grose going commando?
- Thread starter cant
- Start date
Bbucko
Cherished Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2006
- Posts
- 7,228
- Media
- 8
- Likes
- 365
- Points
- 208
- Location
- Sunny SoFla
- Sexuality
- 90% Gay, 10% Straight
- Gender
- Male
I go commando [freeballen] in jeans or jean shorts,basketball shorts also
nothing gross about it
Nobulcwby69
Experimental Member
Commando all the time in the summer and always in jeans. Gym shorts, sweats yes. Khaki's yes. Dress slacks if I am looking for a quick blo and go.
B_Nicodemous
Experimental Member
I have to agree with Maxcok. Though I think the key word is hygine and I have been (for the amount of time that it took me to LEAVE the premises and NEVER be heard from again) with some guys who wore underwear whose hygine was...um...absent? lol Shorts I find more acceptable for people to freeball in. At least its getting ventilation! :wink::biggrin1:
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2010
- Posts
- 802
- Media
- 83
- Likes
- 2,112
- Points
- 448
- Location
- Niagara Falls (Ontario, Canada)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 99% Gay, 1% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Do not see anything gross about it, I have been going commando since I got out of high school.
Sorry, the word is 'hygiene', otherwise, I appreciate the nod. Yeah, not everybody can get away with going commando all the time. I was imagining some fat smelly old fart with pee stains on his khakis and dirt tracks in the back. Not a good look. Hot hung dudes in nylon mesh shorts, no problem. However, there's a time and a place too. It's not always appropriate to have your big meat on display in polite company, where you might upset the children and frighten the horses. :biggrin2:
Last edited:
Pffft. Underwear is just another chain by which we are fed in to the machine. It's basically just a Victorian neurosis about concealing shame made manifest. One layer isn't enough to hide the world from your disgusting, sinful parts!
And if someone's hygiene is as bad as all that underwear is not going to make any difference.
And if someone's hygiene is as bad as all that underwear is not going to make any difference.
hmmm . . . you could be misinterpreting and extrapolating certain assumptions from my post. I am hardly a prude or Victorian in my attitudes, nor do I think of my or anyone elses 'parts' as disgusting or sinful. Quite the contrary. However, I am what you might call a big time 'shower' in most pants, and though I prefer to hang loose whenever possible, there are certain social situations where it's not just inappropriate, it would be quite crass to be so "in your face". Not to mention I can use the support sometimes, and underwear can be fun.
Yes, well just as I don't care to see a whole world of unattractive people running around naked, I can take a pass on certain people freeballing and freeassing. For some people having that extra layer of absorbent cotton definitely makes a difference, and I appreciate that.
This from a fella whose very extensive gallery is chock full of jockstrap and underwear shots?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2010
- Posts
- 1,599
- Media
- 202
- Likes
- 186
- Points
- 183
- Location
- Washington/Arizona
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Only okay if you're a thorough wiper. Otherwise, you'll look like O'Hare during a rainstorm.
I was speaking generally, not directly to you or your points. That we disagree does not bother me in the least.
Perhaps to clarify, I stand by my assertion that underwear, as with undershirts, and socks with sandals, are merely vestiges of prudish colonial attitudes. They do, however, serve a function under certain conditions, and have often been molded by fashion in to attractive form.
Underwear makes sense in cold conditions, or when wearing a pad or for medical reasons (like an adult diaper or colostomy bag). Otherwise I consider it redundant.
Undershirts are great in cold weather, or when being worn, exposed, by men or women with fantastic physiques. They are humorous when worn by people who are wildly out-of-shape. Otherwise, what's the point.
Socks serve a utilitarian purpose when worn under shoes or boots. In sandals or open-toed anything they look out of place.
Basically, wearing clothes under your clothes doesn't make much sense to me unless it's cold out or you're accessorizing. It's like wearing clothing while swimming. What's the point unless it's cold out?
B_Nicodemous
Experimental Member
And this is why we proof read lol:biggrin1: I agree. Shorts are just yummy and yes one does have to take into the consideration where one is freeballing. As you say in a later post, with some people that extra layer of absorbent cotton does make a difference. And the support can be helpful at times (think of testicular injuries. Sometimes you really don't want your boys moving and slapping around:eek2
D_CountdeGrandePinja
Account Disabled
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Posts
- 312
- Media
- 10
- Likes
- 763
- Points
- 448
- Age
- 60
- Location
- McCalla (Alabama, United States)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Im not really sure why you would find it grose/gross... your privates touch the inside of under wear boxers/briefs so whats the diffrence.... if your clean then your clean....
I never have understood why people think its nasty/gross for the CLEAN body to touch clean clothes.... I guess its just some sort of metal hang up some people have..... Kinda think its better to have a little air flow around the boys....
I never have understood why people think its nasty/gross for the CLEAN body to touch clean clothes.... I guess its just some sort of metal hang up some people have..... Kinda think its better to have a little air flow around the boys....
Similar threads
- Poll
