, can't understand why "star trek" as a franchise has become afraid of it's own future. ever since nemesis, it feels like the franchise has been stuck in it's own past, remaking shows and movies in and before the TOS era.

discovery would have been better if it had been set a few hundred years after TNG. they wouldnt have had to force the time travel.
anyway, forgive my off topic rant...

 

[TheRedChamber]

According to Gene Roddenberry, in the future, you don't have zippers, buttons, pockets, or eyeglasses. They will be unnecessary. Why would they still need underwear? Once he was gone, those working on things didn't follow all the rules so close.

Women don't carry purses (or clutches or big ass bags). However, they do wear makeup. So there must be a convenient button somewhere that applies touch-ups via transport tech.

Mini-skirts and no underwear? My, Roddenberry did have a very utopian view of the future.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Mini-skirts and no underwear? My, Roddenberry did have a very utopian view of the future.

Yes, he did.

 

[MelissaBaby]

That's surely so. If a show brings a couple of million dedicated new subscribers to the service, though, for most of the newer streamers that's gold. At least until recently, a lot of people didn't tend to cancel their subscriptions when a show finished. They're like gym memberships. It's not like the old days when national broadcasters had to satisfy sponsors that they were charging high rates to by promising tens of millions of viewers. Totally different revenue model now.

The CBS/Paramount network supposedly only had a couple of million subscribers for the first couple of years, and aside from their movie library the Star Trek shows are the only strong draw they have so far. That thing is their brand.

The Yellowstone franchise is huge right now.

 

[TadOverdon]

The Yellowstone franchise is huge right now.

Yes, it is. The viewership is up around 8 or 9 million people for the season premieres. Which are numbers that would get you cancelled in six weeks on ABC when I was a kid. LOL

But they do have something other than Star Trek now, it's true. That may not bode well for a show like Discovery, which costs them an arm and a leg and got about half that viewership at the time that Paramount was calling it their most-watched series.

 

[DanDraper]

I never really thought about it when I mentioned men's underwear in my stories, or when see it mentioned in other peoples stories. I think as a guy I focus too much on women's underwear to think about that. This may be something I have to remember for future stories I write.

You can look up the difference for those men's undies online. The big difference you'll notice is how they are used for different occasions, and it depends on the type of man who wears them.



....