November 19, 2005

 under where?

if someone said to you, "underwear should be worn all the time, except when you take it off to change it", what would be your response? (the assumption, of course, is that you'd also take it off for things like showering, sex and pooping.)

for example, what is your opinion on wearing underwear beneath flannel pajama bottoms? is it necessary to wear underwear while you're sleeping?

Posted by xta at November 19, 2005 08:11 AM | TrackBack
Comments

I think you have set a record for number of uses of the word "pooping" in one week.

Wait, you're supposed to take your underwear off for pooping?

Posted by: minty at November 19, 2005 08:32 AM

Have you been watching _Bananas_?

Posted by: Joseph H. Vilas at November 19, 2005 10:38 AM

Underwear under pajama bottoms seems excessive. What about bras? Are you supposed to wear a bra under your PJ's too?

Posted by: marianne at November 19, 2005 11:51 AM

I don't think need to even wear ANYTHING to bed, so underwear under pajamas certainly seem sexc excessive to me.

But then again, while I always wear it outside the house, but I generally try to minimize underwear-wearing as much as possible.

Posted by: Ruby at November 19, 2005 02:33 PM

Pardon the typing glitch above... I think you get the point.

Posted by: Ruby at November 19, 2005 02:34 PM

so, yeah... i was having a discussion with a friend regarding pajamas. he thought it was odd that one would put on pajamas over underwear. he has never heard of anyone wearing underwear under pajamas. i argued with him. so i'm now taking a poll.

the specific question at hand (which some of you have answered already) is this:
if you were to put on pajamas, would you remove your underwear first?

Posted by: christa at November 19, 2005 09:11 PM

I usually wear them under the pajamas (but no, Marianne, not the bra). As cold as my house is these days, I tend to take off as little as possible before leaping under the covers.

Posted by: minty at November 20, 2005 12:04 AM

_Bananas_ by Woody Allen has a character who, on becoming dictator of his banana republic, declares something like "From this day on, the official language of San Marcos will be Swedish. Silence! In addition to that, all citizens will be required to change their underwear every half-hour. Underwear will be worn on the outside so we can check. Furthermore, all children under 16 years old are now... 16 years old!"

And no -- I don't wear underwear to bed unless I'm really cold or the like.

Posted by: Joseph H. Vilas at November 20, 2005 12:26 AM

I believe plaid flannel jammies should definitely be worn without, in the tradition of the kilt. Otherwise, you're on your own there--wear a corset, hose and garters under your pajamas if you wanna, I don't need to know.

Posted by: Penny at November 20, 2005 02:08 AM

if i were to wear pj's to bed i would not wear underwear underneath.

Posted by: joy at November 20, 2005 04:39 PM

Gosh, I guess whatever works for that person, I suppose. I have taken to wearing it under jammies because I wear nightgowns and have very curious children who sleep with me. (they're mine! not strangers' children!)

Posted by: Becky at November 20, 2005 08:17 PM

Becky's got more sense than most of us. You know, this thread reminds me of my mom: she used to raise hell at me for wearing my socks all the time -- more specificaly, without my shoes. After I certain age, I realized I could wear my socks when I damn well pleased. So free yourself! Wear your underwear when you damn well please! My dad used to wear his to bed, but that's often what he slept in: PJs only occasionally.

Speaking of which, what about wearing no underwear when wearing regular clothing?

Posted by: Joseph H. Vilas at November 20, 2005 10:12 PM

to junior year high school state french convention awards ceremony, just for fun, not for any frenchness, i wore my pants and shirt inside-out. my skit won first prize. it was about a boy, me, trapped in a mirror, and only one person, the girl, could see (and talk to) me (but only when no one else was looking) all the adults razzed her for insanity, 'til one day, she reaches in, takes my hand, and I Pull Her Through, and we both live happily ever after, in trapped-in-mirror-land.

that's all i think this thread deserves, are tangential irrelevant stories in response. anyone who thinks different can Eat My Shorts. :->

Posted by: ray sous la ubinger at November 21, 2005 06:23 PM

No underwear required.

Ever, really.

Although, with jeans it usually feels better to wear panties.

Posted by: Sarah at November 22, 2005 10:06 AM

wait a second. people take off underwear for sex?!

Posted by: rick at November 22, 2005 12:02 PM

I do have a cautionary tale about underwear or lack thereof. I was living somewhere hot where I used to wear long summer skirts and no undies as a matter of course. Until the day I twisted my ankle in the middle of town, and the helpful citizenry insisted on raising my foot while I lay injured. Then I realized the value of underwear - and they probably did too.

My ex-hubbie always used to wear jeans sans undies and I thought that was the sexiest thing ever.

Posted by: marianne at November 23, 2005 07:58 AM

Damn, what a thread.

My skin feels happier when I keep the underwear on.

Posted by: Phil at November 26, 2005 01:18 AM

do'nt wear anything to bed,only if its very cold,even then iwould rather put more on the bed.I like to feel free,you turn over in pj's and get all twisted up.
The only problem with no pj's is if you had to get out quick fire ect!!!

Posted by: richard at April 14, 2006 04:50 PM

I just to wear them under PJ's but haven't do so in years. Now I hate wearing underwear so whenever I am in the house they come off!

But really their is no reason to wear anything under PJ's.

Posted by: Dave at December 22, 2006 08:22 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?