I found the most adorable purse the other day.
i want my purse back
damn thief
LOL
Psst Happy Rosh Hashanah, come have some honey cake and wine:
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=60840
I think the problem is that women have too much choice.
Take underwear for instance. I have worn many types and styles of womens underwear and, apart from the corset variety which caused severe rubbing to the underbelly, I have found them all to be relatively comfortable. It doesn't really matter whether they have a lace design around the waistband, pretty flowers embroidered in the Percy area or little bows sewn into the fabric. Nobody sees the damned things, apart from one's dear spouse, who always laughs her head off when I disrobe, no matter what I wear!
Now, when a man goes on a mission to buy gentleman's undergarments, simple practicality comes into play. None of this fancy, lacey, flowery stuff.
Practical usage is all.
At an early age, a male makes the decision as to whether he prefers to have his nuttage area free swinging and unruly, or held snugly in place.
This determines the type of garment to be purchased, leaving only one further question to be answered.
Does one like to pop percy over the top, under either side, or through a central pouch when it comes time to tinkle with, scratch, inspect or put the blighter to good usage in a stimulating way.
Again, the preference is determined at an early age, leaving the purchaser able to stroll straight to the particular rack, select the correct size, have a quick look at the back just to make sure that it is not a "return", and make the purchase.
Simple, really. I don't know what all the fuss is about.
Dear Lord are you making light of that most important place er body part?
Littlek is right the 80s were good for women. Gym clothes were easy nice and baggy and easy to wear.
Actually now that I think about it that is the problem. Styles now are in the 70s and is/was a decade of awful clothing for women.
Lord Ellpus wrote:
Now, when a man goes on a mission to buy gentleman's undergarments, simple practicality comes into play. None of this fancy, lacey, flowery stuff.
Practical usage is all.
Simple, really. I don't know what all the fuss is about.
Quite simple.. as you stated.
Since we dont have dangly things to fuss about, and dont have to worry about chaffing,pinching, or the obvious interest that randomly pops up ..
we get to worry about cuteness.
I think you are right. Women should throw out their thongs, lacy panties, cotton drawers, low-risers, butt-huggers, etc., etc., and adopt Womens Boxer Shorts that leave no VPL (visible panty line) and cover all the bits and pieces and hold all the stuff in (if required). At least our ass-cheeks would not be hanging out.
That is a possibility Heeven, but then, what to through out and do without - decisions, decisions.
you're braver than me lorde.
heeven, wouldn't boxer shorts cause pretty major league VPL and/or bunching if the pants covering 'em were tight?
dagmaraka wrote:what is it about the first pair of shoes? each time i go hunting for shoes, i end up buying the first pair. not immediately, no. that would be too simple. instead i put them down, circle the city a few times, which takes hours, and then go back to the first store and buy the first pair i picked up. i should finally learn to just bloody buy it right away and be done...
All of that will end if and when you have a child, Dag. I used to be a world class shopper. Now I don't have time...it's grab & go.
"Now I don't have time...it's grab & go." no payment then
?
i say we should boycott undies completely. i find it rather nice sometimes to wear no undies at all. imagine mr.d's surprise at night! comfort with easy access...it works on all levels. and no VPL because there aren't any panties!!!
otherwise i am a g string wearer, everything else goes up my butt anyway (because it is so freaking wide), so i figure the less material up there the better.
by the way, who thought panty hose were a good invention. i think someone else said it perfectly, they are extrememly tight around the waist, and no matter what freaking size i buy, they sag in the crotch giving me a horrible load in my pants look.
oh, and do any of you ladies have that back fat look? i have perfected it...its that stuff that hangs over your bra just behind your arm pits. now understand, i am wearing the size they tell me i am and it is still there. if i wear any bigger, it slides around and the ladies slip out. can we boycott bras too???
Usually when I walk in the door, I remove my shoes immediately, then my bra.
The door of my house, not any random place...
Oh dragon-you're soooooho sexy.
Synonymph wrote:Usually when I walk in the door, I remove my shoes immediately, then my bra.
The door of my house, not any random place...
And a good thing. Wouldn't want ya getting arrested. :wink:
There has to be a better system. Bras are designed by the Army Corps of Engineers or at least they often look like they are. Y'know the first bra or one of the first was just two hankies tied together, with a ribbon sewn to the back?
BTW, WTF are leisure bras? If I want leisure time (or sleep time, they are sometimes called sleep bras), I tend to not care too too much about keeping everything freakin' lifted and separated. Who the heck thought of this money-making scheme?
just move to texas. No need to boycott bras..
here, everyone can walk around topless
legally!