Old Navy – Soft-Washed Flex Briefs – White – M

077

Material: 96% Cotton, 4% Spandex, which seems to be a common theme among many of my recently reviewed pairs! The actual make of this fabric is a bit weightier (and a bit softer?) than recent comparisons – which, as a traditional “whitey tighty”, makes perfect sense and is executed quite well.
Aesthetic: I’ve spoken about the range of sexiness levels for whitey tighties multiple times before, and these fall somewhere in the middle I guess. There’s nothing to accentuate the white-ness of this pair, so you either like it or you don’t. Compared specifically to the CK briefs I reviewed a while back, I think this pair looks a little more polished and professional, doing so while sacrificing a bit of the visual “pop” that CK brought with the colored waistband. And, to be entirely fair, Old Navy also has alternate colorations of this style that are white with a grey waistband, which I think are unambiguously a bit better to look at than the CK briefs from before. Even though the pair I’m wearing here is an inherited pair, (i.e. the amount of wear is similar,) the cut and fabric are still tighter than what CK brought.
Waistband: Overall, very comfy typical waistband, which in this case sits about at the waist.
Pouch: Whitey tighties are known for not having very good pouches in general, and I think this is the one area where the CK brief excels just a bit more – there really isn’t much of a pouch here at all. I’m not sure if it’s just due to the slightly tighter fabric, or if there’s an actual difference in the cut causing this front to be a bit flatter. You can clearly see a single little pleat right where your balls are on this pair, so there definitely is some effort to button things up here. And even though I say there isn’t much of a pouch here, it thankfully doesn’t go the way of actually smushing your junk against you uncomfortably in any way. There’s still a relatively nice cupping feeling and freedom of movement, plus the fabric is so soft, it feels pretty good.
Backside: Very comfy, and as far as tighty-whities go, actually not un-flattering at all! While still covering essentially all of your cheeks, it doesn’t look over-stretched or loose at all, which is a very difficult line to toe! Definitely better than CK briefs before.
Legs: Not much to say about the leg openings on these briefs. Not too loose, nor cutting in to your torso or thighs either.
Other: Shout out to @twoguysin202 on Tumblr, who I frequently chat with (they’ve followed my blog almost since the beginning) and sent me this pair for Christmas! Always fun wearing someone else’s undies. ;-D
Overall: 4/5 – all in all, a great pair! Comfy, doesn’t look bad at all, (unless you hate the whitey tighty look in general,) very easy pair to just throw on for any given day.
Great for: Everyday wear, Sleepwear
Good for: Loungewear

Tentative winter post schedule

Hi all! With all of the pairs I have to review from my recent orders and some backlog, I think what I’m going to do I schedule thorough reviews of my posts for Saturdays and Tuesday, and then maybe post reblog reviews on Thusdays (which gives me the opportunity to maybe indulge in “Thirsty Thursdays” every once in a while). Hope that sounds good! And I’ll do my best to stick to it.

Modus Vivendi – Flag Jockstrap – Blue – L

066

Material: 95% Viscose, 5% Elastane, and very velvet-y! The pouch, that is. And it’s reeeaaally soft and plush. The straps are more your typical elastic, and between them you’ve got some vinyl siding with the metallic studs punched in.
Aesthetic: I’ve seen this pair described as “rock star” before, and IDK? The velvety sheen on the pouch, plus the jet black middle strap, is certainly distinctive at least. The color scheme overall is bright and bold while still remaining simple – only one color aside from black or white, and it’s not an outlandish shade either. Same for that little rubber brand tag up front, the shiny vinyl bands on the side of the pouch, and the metal studs holding the straps on (they do go completely through the vinyl and touch the skin).
Waistband: No real waistband here – what you’d call the waistband is just one of the three straps that goes around the back. It feels about like what you’d expect the normal-strap material would feel if it was around your waist instead of under/across your cheeks. I think the intent is for the black strap to be a second half of the waistband, but I’m considering it as its own strap.
Pouch: The pouch isn’t incredibly shaped, but it’s so, so soft! The velvety feel is more on the outside that on the insde, but it’s still incredibly comfortable. The fabric is somewhat on the medium-thick side, which probably is why it feels so cushion-y.
Backside/Straps: As mentioned above, theleg/cheek straps are fairly expected for “comfort” jockstraps. Small and soft as they are, the leg straps do fold over themselves somewhat, at least with the noticeable fold I have between my glutes and hammies, but they’re soft enough that this folding doesn’t cause any problems. What’s unique about this pair, obviously, is the extra horizontal strap that goes between the leg straps and the “waistband”. I’m not entirely sure how it’s intended to be worn – higher-up (almost like a shadow waistband) to leave the ass exposed, or directly across the middle of your cheeks to draw the eye there. The only promotional images I’ve been able to find suggest the former, but the friend who gifted me this pair (and took these pictures) thought the latter looked better, and I think I enjoy both alignments. You could probably even wear them low if you want to! I’m not sure what kind of look or feel that would accomplish though.

Other: I don’t know how long ago my friend bought this pair, but I was quite lucky to find that link above; these don’t seem to be available at all any more. Which is a shame, because these certainly are fun! (Shout out to @davin-w on tumblr, said friend, who I’ve also mentioned in my old MAL2018 posts.)
Overall: 4.5/5 – although somewhat impractical, they are honestly rather comfy, so the sexy look is just a bonus in that sense. I’m honestly almost tempted to do a 5/5, but I haven’t tried wearing this pair for an extended period of time yet to see how it deals with a full day of movement.
Great for: Sexy wear
Good for: Loungewear(?), Sex wear(?), Everyday wear(??)

GoodDevil – GD4500 Net G-String – Blue – M

065

Material: 85.15% Polyamide, 16.85% Spandex, though I don’t know which of the straps, panel, or mesh this mix is describing exactly. It could be describing all three parts of the pair, though, since everything seems to have the same kind of stretch, even if the weave might make those three components feel a bit different. It’s also a very nice mesh! Might get a little much if you get hot & sweaty, though – it definitely feels synthetic at that point.
Aesthetic: It’s quite the looker! The straps are about as thin as they can be, and of course the mesh is nicely see-through! I also really enjoy how the top of the pouch is a solid panel instead of being mesh – it gives the pair some much-needed some visual variety. (I have some other all-mesh underwear, and it usually looks kinda lazy.)
Waistband: Just an elastic strap with fabric over it! Not much to speak of – and without a ton of fabric there, it doesn’t stay in place incredibly well, but that’s assuming you’re moving a lot or otherwise doing stuff that would mess with it. Since it’s just straps, you can of course wear it as high or as low as you want. I actually think, in the front view above, I should have worn the waistband a bit higher (up to the waist) or lower (around the hips) because it looks a bit awkward in the middle ground like I have it… Though the angles made on the pair itself still look fairly good.
Pouch: Nicely shaped and very stretchy! It understandably is great for showing off. The pictures above don’t do a great job of showcasing the pouch, particularly the side view, but trust me it’s good. The tag is also on the inside of that upper panel and long enough that it can be seen through the mesh if you look for it. With how stretchy and thin the mesh is, it doesn’t provide a great amount of support, per se, but it’s still fun to wear.
String: Soft and stretchy, and it fits really well through the back – not too tight/cut-in-y or too loose/floppy. Even if the tightness/length wasn’t great, it’s small enough that it’s not much to notice threading through.
Other: I think this is my first Good Devil review. Pics by @davin-w ! He moved out of the area and thought I would appreciate some of his underwear, since stuff like this typically isn’t what people are looking for at Goodwill and such. X-D
Overall: 4/5 – a little higher than the 3.5/5 I gave the Jack Adams Flyer Thong, but I’m evaluating this pair as something that’s entirely intended for showing off in the bedroom or at an underwear party, while I evaluated the Flyer more on everyday and active use – I certainly think I would rate the Flyer’s fabric as more comfortable, and it’s got better pouch support. (And to be fair, the slightly-cutting strap was a problem) But if you like your G-strings for showing off, this is the pair you want!
Great for: Sexy wear, Sex wear
Good for: Everyday wear

Joe Boxer – Classic Cotton Boxer – White – Medium

023

Material: 100% Cotton and soft as you’d expect it! (You might suggest it’s a function of this pair’s pre-collection age, but it has always been super-soft.)
Aesthetic: You can’t really go wrong with a classic white, plus a true Joe Boxer vintage white-waistband-with-bold-black-text waistband – unless, of course, the pair has aged to the point of looking thin and ragged, which this pair somewhat has. Still, if you can get your hands on a crisp, fresh pair of classic white boxer-briefs like this pair, I’d say go for it!
Waistband: Feeling-wise, what you expect of most waistbands. Sits right up at or beneath the waist; good size.
Pouch: The one downside for having a truly classic white (boxer) brief look is that there’s essentially no shape whatsoever to the pouch – it’s super flat. The one upside to this pair is that it’s not entirely a true traditional vertical fly – the inner fly opening is a looser, non-trimmed horizontal opening not unlike the inner fly opening in the Jack Adams Core Cycle Trunk. However, while the inner opening of the fly has easy access, the outer opening is NOT, at least not by design. The opening is small and attaches too far up the “V” structure of the brief, making this more similar to the AC Tagless Brief. At least, it was – as you can see from the photos below, I’ve made a modification to the pair. Back in my late teens, I was as annoyed with the inaccessible fly opening as I am now, but I still loved the overall feel of the pair and the inner fly opening, so I decided to take a pair of scissors to the pair. Snip snip! You can see now that the right and left “triangles” formed by the trim/piping are no longer the same size. I wouldn’t do this to any pair I’ve purchased recently, or at least any pair that’s worth more than $6 or $8 – I think this is only a real option for underwear that you’d buy in bulk and isn’t designed to stand out.

Backside: Like the front, rather flat, though there’s at least a slight curve between the legs.
Legs: At this point in time, they’re getting worn and loose, but they were similar to the Core Cycle Trunk originally, if a bit shorter.
Overall: 2.5/5 – I do love sleeping in these, and they’re good to wear for a day in the office as well, but they’re really hard to find at this point, (the closest I’ve found are here,)and you can do sooooo much better pouch-wise anyway.
Great for: Sleepwear
Good for: Everyday wear, Loungewear