# BHM & Boxers - Above or Below the Belly Button?



## VinnyPA (Aug 29, 2007)

Found these boxers and chuckled. Here's a question for the FFA's: Boxers: Above or below the belly button?

Go Steelers!!! 

View attachment Boxers above and below.jpg


----------



## Britannia (Aug 29, 2007)

Below. Above is grody.


----------



## Violet_Beauregard (Aug 29, 2007)

Definitely below... 

Love the hairy chest.... great legs.....

Very nice looking..... 

Thanks for sharing!! 

(Go Browns!  )


----------



## fat hiker (Aug 29, 2007)

Below. Oddly enough, our local high school's new dress code bans "visble underwear". That's going to cramp some boys' styles...


----------



## collegeguy2514 (Aug 29, 2007)

i wear mine below.


----------



## StridentDionysus (Aug 29, 2007)

collegeguy2514 said:


> i wear mine below.



Yep, me too :eat1:


----------



## stuffedyetthin (Aug 29, 2007)

Below, boxers are suposed to be comfortable.


----------



## rabbitislove (Aug 29, 2007)

below. 
its comfortable and shows off yr hot bod.


----------



## Qit el-Remel (Aug 30, 2007)

Below, or it looks silly.

-Qit


----------



## newlylarge (Aug 30, 2007)

I agree with those who say above the belly-button looks a bit silly. I suppose if one's belly hung way down over their waistband, they might find it more comfortable to wear their boxers over their lower-stomach. From your photo, your stomach looks to be similar in shape to mine, although I have to admit that mine is larger (I know. I say that as if it is a bad thing  ). Even so, mine is similar to the way yours appears in that it is round, but not droopy, and does not hang over my waistline. And I do not use the term "droopy" in a negative sense. Many prefer that "apron" effect.

People seem to carry weight in different ways and different people, even of similar relative weight, may have different "shapes." Some sag or hang more while others find that their girth is more "defiant" of gravity and sticks straight out in front and on the sides without hanging down much if at all.

In my case, I seem to fall into the category of having a more "perky" belly that sticks straight out in front as well as on each side. So I wear my boxers and pants below my belly. My girlfriend often jokes about how my belly leaves my belt still visible, but "in the shade." 

By the way, since Fat Hiker mentioned the "visible underwear" look, I have a question for the women here. Do you think that looks good or, like me, do you think it looks ridiculous? I mean, if someone wore their pants with their underwear showing when it was not a popular style or fad, most onlookers would assume that the person dressed that way was, at the risk of sounding offensive, mentally challenged. It would go without saying that having ones boxers sticking up above their pants looked silly. But when it becomes a "style," all the kids jump on board and think it looks cool. I would also be interesting in hearing womens opinions of the related style of young guys wearing their pants hanging down well below their hips. My opinion of this "looK" is the same as my opinion of visible boxers. But maybe I am just getting old.


----------



## Jah (Aug 30, 2007)

Doesn't matter as long as it's comfortable.


----------



## newlylarge (Aug 30, 2007)

I agree, Jah. As I said, I could see how if one's belly hung down like an "apron," it would probably be more comfortable to have one's boxers pulled-up over their lower-belly in order to hold everything in place as it were.

When I started gaining weight a couple of years ago, I had started with a flat stomach and I had no way of knowing how my "body type" would carry my newly added weight. Of course, early on, I was not surprised that my stomach did not hang-down as it was not yet very large. But as my belly grew larger and rounder, I somewhat expected that it would eventually do so. It is likely that, if I had continued gaining more weight, my added girth would have had to begin to hang-down over my waistline eventually.

As I noted, I know that many people prefer a belly that hangs "apron-like," but I can also see how that might present problems when it comes to wearing pants and underpants which are designed to fit below the belly. Of course, it is worth noting that it was once the style for men to wear their pants much higher. Ever notice that in those old movies from the 1940s and earlier? The men clearly wore their pants at or above the belly-button with appropriately shorter ties. I suppose, considering my comments about the current style of wearing pants below one's hips, the style since the 1940s has been for an ever lowering "waistline." This seems to be the case for women as well as men.

Of course, in the "old days" men also always wore hats. As George Costansa said on Seinfeld, it must have been "a bald man's paradise."


----------



## Britannia (Aug 30, 2007)

newlylarge said:


> By the way, since Fat Hiker mentioned the "visible underwear" look, I have a question for the women here. Do you think that looks good or, like me, do you think it looks ridiculous? I mean, if someone wore their pants with their underwear showing when it was not a popular style or fad, most onlookers would assume that the person dressed that way was, at the risk of sounding offensive, mentally challenged. It would go without saying that having ones boxers sticking up above their pants looked silly. But when it becomes a "style," all the kids jump on board and think it looks cool. I would also be interesting in hearing womens opinions of the related style of young guys wearing their pants hanging down well below their hips. My opinion of this "looK" is the same as my opinion of visible boxers. But maybe I am just getting old.



Well, I'm 18, and I don't think that finding exposed underwear ridiculous is an "old people" thing. I do admit that when a guy reaches up for something and a glimpse of his boxers is seen it's quite nice, but I absolutely *HATE* when a guy's pants are so low that their underwear is seen between the bottom of their shirt and the beginning of their pants. Yuck!

What's even more ridiculous is when the boy's pants don't even cover his ass at all- the pant BEGINS after his butt ends. Fucking ridiculous. They look like idiots.


----------



## chilihead74 (Aug 30, 2007)

> They look like idiots.



You know the funny thing about that kind of "fashion victims" is: They don´t realize how incredibly stupid they look. Just like for example the whole hiphop style. I am sorry, but I don´t get it: Is there some sort of contest going on, about what is the most stupid way to wear a baseball cap? I mean, guys come on, just think about it, what your future kids might say, when you show them pictures of yourself in like 20 years. Do you honestly think they will say: "Wow Dad, you look really cool"?? I would rather think they will say: "Wow Dad, you really look funny on that picture". 

Why I know this? Cause it was the same thing throughout ALL the times. I laughed at the 70s fashion, just like other kids will laugh at the 90s fashion. I guess one good thing about being a nearly 500lbs BHM is, that you cannot be a fashion victim, since there is no fashion available. Anyways, I am sorry, I just needed that rant now 

@topic: I don´t wear boxers but some bigger kind of briefs and even though I could pull them up on the belly, I wear them under my belly...way more comfortable


----------



## Britannia (Aug 30, 2007)

chilihead74 said:


> I guess one good thing about being a nearly 500lbs BHM is, that you cannot be a fashion victim, since there is no fashion available. Anyways, I am sorry, I just needed that rant now



White tees and jeans with some nice shoes are HOT on big guys. Same with button-up shirts and jeans.

I love it when a big guy dresses himself with care. It's really not that hard, but it makes a world of difference :wubu:


----------



## Zandoz (Aug 30, 2007)

Where ever they land and stay put...I don't tend to micro-manage underwear unless they're unruly.


----------



## orinoco (Aug 31, 2007)

has to be below the belly, trouble is that with my stumpy legs and the way mens boxers seem to be designed they end up somewhere around my kneecaps! now to me that just looks daft. more shorter, wider boxers please underwear designers....


----------



## overtkill (Aug 31, 2007)

i wear my boxers below...i feel more comfortable


----------



## Kiki (Aug 31, 2007)

Below if that's all you're wearing! Under your clothes, it doesn't really matter!


----------



## newlylarge (Sep 1, 2007)

Thanks, Britainnia and Chillihead. I am glad to hear that it is just not me turning into an old-man (I am only 35) who simply thinks that these "young whippersnappers" are crazy.  

I agree that what is most silly about this fad is the way it shows how many people are sheep who will fall for anything. Something that would seem to be clearly ridiculous comes to be accepted as long as "everyone is doing it." Actually, the overall trend seems to be to look as sloppy and unkempt as possible. Make your hair looks as if you just got out of bed and you did not wash or comb it. Make your pants look as if they are three size too large. Even more odd, I have recently noticed high-school aged guys wearing what appear to be flannel pajama bottoms as pants. Trying to look casual is one thing, but do we really have to look as if we, literally, just got out of bed?

I have long wondered what the appeal of this "look" might be. At least, women (even younger ones and girls) seem to want to look "put together" and have their clothes fit. I cannot understand the appeal for guys of wearing clothes in such a manner that they look one step away from wearing a burlap sack. I suppose this is merely the ongoing evolution of wanting to "rebel" against the traditional. But what I find amusing is that such "rebellion" always takes the form of another kind of conformity. A whole generation of guys trying to look "different," but all in the exact same way. I guess the expression that, "we all wear uniforms" is true even if we THINK we are being "different."


----------



## Skinny_FFA (Sep 1, 2007)

Boxers and pants definitely always below!!!!


----------



## PrettyKitty (Sep 2, 2007)

Below! 
Nice shorts. hehe


----------



## daniel (Sep 2, 2007)

I also wear my boxers below - always


----------



## SnapDragon (Sep 3, 2007)

Below, personal preference.

As a personal preference, I think underwear should remain underwear. Where's the excitement of it if it's exhibited in the park and the street and everywhere? And people who wear particular clothes in the name of fashion are just sheep.

-SnapDragon.


----------



## Britannia (Sep 3, 2007)

SnapDragon said:


> And people who wear particular clothes in the name of fashion are just sheep.
> 
> -SnapDragon.



I beg to differ. I wear clothes, when they're fashionable, if I enjoy them and they fit properly. Right now, that's skinny jeans and a spaghetti strap shirt with heels, mainly, and I love every outfit I put on.

Just because people follow trends doesn't mean they're sheep - I look fashionable, but I keep my personality. There's a grey area that's very important between being a "sheep" and completely ignoring what people are wearing these days: incorporating the new or up-and-coming styles into one's own personal wardrobe because one finds it exciting, interesting, etc.

Perhaps it's because I want to be a model, or because I work at Express. Or both. But that's what I think.


----------



## CartmanUK26 (Sep 5, 2007)

Ah this old chestnut, well I would agree if you are shaped like the the pictures then below would make more sense as there is no benefit from having them any higher.

Sadly one rule doesn't apply to everyone and as I have a double belly (http://www.youtube.com/cartmanuk26) and my boxers would tend to fall down if worn below for any length of time I wear mine on my bb, of course if boxers are all I am wearing then under is fine as I am probably not going to be TOO bothered if they come off at that point, but under clothes definitely over or on for me, it's the way I am made!

Rich


----------



## SnapDragon (Sep 5, 2007)

Britannia said:


> I beg to differ. I wear clothes, when they're fashionable, if I enjoy them and they fit properly. Right now, that's skinny jeans and a spaghetti strap shirt with heels, mainly, and I love every outfit I put on.



Ah, but the key phrase here is that you enjoy them. If you're wearing them because you like them, that's a world of difference to wearing any horror advertising throws at you just because you're told to believe it'll make you more socially acceptable. That's the difference between something that is genuinely popular and just a fad. Various things that I use have passed briefly under the vagaries of what's called fashion, but that doesn't mean I disown them on principle.

-SnapDragon.


----------

