Talk:Boardshorts

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Swimming, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Swimming on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwimmingWikipedia:WikiProject SwimmingTemplate:WikiProject Swimmingswimming articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Fashion Low‑importance

	Fashion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A note

Oh sweet Jesus, what sort of academic paper does one expect people to cite in this article!?! 89.62.106.210 16:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

its not just men who wear boardshorts is it?

Original image in this article was innacurate, as that suit is not a boardshort. It is a Jammer. I've updated it using a photo from the surfing article. Lemon-lime 05:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that boardshorts are designed to be worn without underwear is a distinguishing characteristic. As with bike-shorts, it is one of the things that makes them differend from other types of shorts and is relevant to the article. The fact that there are exceptions to the exception, and that some people have personal preferences is not relevant to the article, as it can be assumed that some people have personal preferences that differ from the standard.

The only disagreement I have is that people might find it hard to identify a board short "in the wild" in the US since nearly every non surfer actually does wear boxers underneath. To be fair, they don't even know it's a fashion faux pas, since our surfing culture is mostly just a fad, at least on the east coast...Lemon-lime 17:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then the article should also include thongs, briefs, boxer-briefs, jock-straps, etc....if we're going to clog up the article with in everyone's personal preference, instead of sticking with the facts about the shorts themselves and their design. Surfing culture is not a fad...it's non-surfers taking up surfer wear that is a fad. Boardshorts with boxers looks as silly bike shorts or speedos with boxers.

No, Lemon-lime correctly stays on use of boardshorts, and seems to me to have a point: if a sizeable majority does it otherwise, going commando is not an integral characterstic, especially as no intransic reason is being given Fastifex 12:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is a minority of wearers who wear underwear with bike shorts, boarshorts, bathings suits, and other such articles of clothing that are specificaly designed not to be worn with underwear. If people in his town wear them with underwear, he can certainly state so, but this is not common in the whole "United States" as he states. On the west coast, here in Florida and throughouth the southeast, the Caribbean, Hawaii, Australia, and most other places I have been too, people don't wear underwear with boardshorts, bike shorts and bathing suits. The reason boardshorts, bike shorts and bathing suits are made from quick-dry materials is by design, and is defeated if worn with underwear which hold water. They are sized and cut for wear alone.

I am more than willing to withdraw my argument if you can give any authoratative data that a sizable majority of beachgoers and pool patrons in the United States don't wear boxers under their boardshorts. Lemon-lime 18:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to fund and conduct a survey. In the mean time, maybe a little logic would help us all out as to what belongs in the article or not. Boardshorts are made from quick-dry materials. They use velcro instead of zippers to prevent rusting. They use strings instead of snaps to prevent rusting. A lot of careful design effort seems to be defeated by those wearing underwear with boardshorts. Is it more likely that all the boardshorts manufacturers in the world have got it all wrong, or that a few people in certain places in the US, just don't get it?

Everything you've listed is a feature present in nearly every bathingsuit style available. What's your point?

The point is that normal people do not wear underwear with bathing suits (including boardshorts)!...so why even mention that a few people wear them with underwear? It's not relevant to the article.

Every form of bathing suit other than boardshorts has a lining specifically designed to avoid chaffing...board shorts do not. In all seriousness, though. Your evidence is no better than mine. Anecdotal evidence is not a valid source material. The article needs to be footnoted anyway. Until either of us finds hard evidence we can cite either way, I say leave the article be. Lemon-lime 06:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boardshorts are often worn as casual regular street clothes by both men and women, usually with t-shirts and flip-flop shoes but sometimes with polo shirts and tennis shoes. I assume that if worn as walking shorts that they would be worn with underwear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.182.213.158 (talk) 02:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Linings are not used to prevent chaffing, they are for modesty. If fabric caused chaffing, then so would the lining. Boardshorts do not require modesty lining, because they are long enough, and are cut so that they don't float up or have large gaps.

Just out of complete curiosity since you seem to be such an expert on swimwear, what exactly is it that makes you an expert on this subject, anyway? I only wonder becuase I'm a State-ranking year-round competitive swimmer that has spent the better part of my free-time as a child and young adult in and around the pool or beach...I'm wondering why we're getting such differing oppinions on this subject since it seems like we both must have such a large amount of experience in the area of swimwear.Lemon-lime 01:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Competitive swimmer in HS. SCUBA diver. Beach-goer. People into swimming, diving and hanging out at the beach don't wear underwear with swim attire. A small minority of land-lubbers don't understand that boardshorts are a form of swimwear. The only guys I see wearing underwear with boardshorts and other swimsuits are the same ones that wear dark socks and dress shoes at the beach. People can wear whatever they want to. I don't have a problem with people wearing underwear with speedos, boardshorts, etc., but I hardly think it's the majority, and those that do just look out of place (the dark socks, underwear, dress shoes, etc. don't really fit in with the beach environment). According to at least one poll (http://www.misterpoll.com/results.mpl?id=933214613) a majority of those that said they wore boardshorts swimming do so without underwear. This is not a scientific poll, and presumably includes a lot of non-surfers/non-beachgoers/non-SCUBA divers from the middle of the country (kind of like asking someone from Manhattan how to wear overalls).

Here is another mister poll that shows a pretty even split, which reflects my experience with boardshorts: http://www.misterpoll.com/results.mpl?id=324865718

In this one Underwear has it by a sizeable majority. 38% wear nothing, and 57% wear underwear with it: http://www.misterpoll.com/results.mpl?id=2336488609

Here is a website talking about ideas of things to wear under boardshorts because of chaffing: http://www.surfing-waves.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2345&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=20&sid=796658ffce60762f1f51d36302432f6b Lemon-lime 05:32, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Now someone's added New Zealand to the already excepting Australia... Apparently people don't believe boardshorts are worn without underwear in Australia or New Zealand and I'm inclined to disagree with the assertion people do it in the US. I'm going to go ahead and remove the reference until we can find some real hard evidence that isn't abiguous. Lemon-lime 05:15, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One only has to look at the design to see if underwear is intended to be worn. Quick dry materials. Special closures to prevent body hair from getting tangled in the fly. No-seam construction. These and other design choices only make sense if a significant number of wearers go sans underwear. If the majority of people wear them with underwear, then manufacturers are wasting a lot of effort, and buyers are purchasing something that is not suited to their use.

I believe you have a point, but we're both interested in how people where the garment as well as how the garment was made. If you can find a manufacturer confirming either the garment is meant to be worn sans underwear or that it's designed to do everything you mention, I think we have something to work on other than just conjecture. In my personal experience, I have seen bordshorts with and without the features you speak of. Most of the ones I've owned haven't had noseam construction, haven't had special closures. Only the more expensive boardshorts appear to have the features you mentioned... Lets find some good sources. Sources mean everything! Lemon-lime 02:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quicksilver makes shorts with neoprene flys http://www.k5.com/getproduct.asp?p=10248&ptid=24&b=99&partnerid=85 RipCurl has seamless boardshorts www.ripcurl.com Nearly all manufacturers use quick-dry materials.

I do not see any reference anywhere (internet search) to "Body Glove" as having coined the term "boardies. Their own web site history seems to state that in 1953, they had just, or were early in the process of developing their wetsuit, but no mention to any other product categories or anything outside of present & future wetsuit development. I am suspicious that this might be a re-imagination of a prior time for the sake of building possible future brand heritage angle with something that is arguably an expansion that ends up serving to put them as a brand closer to the core of surfing's modern day and be tied more deeply into the history as an authority - A claim for which I can find no reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazybitterunicorn (talk • contribs) 23:07, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

viewing down there

could someone please put in a section about how some shy people sometimes are uncomfortable wearing these because other people may be able to see up them? thanks a bunch.

I'm pretty sure the point of boardshorts being so long is to avoid just this problem... Find a source talking about it and we can add it, if it's really true. Lemon-lime 06:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of people wear a compression under their boardshorts like the ones found at www.heloclothes.com

"Men's fashion"?

From what I've seen, boardshorts are at least as common among women as men. They're usually worn over the top of regular female swimwear. This could just be a New Zealand thing, but a Google search for 'boardshorts' brings up plenty of examples of boardshorts for women being on sale... Simulato 04:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boardshorts with a mesh lining?

I just took out this sentence: "Many boardshorts designs also utilize a light, net-like material stitched to the inside of the shorts that is designed to be a substitute for underwear." At least in the USA I can say I have never ever seen a pair of real boardshorts with a mesh lining. Mesh lining is only for regular swim trunks. Perhaps this is different in other countries? If so please reinsert the sentence but qualify it by saying where these occur. Thanks. Invertzoo (talk) 01:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seen it in the US only with boardshorts of predominantly white fabric. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.228.53.38 (talk) 06:53, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]