Romney

[scottie]

Garments enter the national discussion as never before. McKay Coppins does a nice job dealing with the subject:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins...rmon-underwear

It probably wouldn't deflect attention, but I'm surprised Mitt doesn't go with the crew neck tops.

EDIT: 3D beat me to it.

[Donuthole]

I'm pretty confident that this issue won't come up beyond the blogosphere because a politician would look like a complete fool asking Mitt about his underwear.

That being said, i wonder why his style consultant (assuming he has one) didn't advise him to go crew neck. The scoop has always looked awful and ridiculous under a white shirt.

Agreed. Crew neck under a white shirt, scoops under everything else.

[Flystripper]

Agreed. Crew neck under a white shirt, scoops under everything else.

Scoop necks are never a good idea. There is a reason you can't find scoops in department stores. They are horrible.

[Donuthole]

Scoop necks are never a good idea. There is a reason you can't find scoops in department stores. They are horrible.

Sorry, you are wrong. I know most 30 to 45 year old men who have worn or still wear garments share your opinion, but scoops are actually much preferred over some nasty crew-neck poking out.

FTR, all scoops are not created equal. Some are good and others are terrible.

[scottie]

Sorry, you are wrong. I know most 30 to 45 year old men who have worn or still wear garments share your opinion, but scoops are actually much preferred over some nasty crew-neck poking out.

FTR, all scoops are not created equal. Some are good and others are terrible.

My guess is a woman prefers the look of her husband in crew necks over the scoops.

[UtahDan]

Garments enter the national discussion as never before. McKay Coppins does a nice job dealing with the subject:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins...rmon-underwear

That is well done. But I don't agree with his take that the only protection temple garments are thought to provide is that of a reminder. That would be news to Willard Richards, among others. I agree that "magic underwear" is a mocking and disrespectful way to say, but I don't really think it is inaccurate, particularly from an outsider's perspective.

[cougjunkie]

That is well done. But I don't agree with his take that the only protection temple garments are thought to provide is that of a reminder. That would be news to Willard Richards, among others. I agree that "magic underwear" is a mocking and disrespectful way to say, but I don't really think it is inaccurate, particularly from an outsider's perspective.

Of course you don't.

[Green Monstah]

Scoop necks are never a good idea. There is a reason you can't find scoops in department stores. They are horrible.

I disagree. The scoops in stores just don't have sleeves: They're colloquially known as wife beaters.

[Green Monstah]

Sorry, you are wrong. I know most 30 to 45 year old men who have worn or still wear garments share your opinion, but scoops are actually much preferred over some nasty crew-neck poking out.

FTR, all scoops are not created equal. Some are good and others are terrible.

I prefer crew, but DH does touch on a real issue: It's what Hanes underwear calls "bacon collar." They need to start a lay flat collar edition of Gs.

[Flystripper]

Sorry, you are wrong. I know most 30 to 45 year old men who have worn or still wear garments share your opinion, but scoops are actually much preferred over some nasty crew-neck poking out.

FTR, all scoops are not created equal. Some are good and others are terrible.

you are crazy

By way of example here is what Nordstrom offers:

http://shop.nordstrom.com/c/mens-und...sizeFinderId=4


I see v-necks and tanks, but no scoop undershirts. There is a reason for this. Scoop-neck sucks. If you want to wear a sucky uncomfortable scoop neck (yes the neck feels horrible against my chest) good thing you are Mormon, because the rest of the world disagrees.

[Flystripper]

I disagree. The scoops in stores just don't have sleeves: They're colloquially known as wife beaters.

exactly tanks feel much different that teeshirts. They are not comparable.

[Donuthole]

My guess is a woman prefers the look of her husband in crew necks over the scoops.

My guess is that it depends on the woman, depends on the husband, and depends on the situation of wearing the garments.

That doesn't change the fact that wearing a crew top under a button-down shirt with the top button undone is tacky. And especially tacky when the garment is dingy (which most are, primarily because the material used to make garments is cheap and prone to graying over time).

[UtahDan]

Of course you don't.

So you don't think garments provide divine, supernatural or "magical" protection? Of course you do. Why is that difficult to own?

[Donuthole]

you are crazy

By way of example here is what Nordstrom offers:

http://shop.nordstrom.com/c/mens-und...sizeFinderId=4


I see v-necks and tanks, but no scoop undershirts. There is a reason for this. Scoop-neck sucks. If you want to wear a sucky uncomfortable scoop neck (yes the neck feels horrible against my chest) good thing you are Mormon, because the rest of the world disagrees.

As i said, not all scoops are created equal. The scoops i'm advocating do not go any lower than the v-neck you linked:



Just low enough to not show when worn under a polo or a casual button-down, but not so low that they rub on your chest.

[Flystripper]

As i said, not all scoops are created equal. The scoops i'm advocating do not go any lower than the v-neck you linked:



Just low enough to not show when worn under a polo or a casual button-down, but not so low that they rub on your chest.

I am fine with those. That isn't a garment cut though.