Author Topic: Non-Mustachian Underwear?  (Read 4667 times)

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20180
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #50 on: February 21, 2025, 06:19:19 PM »
I don't get why uniboob is considered unflattering.

Because it is???

Are you sure you know what uniboob is? Because it's distinctly unattractive. It takes two separate breasts and squishes them into, like, a flattened, horizontal, fatty, singular tube across the chest.

If you have any significant fatty mass, it's hideously unflattering. Like, you don't realize how unattractive perfectly nice looking breasts can look until they're compressed into a singular tube shape while squished into a shelf bra.

You will very, very rarely see uniboob in the wild because most women won't be seen in public with a bra that creates uniboob. We all know the phenomenon well because all breasty folks have tried in countless bras and bra tops that create it, but we don't generally walk around wearing them because they look that terrible.

ETA: I literally can't even find a photo of uniboob on Google because all searches that include the word "uniboob" are for bras that market themselves as not causing uniboob.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2025, 06:26:26 PM by Metalcat »

ScreamingHeadGuy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 341
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Down the street from the Frozen Tundra
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #51 on: February 21, 2025, 07:09:26 PM »
I don't get why uniboob is considered unflattering.

Because it is???

Are you sure you know what uniboob is? Because it's distinctly unattractive. It takes two separate breasts and squishes them into, like, a flattened, horizontal, fatty, singular tube across the chest.

If you have any significant fatty mass, it's hideously unflattering. Like, you don't realize how unattractive perfectly nice looking breasts can look until they're compressed into a singular tube shape while squished into a shelf bra.

You will very, very rarely see uniboob in the wild because most women won't be seen in public with a bra that creates uniboob. We all know the phenomenon well because all breasty folks have tried in countless bras and bra tops that create it, but we don't generally walk around wearing them because they look that terrible.

ETA: I literally can't even find a photo of uniboob on Google because all searches that include the word "uniboob" are for bras that market themselves as not causing uniboob.

Heh - “tube boob”. 

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20180
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #52 on: February 22, 2025, 06:57:28 AM »
Heh - “tube boob”.

That's what it is though! For larger breasted women especially, a lot of sports bras that aren't specifically engineered to separate the breasts just smash them into kind of like a singular horizontal breast sausage.

And if you don't have tube boob, you have double-bubble spill over, or even worse, spill-under. I'm very prone to spill-under because they  literally don't make bras for my rib cage size, they're just not manufactured.

There's so much engineering that goes into designing the exact right compression to lift a blob of fairly loose, irregular fat and other tissues in a very thin, pliable casing into the exact right esthetic position, and it's impossible to produce a universal garment design that can do this for all shapes and sizes of breasts and torsos. Then add to that that most women have two different sized breasts, you can see why so much R&D is necessary and why no one product can capture a ton of market share.

Meanwhile boxer briefs just have to sew a little cozy fabric pouch on the front.

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1361
  • FIREd at 36
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #53 on: February 22, 2025, 11:30:18 AM »
Heh - “tube boob”.

That's what it is though! For larger breasted women especially, a lot of sports bras that aren't specifically engineered to separate the breasts just smash them into kind of like a singular horizontal breast sausage.

And if you don't have tube boob, you have double-bubble spill over, or even worse, spill-under. I'm very prone to spill-under because they  literally don't make bras for my rib cage size, they're just not manufactured.

There's so much engineering that goes into designing the exact right compression to lift a blob of fairly loose, irregular fat and other tissues in a very thin, pliable casing into the exact right esthetic position, and it's impossible to produce a universal garment design that can do this for all shapes and sizes of breasts and torsos. Then add to that that most women have two different sized breasts, you can see why so much R&D is necessary and why no one product can capture a ton of market share.

Meanwhile boxer briefs just have to sew a little cozy fabric pouch on the front.
and for us smaller boobed types sports bras just flatten them out into non-existence! I'm not a 12 year old boy! I have boobs damn it! I just can't find them in this stupid squeezy piece of elastic! And then there's the PITA to take off a sweaty sports bra that has no clasp. The struggle is real. Then add in the exorbitant cost and ...YIKES!

Plus why do I, who's wearing basicly a tiny piece of cloth without a lot of supportive stuff, have to pay the same price as larger support bras with all the structural stuff that goes into them, that are made for larger breasted women?

In any case paying non-mustashian prices for things like good bras or under wear isn't worth it for me but I can see how it would be for many people.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2025, 11:40:18 AM by spartana »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25113
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #54 on: February 22, 2025, 03:38:28 PM »
Heh - “tube boob”.

That's what it is though! For larger breasted women especially, a lot of sports bras that aren't specifically engineered to separate the breasts just smash them into kind of like a singular horizontal breast sausage.

And if you don't have tube boob, you have double-bubble spill over, or even worse, spill-under. I'm very prone to spill-under because they  literally don't make bras for my rib cage size, they're just not manufactured.

There's so much engineering that goes into designing the exact right compression to lift a blob of fairly loose, irregular fat and other tissues in a very thin, pliable casing into the exact right esthetic position, and it's impossible to produce a universal garment design that can do this for all shapes and sizes of breasts and torsos. Then add to that that most women have two different sized breasts, you can see why so much R&D is necessary and why no one product can capture a ton of market share.

Meanwhile boxer briefs just have to sew a little cozy fabric pouch on the front.
and for us smaller boobed types sports bras just flatten them out into non-existence! I'm not a 12 year old boy! I have boobs damn it! I just can't find them in this stupid squeezy piece of elastic! And then there's the PITA to take off a sweaty sports bra that has no clasp. The struggle is real. Then add in the exorbitant cost and ...YIKES!

Plus why do I, who's wearing basicly a tiny piece of cloth without a lot of supportive stuff, have to pay the same price as larger support bras with all the structural stuff that goes into them, that are made for larger breasted women?

In any case paying non-mustashian prices for things like good bras or under wear isn't worth it for me but I can see how it would be for many people.

There should be Nike pump bras where you can pump up the cleavage to whatever height you want.  I mean, c'mon, the shoes came out in '89.

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1361
  • FIREd at 36
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #55 on: February 22, 2025, 04:29:02 PM »
Heh - “tube boob”.

That's what it is though! For larger breasted women especially, a lot of sports bras that aren't specifically engineered to separate the breasts just smash them into kind of like a singular horizontal breast sausage.

And if you don't have tube boob, you have double-bubble spill over, or even worse, spill-under. I'm very prone to spill-under because they  literally don't make bras for my rib cage size, they're just not manufactured.

There's so much engineering that goes into designing the exact right compression to lift a blob of fairly loose, irregular fat and other tissues in a very thin, pliable casing into the exact right esthetic position, and it's impossible to produce a universal garment design that can do this for all shapes and sizes of breasts and torsos. Then add to that that most women have two different sized breasts, you can see why so much R&D is necessary and why no one product can capture a ton of market share.

Meanwhile boxer briefs just have to sew a little cozy fabric pouch on the front.
and for us smaller boobed types sports bras just flatten them out into non-existence! I'm not a 12 year old boy! I have boobs damn it! I just can't find them in this stupid squeezy piece of elastic! And then there's the PITA to take off a sweaty sports bra that has no clasp. The struggle is real. Then add in the exorbitant cost and ...YIKES!

Plus why do I, who's wearing basicly a tiny piece of cloth without a lot of supportive stuff, have to pay the same price as larger support bras with all the structural stuff that goes into them, that are made for larger breasted women?

In any case paying non-mustashian prices for things like good bras or under wear isn't worth it for me but I can see how it would be for many people.

There should be Nike pump bras where you can pump up the cleavage to whatever height you want.  I mean, c'mon, the shoes came out in '89.
They make those! I've never seen them myself (and I'm definitely NOT looking to go "bigger") but I've seen some online in during my bra search. I think they make water filled ones too. Handy when out riding your bike and your water bottle is empty ;-).

force majeure

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 199
  • Age: 49
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #56 on: March 07, 2025, 08:04:40 AM »
I wear this brand of men's underpants...

Stitches Medical - innovative fart-filtering boxer briefs for men. Say goodbye to bad odours ruining your day with our advanced filtering technology.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25113
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #57 on: March 07, 2025, 08:08:56 AM »
Stitches Medical - innovative fart-filtering boxer briefs for men. Say goodbye to bad odours ruining your day with our advanced filtering technology.

 . . . and here I've been holding my farts in until I make it to a socially approved farting area like a sucker.


I have so many questions about this.  Do you just rip ass around people all day long?  Does the odour suppressing technology also suppress the noise, or are the people in your life just cool with that?  Do you ever accidentally grab an old pair of underwear and then clear out a busy room because you're in the habit of farting without thinking about it?  Does use of this underwear over a long period of time weaken your ability to hold back your farts?

force majeure

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 199
  • Age: 49
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #58 on: March 07, 2025, 08:15:02 AM »
They can handle most gas emissions.
I get a week's wearing of one pair.
I dont hold back, especially in public areas. Its not healthy to suppress things... just let it out.
Doesnt embarress or bother me ... I wear noise-cancelling headphones.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25113
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #59 on: March 07, 2025, 08:22:03 AM »
Doesnt embarress or bother me ... I wear noise-cancelling headphones.

Borderline incel-levels of self-awareness?  :D

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20180
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #60 on: March 07, 2025, 10:41:37 AM »
I've lost track of the number of times fart-filtering underwear have been brought up in the forums, but this is the first time in many years where it's directly relevant to the thread topic.

RetireOrDieTrying

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 158
  • Age: 55
  • Location: United States
  • Gallivantin' across the US
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #61 on: March 07, 2025, 02:37:54 PM »
Meanwhile boxer briefs just have to sew a little cozy fabric pouch on the front.

Weirdly topical - there is a market for men's boxer briefs with a non-little cozy fabric pouch, not that anyone seems to make them. One size does not fit all. Boobs come in different sizes, and so do gentlemen. Perhaps this should be my next side hustle. LOL

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20180
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #62 on: March 07, 2025, 03:02:41 PM »
Meanwhile boxer briefs just have to sew a little cozy fabric pouch on the front.

Weirdly topical - there is a market for men's boxer briefs with a non-little cozy fabric pouch, not that anyone seems to make them. One size does not fit all. Boobs come in different sizes, and so do gentlemen. Perhaps this should be my next side hustle. LOL

Yes, but you would need a pretty small variety of little cozy pouch sizes compared to the near-infinite variety you need of bra shapes and sizes.

That said, fit is one thing, style is another. DH just picked up some new boxers that I can only describe as very "dick forward" in their design.

The pouch is clearly designed to make the bits stick out front as much as possible, while other pouches are wider and flatter, these have a pouch shaped kind of like a nose.

DH is a huge fan, but that's because he works from home and the sexual harassment policies here are pretty lax.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25113
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #63 on: March 07, 2025, 04:04:44 PM »
Bring back the codpiece!

Zikoris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4725
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Vancouver, BC
  • Vancouverstachian
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #64 on: March 07, 2025, 10:26:58 PM »
I order underwear in 6 packs online and never think twice about it. I've never found it distinctly uncomfortable or comfortable, I don't really feel it or think about it at all once I'm dressed - is that unusual? I can see it being uncomfortable if it was the wrong size, or you needed some sort of sport-specific performance underwear, but I can't think of any advantage expensive underwear would have over cheap.

I buy some sort of soft and comfortable bra maybe every couple of years to replace a worn out one. All my clothes last a long time because I don't use a dryer. My sports bras were not expensive either, maybe $20/pop? I have two in use now, one uniboob-style (which doesn't bother me, as it's not uncomfortable) and one normal-looking. I'm a 36D, so not particularly small, and those are fine for me. Maybe the key here is that it would never cross my mind to think or care about my tits needing to look a certain way in public.

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20180
Re: Non-Mustachian Underwear?
« Reply #65 on: March 08, 2025, 04:07:43 AM »
I order underwear in 6 packs online and never think twice about it. I've never found it distinctly uncomfortable or comfortable, I don't really feel it or think about it at all once I'm dressed - is that unusual? I can see it being uncomfortable if it was the wrong size, or you needed some sort of sport-specific performance underwear, but I can't think of any advantage expensive underwear would have over cheap.

I buy some sort of soft and comfortable bra maybe every couple of years to replace a worn out one. All my clothes last a long time because I don't use a dryer. My sports bras were not expensive either, maybe $20/pop? I have two in use now, one uniboob-style (which doesn't bother me, as it's not uncomfortable) and one normal-looking. I'm a 36D, so not particularly small, and those are fine for me. Maybe the key here is that it would never cross my mind to think or care about my tits needing to look a certain way in public.

Yeah, women's underwear is much simpler than men's, we don't have dangly bits to manage.

And yeah, if you don't care about boob esthetics, then it's much easier. I don't really care anymore, most of the time, which is why I wear light support Puma sports bras, but when I go to more formal events, I do care, and I have a $350 bra.