Mainstreaming Men's Hosiery - VI

Wow, that seems really tough and i for one would hate to think that this would be a pyrrhic victory in any way. but to give up now would let all this work go to waste. You can't kill the the female hosiery machine because well guys love to see womens legs clad in NYLONS! Any ways why would a female be afraid to wear something that men were wearing? they do it all the time, infact the walmart near me has just started selling men's underwear in much smaller sizes to ladies. I think as men if we stick together we can over come this and hell if they stop making hosiery all together i figure i could pick up some old equiment on ebay and pick up the slack for us guys! ~dupont here i go!~

Hi Justin

I decided to publish this rather pessimistic article in the hope of stirring some debate, and maybe of being proved wrong.

I have no intention of giving up now, and neither should anyone else. But I think we must be realistic – our success, when it comes, will be a two-edged sword.

I certainly do not want to kill the ‘female hosiery machine’ – for the same reasons you have stated.

As to why a woman would be afraid to wear something that men were wearing: as you say they do it all the time. To my mind it’s not a question of being afraid, but of choosing not to.

Previous generations of women have fought their cause for their fashion freedom, most obviously to wear trousers, and they have won. There are some similarities here with our cause of fashion freedom for men to wear hosiery, but there is an important difference: I doubt whether many women wore trousers because it gave them a sexual thrill. It is the fetish connection that gives male hosiery wearing a bad name – just read any article in the popular press about men wearing tights or stockings.

My fear is that the more that men are seen to wear hosiery, the stronger the association between hosiery and fetish will become in the eyes of women and, more importantly, in the eyes of the hosiery industry, which has been in decline for a decade or more, and where a total collapse is not unthinkable. Remember that most hosiery is manufactured by the big corporations like Sara Lee who are always concerned about their shareholders. Maybe I should have used the word ‘scared’. At some stage companies like Sara Lee might decide to pull out of hosiery manufacture. Brands and factories would be sold, assets would be stripped.

It is a bit of an open secret that hosiery sales to men make up about 40% of the general market and up to 90% of the online market. This is deliberately not being publicised by the mainstream hosiery companies, whose policy is to downplay the male market, for fear of an adverse effect on the female market. Hence no advertising.

There is no doubt that the hosiery suppliers have put pressure on on-line retailers to keep their acts clean, and to dissociate themselves from anything that caters to the fetishists.

However - we will continue to do what we can. We will go out visibly wearing hosiery as a part of normal male attire, and people will start to notice. Activskin and legwear4men will prosper. But the volume hosiery manufacturers are not going to start marketing to men. The most they are likely to do is to test the water secretly from time to time, as with the Lexwear range for men. (You won’t find this mentioned on the lexwear.com website, but Lexwear is a division of Mayer Berkshire.)

Maybe I have been too pessimistic in my conclusions – I do hope so. What do others think?

Hi Justin,

I agree with Geraden. I don't see any point why the male hosiery market would destroy the female one. A hundred years ago, when ladies took guy's trousers, nothing bad happened to the male trouser market.

When, back in 1942, Enrico Fermi and Leó Szilárd made the first nuclear reactor working in Chicago, there were some fears that the chain reaction would be unstoppable at an 'atomic level' and the whole world would be destroyed - but it did not happen.

What's more, both Steve Katz, L4M, and this blog is very strong eliminating the fetish side of the male PH issue.

I am not worrying about big manufacturers: they are still waiting for a good entry point, and will step in to the male PH market by time because you just can't say no if there is a chance to double your potential market and sales. They just have to find out how to do it.

Believe me, their eyes on Activskin, L4M, and other shops, and waiting for some significant progress. There are more and more words about male PH in quartely reports, and managers are secretly shopping for MPH to know more about the issue when it will necessary.

Hi Csanad

A great contribution from you. How diplomatic of you to say that you agree with me, and then proceed to say the opposite of what I said! I can only hope that you are right, however.

Seriously, I do appreciate having a comment from someone who has been more closely involved with the hosiery industry that I am.

The crucial difference between women wearing trousers and men wearing tights is that, so far as I know, no woman ever wore trousers in order to get sexually aroused. It is however true that the sexuality of trouser-wearing women was called in to question, but it was the Second World War that made women in trousers acceptable without any question of sexuality arising – think of the Land Army girls. On the other hand, our sexuality as tights wearing men is constantly being questioned. We can go on till we are blue in the face that statistically homosexuals are less likely to be found among tights-wearing men than among non-tights-wearing men. That message does not get through.

In a sane world there would be no reason why an increase in male hosiery wearing should spark a decrease in the female equivalent, any more than men have rejected the wearing of trousers now that trousers have become a female garment. But this is not a sane world! The nylon fetishists are having a ball, thanks to the internet, and in doing so are damaging the cause of hosiery freedom for men. Let us be quite clear – the fetishist is not interested in men’s hosiery – he is either indifferent to it, or more likely, he would prefer it not to exist. He wears women’s hosiery because it is women’s hosiery, and that very fact gives him the thrill he seeks. At the risk of offending some of my internet hosiery loving friends, the fetishist and the mainstreamer (for want of a better word) are on opposite sides. While it appears that they have something in common (a love of hosiery) really they have little in common.

I believe that an increase in male hosiery wearing will raise the spectre of the hosiery fetish in the minds of the general public and that this in turn will discourage women from wearing. I would like to be wrong on this point.

Maybe I have some hang-ups about the fetish thing. I have admitted that that is how I came to wear tights and I do find it hard to live this down. It is not by any means the reason why I have worn them regularly for the past 15 years. While I can justify wearing in terms of leg health and comfort, protection from insects and sunburn, as well as general practicality, there is still a residual guilt. And I still find women wearing tights, whether in ‘real life’ or in pictures, to be much more attractive than the bare legged variety.

I have to disagree, in fact your comments are hopelessly unrealistic. There are any number of reasons why women wear hosiery. The main reason being vanity. The recent increase in mens cosmetics, moisturisers and the like, have not caused a dip in sales to women. Why would hosiery?

In short, your comments are based on the assumption that women wear them because they are exlusively female, and that any challenge to that would make them look for some alternative garment that did that job (of allowing them to wear something exlusive to women). This is completely wrong. Men cavorting around in tights, for practical or sexual reasons, won't make the slightest dent in womens' hosiery sales.

The reason the manufacturers aren't really pushing this is because there is no market. Beyond fetishists there are no men who want to wear them. They are also tricky things to take care of, something women are used to, but men are not.

Anyway, why the big push to change things. If you like wearing them go right ahead. Why waste your life trying to get people to think like you do? Aren't you confident enough just to enjoy it?

Hi Geraden, I have read your blog and links with interest as I have had a nylon fetish since being a small boy. I used to view it as a curse and it was, and still is, a source of great guilt. Now that I am middle aged, there is only a residual, mildly erotic and pleasant feeling to wearing sheer hosiery. I am inclined to agree with MMM that, as a rule, only fetishists want to wear pantyhose full time and in especially in public. Because my desire has been so great to wear sheer hosiery, I have gone through the spectrum of reasons to rationalise wearing, and make it sound ok and "normal". Your endless drumming of the "benefits" of pantyhose certainly remind me of excuses I have used (to my wife and myself)in the past. In reality I believe that these benefits are largly illusory and appear sensible to us (fetishists that is) because of our slanted viewpoint. Don't misunderstand me, there was a time when I worked in the construction industry that I knew regular guys, mainly bricklayers, who would wear tights under their jeans during cold winter days. But do you think that they would want to shave their legs, change into shorts with sheers after work, or parade around the mall in sandal toe hold-ups? Not at all. With the great advances made in synthetic fabrics over the last couple of decades, the need to wear tights for a marginal amount of extra insulation has disappeared. Women see sheer hosiery as either a necessary dress code evil, or to produce a cosmetic effect. Thick opaques or heavier denier support tights are possible exceptions. No guy in his right mind would want to bother with a garment of such extreme fragility as 6 or 10 denier pantyhose. The other painful truth is that it is rather wierd for guys to want to walk around in womens sheer nylons in public. Despite what many of the guys at Lauf maintain, people do notice anything slightly out of the ordinary. Sure they may be too polite to point and snigger, a small minority of course will not, and perhaps they may pretend not to notice. I would not wear in public for 3 reasons: 1. I don't want to bring embarassment upon my family. 2. I don't want to be thought of just as "the wierd old guy who wears womens nylons. 3. I have terrible looking legs anyway (!)

So I feel that if a guy enjoys wearing womens nylons then he should be comfortable about admitting that he does so for the erotic thrill. Most of the other "rational reasons" for doing so are really pretty lame, especially for the 6 denier sandal-toe variety with lacy panty motif. Mainstreaming anything other than maybe footless athletic type tights for men is doomed in my humble opinion.

Cheers Rich

Hi Rich

Welcome back! And sorry for the delay in replying.

Hmm. You have packed in a lot there! Some of which I agree with and some I disagree with quite strongly.

If I wore for fetish reasons I would surely hide my wearing! Since I don't wear for those reasons, I am prepared to be open about it; though having consideration for my family, and to avoid causing scandal (to those who are too old or set in their ways not to be scandalised) I do not wear indiscriminately.

To conclude that I wear tights for fetish reasons now (whatever may have been the case in the past) is simply wrong. No one who wears tights for extended periods (whether 24/7 or not) wears for fetish reasons. Sexual arousal does not work like that, and if it did, life in a perpetual state of arousal would be fairly difficult!

The benefits are largely illusory, you say. Maybe you are lucky enough for none of them apply to you. Maybe your legs do not get tired for long periods standing or walking around. Maybe you do not sit still for long periods and risk DVT. Maybe you do not have varicose veins, leg cramps or oedema. Maybe you do not stand at draughty bus stops in winter, when tights give warmth without bulk, without itch, and without cling.

You think that we wearers rationalise our desire to wear? Well, maybe. But there is a lot of rationalisation taking place on the other side. What about the spurious reasons for not wearing tights: because it is unmanly or wussy; because it will make people think you are gay; because it shows that you are unhappy with your sexuality; because it shows that you would rather be a woman; because its shows that that you are heading for a sex change operation, because people will think you are a danger to children.

"So I feel that if a guy enjoys wearing womens nylons then he should be comfortable about admitting that he does so for the erotic thrill." Why admit what is not true, just to fit a theory? I do not deny that wearing tights (particularly good quality ones with a certain degree of support) makes your legs feel good. Personally, I would class this as a sensual, rather than a sexual thing.

Why do you say we are wearing 'women's nylons'? 'Nylons' is the word women typically use when they disapprove of male wearers; when they approve, they say 'pantyhose', 'hose' or 'tights'. Eddie Izzard is not one of my favourite people, and probably not to be recommended as a role model, but he was once asked why he was wearing ladies' tights. To which he replied, "These aren't ladies' tights; they are MY tights."

Male wearers (other than the fetishists) do not wear tights that are "women's", except sometimes in the sense that that is how they have been packaged and marketed. (And if they do have a picture of a woman on the packet, well, women's legs are more attractive than men's!) If we wear Activskin or any of the other the other male brands, they are not even manufactured or marketed for women. But men's and women's legs are remarkably similar and nylon lycra is stretchy enough to accommodate any anatomical differences. For some men it is very important that they wear only tights that are designed and marketed for the male market. The reasons may be psychological, ideological or moral / religious.

Quite apart from those who wear tights, many men nowadays shave their legs. This is particularly noticeable among younger athletic types.

Those who wear in such a way as to draw attention to their wearing are making a fashion statement. Personally I find a man wearing tights less repulsive than someone with multiple piercings, or tattoos or bright blue or green hair colouring. Apart from that, men tend to wear unobtrusively – skin coloured sheers under shorts. It is nobody else's business what they wear on their legs, when all is said and done. They will not thank you for deciding that they are wearing for reasons of sexual arousal, which is the minimum of what 'fetish' means.

Geraden