I would sooner cruise the Champs Elysees on a Saturday at 1PM on all 4s with a broom stick up the ass than be caught dead wearing one of these under-monstruosities. They are even worse looking than the ridiculous slip kangourou. There is no salvation without the traditional boxer.
Tell you the truth, I'd never heard of "boxer briefs" before. From what I can tell, they bear an uncanny resemblance to what JJ uses for pants on a regular basis.
not by choice my friend: had i been endowed with Barishnikov's physique, i would be prancing around in pink spandex underwear just to piss off the O'reilly traditionalists.
Pepe said: had i been endowed with Barishnikov's physique, i would be prancing around in pink spandex underwear just to piss off the O'reilly traditionalists.
Now, the question remains: does that fall under Free Speech, a sort of self-evident truth?
9 comments:
I would sooner cruise the Champs Elysees on a Saturday at 1PM on all 4s with a broom stick up the ass than be caught dead wearing one of these under-monstruosities. They are even worse looking than the ridiculous slip kangourou. There is no salvation without the traditional boxer.
...the fact that my beer gut looks ridiculous when hanging over these briefs has nothing to so with the opinion above.
Tell you the truth, I'd never heard of "boxer briefs" before. From what I can tell, they bear an uncanny resemblance to what JJ uses for pants on a regular basis.
Hmmm... looks like Pepe is, after all, a conservative.
>>Hmmm... looks like Pepe is, after all, a conservative.
now let's remain polite, young man.
Pepe said: now let's remain polite, young man.
LOL!
You're right, Pepe. My mistake: I didn't mean that you were conservative. You're probably more of an O'Reilly "traditionalist."
not by choice my friend: had i been endowed with Barishnikov's physique, i would be prancing around in pink spandex underwear just to piss off the O'reilly traditionalists.
Pepe said: had i been endowed with Barishnikov's physique, i would be prancing around in pink spandex underwear just to piss off the O'reilly traditionalists.
Now, the question remains: does that fall under Free Speech, a sort of self-evident truth?
>>does that fall under Free Speech,
maybe but mostly it is a crime against nature.
Post a Comment