Well, I picked up some new drawers the other day, and in line with the latest trend, I picked up some "natural pouch" type briefs.
I had posted a while ago about feeling a bit uncomfortable with my bulge showing, after several of my students took notice of my "assets". http://www.lpsg.org/262233-teacher-is-my-bulge-appropriate.html So, needless to say, I have to factor that in when shopping for underwear.
That being said, here we go!
Pic number one is the John Sievers Natural Pouch Brief and the Natural Pouch Freestyle. First thought: "MAN, these natural pouch briefs make my junk look huge...and prominent! Not what I was hoping for." The Sievers Natural Pouch Brief is SUPER comfortable, and just covers enough that you wouldn't see it under low rise pants. The bulge without pants looks a little unnatural...at least compared to standard low rise briefs. The Freestyle, on the other hand, has a waistband that sits way too high for my taste, and can be seen above pants with a medium-low rise. The bulge is much less noticeable, and everything rides lower and longer, as I had initially expected with the "natural pouch" style.
Pic number two is the Ergowear Plus Brief and the Obviously Full Cut Brief. The Ergowear brief is ABSURD! It was crushing my package the whole time it was on and made things look like a softball. It's hard to tell in the pics, but my pants look ridiculously puffed out...not unlike I'd imagine those Andrew Christian padded Show-It briefs might look. The Obviously briefs have a very comfortable material, but the area around the nuts and on the backside is a bit too slim and loose, and will surely be wedgie city under most pants. After trying on the Ergowear these didn't look quite as silly, but the bulge looks unnatural under pants.
So, in conclusion...
-Buy the Ergowear if you wish to move your junk up and you don't have large balls...or know you are lacking when flaccid.
-Buy the Obviously if you are above average flaccid, have average or below average balls, and big thighs or butt, and want a "lift".
-Buy the Sievers freestyle if you wear standard rise pants, and you don't want your junk crushed, and want it sitting a bit lower, but further out than most briefs.
-Buy the Sievers brief if you have slimmer legs, wear low-rise pants and want the "natural pouch" style hang.
At above average soft, and with bigger high-riding balls, the pouch is very comfortable for me...although, I would like a bit more width on the bottom for my balls. My initial reaction is that these are the best of the bunch. This brief shows a more attractive bulge than a standard low rise brief with skinny pants, as it allows the package to spread out lengthwise, instead of being pushed up and out (which is actually more noticeable...and unnatural looking).
Let me know your thoughts!
Which one do you think is best?
I had posted a while ago about feeling a bit uncomfortable with my bulge showing, after several of my students took notice of my "assets". http://www.lpsg.org/262233-teacher-is-my-bulge-appropriate.html So, needless to say, I have to factor that in when shopping for underwear.
That being said, here we go!
Pic number one is the John Sievers Natural Pouch Brief and the Natural Pouch Freestyle. First thought: "MAN, these natural pouch briefs make my junk look huge...and prominent! Not what I was hoping for." The Sievers Natural Pouch Brief is SUPER comfortable, and just covers enough that you wouldn't see it under low rise pants. The bulge without pants looks a little unnatural...at least compared to standard low rise briefs. The Freestyle, on the other hand, has a waistband that sits way too high for my taste, and can be seen above pants with a medium-low rise. The bulge is much less noticeable, and everything rides lower and longer, as I had initially expected with the "natural pouch" style.
Pic number two is the Ergowear Plus Brief and the Obviously Full Cut Brief. The Ergowear brief is ABSURD! It was crushing my package the whole time it was on and made things look like a softball. It's hard to tell in the pics, but my pants look ridiculously puffed out...not unlike I'd imagine those Andrew Christian padded Show-It briefs might look. The Obviously briefs have a very comfortable material, but the area around the nuts and on the backside is a bit too slim and loose, and will surely be wedgie city under most pants. After trying on the Ergowear these didn't look quite as silly, but the bulge looks unnatural under pants.
So, in conclusion...
-Buy the Ergowear if you wish to move your junk up and you don't have large balls...or know you are lacking when flaccid.
-Buy the Obviously if you are above average flaccid, have average or below average balls, and big thighs or butt, and want a "lift".
-Buy the Sievers freestyle if you wear standard rise pants, and you don't want your junk crushed, and want it sitting a bit lower, but further out than most briefs.
-Buy the Sievers brief if you have slimmer legs, wear low-rise pants and want the "natural pouch" style hang.
At above average soft, and with bigger high-riding balls, the pouch is very comfortable for me...although, I would like a bit more width on the bottom for my balls. My initial reaction is that these are the best of the bunch. This brief shows a more attractive bulge than a standard low rise brief with skinny pants, as it allows the package to spread out lengthwise, instead of being pushed up and out (which is actually more noticeable...and unnatural looking).
Let me know your thoughts!
Which one do you think is best?Attachments
Last edited:
