Men's boxer-type undergarments come in a variety of shapes and sizes as you well know. Maybe you don't know. Boxers, the underwear, resemble the trunks that fighting boxers typically wear, therefore the name.

What men wear and what fighting boxers wear are very different. First, style. The style of boxer trunks are much longer, often touching or going below the knee (and this style for fighting boxers has changed over the years-think Muhammad Ali with mid-thigh trunks). These trunks are very loose and baggy. They need to be so that boxers can move around freely. On the other hand, the undergarments that men might wear only go down to the middle of the thigh or even less than that. The boxer underwear are loose (though not as loose as Boxer trunks). Boxer underwear are intentionally designed to be loose and unobtrusive.

One requirement that boxers (the sportsmen) have is the need for their shorts to stay on their hips during a long match. The shorts cannot even sag or slip over the waist even a little. The boxing shorts are therefore reinforced at the hip with heavy elastic or a tie-string. Boxer-style underwear, on the other hand, rarely use a tiestring to hold them up. Instead those shorts rely on heavy elastic, a comfort designed specifically for the shorts.

The one similarity I have seen between what fighting boxers wear and what you and I wear is that they are made from many types of material: mainly, silk, cotton, or a combination of the two often. Silk is a very romantic material for men to wear. I would say that it appeals more to the women who let their mates wear them. It's nice to the touch.

On a quick sidenote, I have also seen boxer shorts made from a fishnet type of material. I suspect the Boxing world has pretty much rejected that impractical material because then it would show the protective gear that boxers wear during a match. Mesh/Fishnet material for boxer shorts are found in novelty stores.

Obviously those types of boxers are not for comfort or utilitarian usages; they're for romance and all that entails.

So, in summary, boxer shorts are similar to what Boxers are in physical material (especially silk and cotton) but differ in length and what holds the shorts up. Another major difference is the cost for each: boxing shorts are much more expensive than underwear boxers. Specialty boxers, though, can be more costly, but may very well be worth the expense.

A topic such as this is likely to get very embarrassing and risque rather quickly. It could end up in the sleeze and raunch pile in short order. I will make it a PG13-rated article for the young readers in the group.

As a child, I grew up wearing briefs as underwear. My mother never thought of purchasing anything other. Back then you could buy packages of five or six for really cheap. I don't recall being able to do that with boxer shorts.

To be quite honest, boxer shorts have taken on much greater cultural significance and in the world over the past 10-15 years. Actually, I'm not sure I would've been able to purchase boxer underwear 20 years ago when, as Billy Joel sang, "I wore a younger man's clothes." I know, it dates me a tad.

When Michael Jordan, the world's best basketball player, advertises for a major undergarment manufacturer, the briefs and boxers debate necessarily goes on. And yet, the general public still doesn't know what style of underwear he uses. How did he respond when two women were admiring his backside, "Don't even go there." Good answer. Good commercial, Jockey.

I think that briefs underwear is/are for the common man. Guys buy them because they are not expensive. I cannot emphasize enough the fact that briefs are inexpensive because you can buy them in bulk, in packs of 4, 6, and 10. And I think they're also cheap because they generally come in one of a few colors, white being the standard.

Of course, brief brands that men choose matter a lot too. Hanes, Jockey, and Fruit of the Loom seem to capture the retail underwear market share. The mega superstores manufacture their own brand (normally made in China). Those generic brands of briefs are cheaper in quality than Jockey, Hanes, and Fruit of the Loom.

In any event, I naturally lean towards briefs in my selection of underclothing. I said it. Briefs are cheaper, been around longer, and they're just more comfortable. I've tried boxers and they were, well, awkward. I'm from the old school undergarment wearing: if it ain't broken, don't fix it (if it's comfortable and cheap, why change).

Writing about a topic such as briefs puts me at great risk because the topic can turn embarrassing or risque in short order. Likewise, the dialogue could end up turning out sleezy or raunchy quickly. My intention is to make this a PG13-rated article for the benefit of the younger readers on the site.

I grew up wearing briefs as underwear. My family never even thought of buying anything other. Back in the day you could purchase packets of six for really cheap. I'm not sure you could say that about boxer shorts back then.

To be fair, boxer shorts have taken on greater significance in our culture and in the world over the past fifteen years. I may not even been able to buy boxers when I was growing up.

When perhaps the world's best basketball player, Michael Jordan, advertised for a major underwear retailer, the briefs and boxers debate rages on. And we still don't know what type he uses. "Don't even go there," was his response in the Jockey commercial.

I think that briefs underwear is/are for the common man. Guys buy them because they are not expensive. I cannot emphasize enough the fact that briefs are inexpensive because you can buy them in bulk, in packs of 4, 6, and 10. And I think they're also cheap because they generally come in one of a few colors, white being the standard.

Of course, the brands of briefs that men choose matter a great deal too. Hanes, Jockey, and Fruit of the Loom seem to dominate the retail underwear line. The Superstores display their brands of briefs. Those briefs tend to be cheaper in quality than Hanes, Fruit of the Loom, and Jockey.

In any event, I favor briefs. There I said it. Yes, briefs are cheaper but they tend to be less cumbersome and intrusive. It's a bit awkward to switch after such a long time; not impossible, but awkward.

One of the noticeable things that has dominated Hip Hop Culture in the West has been the sagging shorts that Hip Hoppers wear. That's a given. But what's not so apparent is that normally the underwear that shows when their shorts are hanging over the middle of the rear end is Boxer Shorts. That's where I come in.

It may already be apparent that I really don't understand the need for Gangsta Rapper to parade around with shorts that hang so far down past their hips. Occasionally I hear humorous anecdotal evidence of those who burglarize businesses trying to flee and falling flat on their noses because the shorts they wore for their caper slid down their legs and tripped them. Of course it's not humorous for those who get busted that way but that's the good and bad of that culture.

In my observations, I see a lot of plain colored boxer shorts. I don't see a lot of design and fashion in that regard. You would think that the boxer shorts retailers would capitalize on that fact and market more appealing and greater designed boxers. Perhaps I can start something significant here.

One thing I've observed when those outer shorts hang low is that most of the boxer shorts are made of cotton. Silk material does not seem to be a good option for undergarments under outer shorts (with no belt) as it would produce rapid slippage. I don't know this for a fact, but it would appear that nothing's worse than having your boxer shorts slip down rapidly when you're trying to have a friendly motivational discussion with like-minded friends.

Of course, a discussion on the merits and disadvantages of boxer shorts that Gangsta Rappers wear would not be totally complete if I didn't at least address the subject of belts, the Hip Hop variety. I'll forgo a bit of political correctness here, and suggest that a cheapo belt would sure seem like a practical accessory to buy when combined with a fashionable designer baseball hat ($20-30) turned sideways on your head, draping tons of bling bling gold necklaces around the neck, and a $20 all white t-shirt (prominently showing your tattooed and bulging muscles). Certainly fifteen dollars (and upwards) for a leather belt might be the next fashion statement, especially if you're grabbing and fleeing with some extra cash from an unwilling source.

The belt, even one wrapped tight around your thighs could make the difference between a thousand dollars and ten to fifteen years in prison. Perhaps I'm in the wrong market.

Gangsta, Hip Hop, or Rap Culture is here to stay. I'm not trying to change any of that. However, if only a young entrepreneur were to analyze the market and create a new multi-billion dollar industry: the Gangsta Rap Belt Industry, that would be my reward.

The debate has been going on forever it seems, boxers or briefs, briefs or boxers. There's really not been a definitive answer as to which is better or greater.

The time for being wishy-washy or sitting on the fence and waffling over which is the better style of men's undergarments is finished. The choice is today and you need to make it. Today, not tomorrow, but today. The fate of a debate free republic rests on your rapid response.

So, which is it, my friend, briefs of boxers? It's really not rocket science or brain surgery, is it? It's 50/50 one way or another, win lose or draw. But you must make a choice. You've got to do it.

Men will have their responses and women will have theirs. The reasoning will be very different for both.

Men will choose comfort over looks; women will choose how it looks over how it feels because quite frankly, they don't normally wear them.

Then again, women have their own comfort zone when it comes to boxers and briefs, don't they? They have a three-way choice between bikinis, briefs, or long cut or whatever the standard is in women's undergarments. I don't linger in the women's department of stores very often. If I'm getting something for my spouse, it's targeted and quick. No dilly-dallying. No lounging around.

But, purchasing women's undergarments is not what this debate is about. The online poll you're a part of is a single solitary question. If you're a man, one question. If you're a woman, it's the exact same question.

You will be one in six million people around the world who vote on this issue. That's the number I am shooting for before the poll closes. Fortunately, you will have a say in the matter and it will be heard. Please don't take this responsibility lightly. And yet, all you Chicagoans, don't vote early and often.

A number of individuals will be checking back at this same site regularly; and I think you should too. People will want to nab their friends (both men and women) to get in on this debate; and I think you should too. I said earlier that the fate of a free republic rests on your rapid response. Perhaps I didn't state it clearly enough: the fate of the known world rests on the final outcome.