22

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "Sanity Check - DH in Boxers" and posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. The original poster asks how appropriate it is for a middle-aged man to do outside chores and short errands wearing boxer shorts with no other pants. The fact this thread reached 10 pages and leads all other topics in activity yesterday really makes me wonder whether life is so good for our users that this is the most troubling type of issue they face or life is so bad that they are forced to escape by reading the most mundane thread available. Either way, there is near universal agreement that boxers belong inside pants and are not outerwear. Some posters might allow boxers in the privacy of one's home and perhaps even outside in circumstances in which the wearer was not likely to be seen by others. But, for most, even that's not appropriate. A few posters argued that boxers have the same coverage as shorts and, therefore, they don't think there is much difference. But, the difference for most posters is the existence of a fly on boxers. While the ease of egress provided to the male genitalia by a fly may be a convenience in the bathroom, it provides obvious problems in the front yard, let alone the hardware store. I had thought that the original poster was talking about her husband but it turns out that the original poster is the boxer-wearer himself. He followed-up with several pro-boxers-as-outwear arguments and even proposed that this might be an "Italian thing". This suggestion was contested by a poster whose spouse is "100% Jersey Italian". The poster later clarified that his boxers have button flys which somewhat solves the "unexpected appearance" issue, but the poster also admits that he now realizes his attire might make the family's nanny uncomfortable. Several posters are concerned that poor bathroom hygiene could lead to unsanitary and visually unappealing leftovers on the underwear. They much preferred remaining ignorant about this rather than being forced to confront it when encountering the original poster and his boxers. One poster went as far to question the original poster's endowment based on her disbelief that any but the smallest examples could be constrained by mere boxers. The reaction to this by the original poster was such that I had to remove it.