<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

wearing short shorts..

November 14 2012 at 10:07 PM
loopy  (no login)
from IP address 75.90.55.137

 
I wear and always have worn short shorts.Many times some really short shorts,especially growing up.Dose anyone now? Not shorts above the knee, really short shorts like just covering your back side and manhood short to a few inches below it?

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
astra88888
(Login astra88888)
180.194.238.168

Re: wearing short shorts

November 15 2012, 1:33 AM 

Yes I always do wear cut off jeans short shorts with zero inseam and I loved it.

 
 Respond to this message   
loopy
(no login)
75.90.55.137

cut offs

November 16 2012, 3:40 PM 

I wore jean cut offs when I was a kid into my teens,not with a O"inseam but as short as 1",however I do still have some cut off kaki shorts that range fron 4" to 1.5" that I wear regularly in the summer months,

 
 Respond to this message   
astra88888
(Login astra88888)
180.194.238.169

Good to Know

November 17 2012, 12:50 AM 

Good to know that you still wear short shorts. May I know if the 1.5" to 4" is a inseam of it is the measurement from waist down?

From what country are you? How long have you been freeballing? How old are YOU?

 
 Respond to this message   
loopey
(no login)
75.90.55.137

mesurments

November 17 2012, 6:51 PM 

my inseam is from the crotch to the bottom of the leg, I do have some that the entire length of the shorts is only maybe 5 inches,I am 25 in the USA.The shortest shorts I will wear to work,I have a simi public job,have a 4 inch inseam.On hot days I do have to be mindfull of peeking lol

 
 Respond to this message   
astra88888
(Login astra88888)
180.194.242.176

Thanks

November 17 2012, 9:17 PM 

Thanks for replying.

 
 Respond to this message   
astra88888
(Login astra88888)
180.194.237.191

Re: Measurements

November 18 2012, 8:44 AM 

You said you have some short shorts that is 5 inches in entire length. Do you wear them in public or just at home? and how can you wear them?,It is almost impossible to even cover your package. Do you wear them commando?

 
 Respond to this message   
loopy
(no login)
75.90.55.137

re length

November 18 2012, 1:34 PM 

They are gym shorts that fit very snug,so things don't hang out.I usually wear them doing yard work etc.I have worn them in public,just to the store or somewhere that is unlikly I may offend,then I pull them down just to cover as much as possible.I am kinda short in stature so that may sound very tiny to some people but they cover my manhood and most of my behind.I am in shape and stay tanned so it's not ,from the complements I have got, a bad thing...Then again I dont go around trying to be a flaunting exobitionist,I had rather wear shorts, short,whats the point if they cover everything...I have jeans for that!

 
 Respond to this message   
astra88888
(Login astra88888)
180.194.241.15

Re: Length

November 19 2012, 7:29 AM 

Thanks for clearing things about the length of your short shorts. Its nice to know that you can cover your manhood and your behind with that kind of length of your short shorts.

My short shorts is 8-3/4" in length that the shortest short I can wear.

 
 Respond to this message   
astra88888
(Login astra88888)
180.194.240.253

Loopy

November 19 2012, 7:02 PM 

Loopy, If you can post some photo of your gym short shots so we can see how it look like. Thanks
and I agree with you on wearing short short "whats the point if covering everything you have your jeans for that.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave
(Login daves_ndt)
75.14.214.212

Cutoffs in the 60s

November 20 2012, 11:45 AM 

In the 60's we wore cutoffs that were fairly short, just a couple inches of inseam. This was perhaps a bit shorter than our hemmed shorts but about the same as our gym shorts. We wore them commando, since it was not considered appropriate to have your underwear showing in those days. The legs of the cutoffs were fairly tight on the legs so pop-outs generally were not a problem (unlike the gym shorts). Cutoffs were not allowed at school (nor were shorts until 1969) or in the public pools, but they were our swimwear of choice at the beach.

 
 Respond to this message   
Calvin Lam
(Login avant_garde)
71.232.183.223

Re: wearing short shorts..

November 15 2012, 2:09 AM 

not really my thing, I don't think they look good on me lol..

 
 Respond to this message   
Bob in Canada
(no login)
75.157.42.66

the song " When I was young "

November 17 2012, 2:23 AM 

Our kids love to go through the old photo albums,
We took many pictures while we were dating and newly married
" Mom, a tube top, with those big knockers ? " they'd say.
" There's Dad, in his Daisy Dukes " they laugh.
another of my bride participating in a "Mass Mooning on a speed boat"
When they found our " Nude Album ", that changed everything.
The outcome was far different then we had expected.
They were cool with us being "nudies", normally both of us commando.

Now at our half century of life mark, short shorts are a NoNo off the property.
I'd get a verbal tongue lashing if I EVER when shopping in them.

My advise to the young men, Start a new trend in your world, be the change !

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken
(Login kendoggie)
24.47.96.204

Mid life and short shorts

November 19 2012, 12:28 PM 

I live in a beach resort, and this past summer, I've seen plenty of men in short shorts who were 40s, 50s and 60s, a few fb and they all looked great. Some also had pot bellies but it depends how they wore them. It was the teens and 20 somethings that were wearing those long shorts. LOL.

 
 Respond to this message   
Nat
(Login Nafana)
Forum Owner
69.254.40.197

Re: Mid life and short shorts

November 19 2012, 1:30 PM 

I'm one of those old guys- I grew up wearing mid-thigh shorts and still have a quite a few, and I don't think I look any worse in short-shorts than long shorts. Thighs don't really age much and I'm in better shape than many 20-somethings I see these days who sport beer-bellies, spare-tires and moobs.

. . . . .

 
 Respond to this message   
Josh the Jock
(no login)
174.26.34.107

6" of mine Running shorts

November 18 2012, 2:19 PM 

The shortest one i have is 6" on the side -- I wear for jogging and jet skiing at the lake. The whole side can be opened almost the whole way up except the 1 " of waistband -- it is very comfortable. And it dries very quick, it is very practical for water sports.


[linked image]

[linked image]



 
 Respond to this message   
Alex Pustel
(Login alex.pustel)
174.229.193.236

RE: short shorts

November 19 2012, 12:56 PM 

I remember those days. I grew up in the late 1980s and 90s. I never had more then 3 pairs of underwear and haven't owned any since I was 6.

When I was in school my teacher sent me to the principals office for swats when I sat on the floor with my legs crossed in shorts because it showed my stuff. All my shorts back then showed a little if I sat down in the wrong position. Some kids teased me about it and others thought it was cool. I knew 1 kid that would take his underwear off in the boys bathroom when he got to school so his parents didn't find out because he wanted to be like me.

Rite out of diapers my mom would sometimes dress me with underwear and other times freeballing. As I learned to dress myself her rule was ether wear clean underwear or no underwear. With only 3 pairs and no washer at home I had to freeball it at least haf the time before I gave up on underwear.

By the middle of kindergarten my mom tossed out all my underwear because I wasn't wearing it amd didn't fit it. When I was school clothes shopping before the next school she walked past the underwear section and said "you need this?" And I said no. And she put it back on the shelf and hasn't bought me underwear since.

 
 Respond to this message   
Ted
(no login)
76.219.244.111

Re: wearing short shorts..

November 19 2012, 5:12 PM 

For general wear, it still smacks a bit of "old fashion". That said, for recreation and for physical activities such as working out or jogging, even for walking or coed team sports like volleyball or similar, still wear short shorts. It's kinda fun to keep just short of peek-a-boo range and the risk is humorous for everyone. Some of the other guys are doing it too and it keeps everyone laughing. The gals all wear super tight and super short shorts too. Everyone has a good time. For casual mall shopping and for box stores, however, I find that it still smacks of a different generation, unless you just finished your recreation and didn't have time to change. In colder times, I simply pull on a long cooler. In Summer, I'll change into something that looks more like shorts, although my package still shows its shape but the legs are tighter than the going trend. I like the thin fabrics, and darker in color. Most of those shorts are about two inches above the knee which equates to about a seven inch inseam, although 5 is sometime comfortable too. More importantly, though, is where the crotch seam is... if it's high and tight, my dick is going to look for a leg opening. If the crotch is a bit lower, I can deal with a shorter inseam. I don't wear shorts where the crotch sags at the knee level like many of the basketball shorts... just me and my preference.

 
 Respond to this message   
cdadbr
(Login cdadbr)
209.30.90.69

It's "the cut" that matters . . .

November 19 2012, 9:40 PM 

For sure, being in-shape (at ANY age) is important to making "short shorts" work for you. But your height can make normal shorts into short shorts, too!

When I decided I wanted to start wearing shorts again, in the middle 1980s, I looked for the shorter inseams (as I'm not 6 feet tall, which seemed to be the height most of the shorts were designed for). For denim shorts, the shortest "ready mades" I could find were knee length on me, so out came the scissors. I ultimately determined, through trial and error, that a 2.75" inseam worked best for me. Enough to keep things out of sight and enough to show some male thigh . . . and feel good, too. At that time, I was using 36" waist sizes. When I had to go to 38", I didn't cut them off any more.

Watch come of the 1970s college or pro basketball game replays on ESPN Classic cable channel. Those were the only basketball shorts around back then. Nobody "fell out", although some larger packages were displayed, due to "the cut" of the shorts. Back then, too, normal jeans and slacks had tighter cuts which showed "package", or lack thereof, which was considered normal. And then there were the "flares" which had cuts tapering in the thighs, narrowest at the knee, and then "flared" out for the bottom cuff area. For people used to modern "loose and long", no way they could be comfortable in those earlier pants we used to wear "as normal, in fashion" back then! But then I don't like the feel of running shorts with more than about a 2" inseam (and a looser liner intact).

Ahhhh, the memories . . . even of wearing those 36" waist, 2.75" inseam denim shorts! Back then, too, I was usually running 28-30 miles week, leg pressing 400lbs for 2x15 reps, and calf raises of 400 lbs, working up to 100 total reps. Legs were in shape, although more work needed to be done, which helped things "fit right" and look nice.

cdadbr

 
 Respond to this message   
Rick
(Login rickvt)
24.61.192.184

Re: It's "the cut" that matters . . .

November 19 2012, 10:32 PM 

Back when basketball shorts were much shorter, most of
the players on school and professional teams wore either
jockstraps or compression shorts to make sure that "junior"
did not make an appearance. On players wearing white shorts,
your could often see the straps from the jock or the outline
of the compression shorts. Those were the days....

 
 Respond to this message   
 
< Previous Page 1 2 Next >
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Find more forums on SocietyCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement