1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What the hell was Fruit of the Loom thinking?

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by redneck, Jul 27, 2014.

  1. redneck

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Ft. Smith, Ar
    Gender:
    Male
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I went to WalMart and bought some new boxer briefs the other day. When I get home I noticed the package said they had a new design that wouldn't ride up on your leg. I thought no problem there maybe it will be a good thing but then I opened the package. My first thought was that they had put the wrong size on the package, I mean these things looked tiny. I figured I had them and would try them on being the label inside said they were my size too.
    HOLLY WHAT THE HELL BATMAN!?!?
    These things are my size but now they fit like bicycle shorts in the legs and butt (wouldn't be a bad thing if I had an ass worth showing off). And even worse I used to love the way new boxer briefs "framed" my package. These things look like a rag tossed over the toe of a shoe and I bounce around in them like I was wearing normal boxers.

    Wasn't the point of boxer briefs that the were loose like boxers in the legs but offered support closer to briefs up front? These are just the fucking opposite! Way to go FoL now I have to find a new brand of underwear when I have been buying these since college. Don't you think that if I kept buying them then I probably liked them the way they were?


    I didn't like the Hanes and WalMart has a new brand called Gillian or something like that anybody tried those?
     
  2. justjade

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2013
    Messages:
    395
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    North Canton, Ohio, US
    You know, I thought about trying Gillian because I like the colors they come in, but I'm afraid I won't like them. I'm quite skeptical of new underwear. The best ones I've ever tried were the Russell ones, but if you don't like them tight, you may not like them. They're pretty light, and they hold their shape. However, they're a little more expensive. They also have longer legs, which you may or may not like.

    Anyway, my husband is 250 lbs and 5'11", and he likes the Russell ones. I'm 5'4" and about 130 lbs. I'd say they're great for people of all sizes. :slight_smile:
     
  3. redneck

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Ft. Smith, Ar
    Gender:
    Male
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    ^^^

    I agree I saw them and liked the colors and am also skeptical about new underwear, but it seems whether I like it or not, I'm going to have to find new ones anyway. It's not that these are super tight but they are quite a bit more form fitting (more like the trunk style shorts that seem to be more popular in Europe) The old style had legs more like a traditional boxer. The truth is if the front still fit the same I'd probably get used to the change in the legs and love them, but I switched from boxers to boxer briefs because I don't like things just bouncing around unimpeded down there and on that note these couldn't fail more.