Back to Metroland's Home Page!
 Columns & Opinions
   The Simple Life
   Comment
   Reckonings
   Opinion
   Letters
   Poetry
 News & Features
   Newsfront
   F.Y.I.
   Features
   Profile
 Dining
   This Week's Review
   The Dining Guide
   Leftovers
 Cinema & Video
   Weekly Reviews
   Picture This
   Clips
   The Movie Schedule
 Music
   Listen Here
   Live
   Recordings
   Noteworthy
   Clubs & Concerts
 Arts
   Theater
   Dance
   Art
   Classical
   Books
   Art Murmur
 Calendar
   Night & Day
   Event Listings
 Classifieds
   View Classified Ads
   Place a Classified Ad
 Personals
   Online Personals
   Place A Print Ad
 AccuWeather
 About Metroland
   Where We Are
   Who We Are
   What We Do
   Work For Us
   Place An Ad

I love you, Dan, but you are so WRONG about tighty-whities!

Last week you told Suffering Latent “Underpants” Trauma, a.k.a. SLUT, that men look good in tighty-whities. WRONG! If you like men in those horrible-Homer-Simpson-retarded-white things, Dan, you’re a FREAKING retard. As a straight woman who is outspoken on this subject, I know I am not alone when I say that men look RIDICULOUS (even hairless gay ones) in TWs! Please don’t encourage already fashion-challenged straight men to wear those AWFUL things! TWs get “stained” more easily than boxers, if you know what I mean, and being forced to see something like that is a gross violation of a woman’s piece of mind! The fucking things should be outlawed!

Go ahead and slam me, Dan, but you’re wrong, wrong, WRONG!

—No More Tighty Whities

TWs are wrong? No, let me tell you what’s wrong: Thoroughly Modern Millie getting the Tony for Best New Musical over Urinetown is wrong. George W. Bush’s opposition to an independent commission to investigate the intelligence failures that laid out the welcome mat for the Sept. 11 terrorists is wrong. But tighty-whities on a boyish and slim and hairless man? That’s righter than right.

Like I told SLUT, TWs only look good on the right guys—and only when they’re clean, of course. (Any man with thoroughly modern personal hygiene practices should be able to keep his TWs clean.) And I’m sorry, NMTW, but I hardly think a woman—a representative of the gender most likely to wear WRONG, RIDICULOUS, AWFUL thongs!—is in any position to cast aspersions on males who wear tighty-whities! At the end of the day, the average man’s TW is a hell of a lot cleaner than the average woman’s butt-hole-huggin’ thong!

Dan, Dan, Dan . . . I thought you would have learned from Thong-gate that underwear rules are different for gay vs. straight people! Straight men need to know the following underwear rules:

1. Thongs: Never.

2. Tighty-whities: If you’re sending pics to sex-advice columnists or looking to get sucked by a guy at the gym.

3. Boxers: If and only if your balls don’t fall out when you sit down.

4. Boxer briefs: If you want to turn a woman on!

5. Commando: You better have a damn good reason.

Please, Dan, you changed your stance on thongs for women to give straight guys a break. I’m not asking for a complete retraction, just tell the guys this: BOXER BRIEFS!

—Prefers Advice Columnist Keeps All Guys Educated

Thanks for sharing, PACKAGE.

I think your opinion about tighty-whities is as just as “dangerous and inaccurate” as SLUT’s opinion, Dan. OK, so you only find guys who are boyish and slim and hairless sexy in TWs. That doesn’t mean you should make people who don’t fit into your narrow definition of sexy feel self-conscious! I’m a muscular 42-year-old man and I have some body hair and I’ve been told that I look fucking hot in briefs!

—Your Obnoxious Underwear Bigotry Is Gross, Tighty Whities Are Tops

Wait a minute, YOUBIGTWAT, I didn’t say muscular 42-year-old men aren’t sexy. What I said was, TWs look better on boyish and slim and hairless guys—and I stand by that statement.

For a big, tall, muscular, middle-aged man, YOUBIGTWAT, you’re quite a crybaby. My pointing out that boyish guys look hot in TWs is not the same thing as saying that mannish and beefy and hairy guys aren’t also sexy. You are (or can be), just not in TWs.

You are appalling and disgusting. You repeatedly dropped your own e-mail address in a recent column, begging for pictures of young men in panties. (You call them “tighty-whities,” but they are panties to me.) Is this professional? You should be ashamed of yourself! You are abusing your position of trust to collect pictures of beautiful men in their underpants—and you have no plans to share those pictures with the rest of us! Outrageous!

—Erica H

I was all set to send you a picture of my boyfriend who is boyish and slim and hairless and looks fantastic in tighty-whities, but then I realized you were only looking for pictures of guys with GIRLFRIENDS. Oh well.

—Matt B

Whatever happened to your plagiarism contest? Did someone win? Did someone go to Las Vegas? What gives?

—Wondering In Nevada

I’m going to kill three letters with one response. . .

First, WIN’s letter: In March of this year, I ran five letters sent to me by Savage Love readers with five responses lifted from books of advice that I didn’t write. I challenged my readers to identify the five writers whose works I plagiarized, and the first person to correctly identify all five was promised a trip to Las Vegas. But some of the writers I plagiarized were too obscure, and the few people who correctly identified one or two of my sources wrote to tell me that they’ve given up.

So . . . I’m canceling the plagiarism contest. Sigh. Here are the five writers whose works I plagiarized, listed from least- to most-obscure: David Reuben (Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex . . . But Were Afraid to Ask, 1969); Ann Landers (Ann Landers Talks to Teenagers About Sex, 1963); Lewis B. Smedes (Sex for Christians, 1976); Eugene Schoenfeld (Dear Doctor Hip-pocrates, 1968); B.G. Jeffries (Safe Counsel: Advice to Maiden, Wife, and Mother, 1901).

Ironically, the plagiarism contest was launched after I cancelled a previous contest, the Reader’s Sexual Fantasy Contest. After reading upwards of 4,000 fantasies submitted by my readers, I concluded (perhaps unfairly) that other people’s sexual fantasies are BORING. One trip to Vegas, two cancelled contests. God, I suck at this contest shit. Since all my contest ideas seem are either too difficult or too boring, and since I still have this trip to Las Vegas to give away, I’ve decided to lower the bar: The new win-a-trip-to-Las-Vegas-with-Dan-Savage contest is . . . The “My Man Sure Looks Hot in His Tighty-Whities” Contest!

Savage Love readers who have boyfriends—male or female readers, gay or straight (that should satisfy Matt B)—are invited to send me pictures of their boyfriends in a pair of tighty-whities. The best looking boy in a pair of tighty-whities will win a trip to Las Vegas for himself and his significant other.

BUT WAIT! As YOUBIGTWAT thoughtfully pointed out, I have a bias: I only think guys who are boyish and slim and hairless look good in TWs. To set YOUBIGTWAT’s mind at ease, I am disqualifying myself as a judge. So who’ll be judging this contest? YOU WILL. All the pictures sent to me by my readers will be posted on a Web site (that should satisfy Erica H). Savage Love readers will then vote on the guy who looks the hottest in his tighty-whities, and that man and his S.O. will be winging it to Las Vegas for the weekend.

The fine print: Candid shots only, please, no professional photos, studio shots or porn stars. These pictures are going to be posted on a Web site, so bear that in mind. I will put little black bars over everyone’s eyes to protect people’s identities unless you tell me otherwise. The deadline for submitting a photo of your boyfriend in his TWs is June 30, and the voting begins on July 4. Good luck, boys!

 

  mail@savagelove.net


E-Mail Dan Savage
Send A Letter to Our Editor
Back Home
   
Banner #22
Banner 10000948
Banner 10000006
Banner 10000007
wine recommendations 120 x 90
 
 
 
Copyright © 2002 Lou Communications, Inc., 4 Central Ave., Albany, NY 12210. All rights reserved.