Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Your Fearless Blogger's Photo Featured on Toronto Life

I was flattered to discover that Karen Liu used my photo on an article in The Goods section of Toronto Life yesterday. In fact, the article was not focused on men's hosiery, but just happened to use it in the featured photo. The article was entitled, "Michelle Obama doesn't wear pantyhose, so neither should anyone else

The article focused on a tongue-in-cheek review of the First World's ever-growing crisis, spawned by the First Lady's pre-inauguration comments that she never wears pantyhose. (BTW, one of the commentors pointed out that Ms. Obama has begun wearing them since moving into the White House). This was juxtaposed against a recent Charlotte Observer article questioning whether pantyhose were on their last legs?  Maybe the subliminal message is that while women's pantyhose may be on their last legs--the men's lines still continue to pick up steam. 

To be sure, there was a parenthetical reference to mantyhose in the article. So, we can be sure that writers out there have definitely become aware of its presence as a real trend. As for the photo, it looks like one that we did sometime last year while having a little fun with those de-motivators posters--a website where people can create their own satires of those smarmy motivational posters we've all seen in offices around the world.

-Ciao for now...


  1. I have been reviewing the various articles about men and pantyhose. It struck me that every "news" article posted was a reactive response , instead of a "pro-active" promotion.
    It is a no-brainer that the news media is pathetic and can only publish what will titillate and catch an "ooh" or "ahh" in order to be read.

    Perhaps if we, (wearers who are NOT wearing for ONLY sexual reasons), where to be more pro-active in getting the media to publish the positive, our wearing might fast-track toward better acceptance.

    I personally do not have the time nor inclination to pick up the flag and lead the charge. However, someone like yourself, whose job is to promote the wearing of mens tights, might be better able to launch an offensive.

    This strategy has really worked for the conservative right. They redefined the words used for their agenda and framed the discussion toward their direction . People in America are not an overall bright lot. They, for the most part are sheep. The "average" American prefers to be told what their philosophy is. aka, Fox News, etc.

    Why not seek out journalist/bloggers to promote the non-sexual aspect of wearing hose? It is just off the 'normal' track enough to draw readers. We win, they win!
    Just a thought!

  2. Actually, women in pantyhose is picking back up and yes, under our pantsuits as well. I have no trouble wearing them under my pant suits but my husband runs into fuzz sticking on his tights from inside his pants except when he is dressed in business suits.

  3. By the way Steve, here's another interesting post on debating wearing pantyhose. I think your input in favor of Lydia would help a lot. I really cannot believe that us women have to have a silly debate on wearing pantyhose even in the summer let alone the guys.

  4. Kevin,

    Well put. I agree that the more sources of information and content that appear out here in the blogosphere, the faster the trend gains notoriety and the quicker it spreads. My time is somewhat limited and I do what I can. I understand the average guy doesn't have the time to do this, but any small bits of aid are always welcome. I would encourage you and others to make a point of posting comments whenever blog posts or articles run that concern men's legwear. (using your real name, so as to lend greater credibility)

    Although I haven't been as active with it of late, I do hope to promote what you suggest with my role as a writer on on men's legwear issues. For any who aren't familiar with my writing, click on the Examiner button in the righthand column to check it out.

  5. Thanks for your input, Carla. I have been seeing a few articles lately hinting that women's pantyhose is beginning to make a comeback. BTW, I always wondered whether very many women wore them under pants, or if they wore knee-highs. What's your take?

    A hint for your husband: If he sticks with the tights or hose that are 'shinier' they tend to pick up less lint and fuzz from the pants you wear over them.

    Thanks for the blog link. I'll check it out and see if my $0.02 would be helpful.

  6. "BTW, I always wondered whether very many women wore them under pants, or if they wore knee-highs. What's your take?"

    Steve, great question but I don't know for sure but last month's unpredictable weather out here in the DC / Northern VA area had me wearing those nylons all the way to my waist.

    Btw: Love that cartoon you posted. My husband used to be a police officer when we used to live in LA years ago. He now thinks that his job back then wouldn't have been as stressful if he had that legwear underneath his uniform. :)

  7. Thanks, Carla. I presume you're referring to the first one, with Robin Hood wearing them to keep light on his feet while evading the law. Maybe they would've leveled the playing field for your husband--so he could keep up with tights-wearing criminals... (haha)

  8. Steve, in LA there's too much culture war going on to accept guys in tights and that was before I moved 10-11 years ago. Personally, I see nothing wrong with changing police uniforms to allow for both male and female officers to wear shorts and tights. It would sure slow down the crooks because for us women well we would be sex targets and for the guys the crooks would be confused about them wearing shorts and pantyhose as if it were a woman's thing only. The crooks in tights would be another story. :)

  9. Fearless Blogger Where are you?

  10. Fear not... I am still here. Sorry I haven't been in evidence as much recently. However, I've had a number of things going on, which I will soon share in a post. I plan on being here for some time to come, though.


/* Google Analytics Code Snippet */