Page 2 of 6

Re: Leggings

Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 11:46 pm
by phathack
Judah14 wrote:There are leggings marketed towards men, known as "meggings", though they are usually more expensive than "regular" leggings but have a fly as they are optimized for male use.
I have looked at several different vendors of "Meggings"
I have not found any that have a fly or even a pouch for the boys, they are no different than the leggings sold to women but with a price increase.

I have found one manufacture that offered tights for men with a fly but they have discontinued the fly option and only sell the non fly tights.


:ugeek:

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 1:23 am
by r.m.anderson
A few years back there was a Fantasy item - "Mantie-Hose" with the fly feature.
But now in reality a fly front panty hose is still a novelty and putting (engineering that fly
feature) maybe adding stress to the seams and possible contact with rivets and rough sewn
edges in the crotch of the damn pant$. Wearing skirts (dresses) result in no wear in that area.
While use of a stand-up urinal will be a problem - sitting and dropping the PH poses nothing
that can not be reasonably done wearing panties and skirts. All of this cultures the flat front
look better than an obvious fly feature.

Another comment leggings and pantyhose are not the same apples and oranges - PH is designed
sheer and normally in nude skin colors - leggings go much further the thicker material and the
colors - oh my gosh - everything under the rainbow and that is included also !
AND then the leggings are maybe designed as the sole garment worn (with or without underwear)
as well as to be covered by a tunic - short mini-skirt - dress - etc.

One thing also - I believe Tights and PH (hosiery) is the same definition in the UK.
Tights and Leggings maybe virtually the same thing in the USA but different from what the UK calls hosiery.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 7:47 am
by Ray
Activskin did sheer hosiery with a fly. So did Gerbe. Doyeah continue to do so. I have and use all three brands.

Other makers of mens' tights include Adrian, Collanto, Levee. I use the word tights for any clingy leg garment which you can't wear without a covering garment - irrespective of denier. You can wear leggings without a covering garment - which is how I distinguish them from tights.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 12:23 pm
by Liino
There are some producers of Mens tights available,
https://www.emiliocavallini.com/en/men/ ... s-for-men/
http://tightsforall.com/index.php?route ... ry&path=57

I have a couple of pairs of Emilio tights, good products.
phathack wrote:
Judah14 wrote:There are leggings marketed towards men, known as "meggings", though they are usually more expensive than "regular" leggings but have a fly as they are optimized for male use.
I have looked at several different vendors of "Meggings"
I have not found any that have a fly or even a pouch for the boys, they are no different than the leggings sold to women but with a price increase.

I have found one manufacture that offered tights for men with a fly but they have discontinued the fly option and only sell the non fly tights.


:ugeek:

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 6:34 pm
by hoborob
r.m.anderson wrote:A few years back there was a Fantasy item - "Mantie-Hose" with the fly feature.
Mantie-hose sadly did not have a fly, they had a third leg from the member instead. As far as the fly being engineered in Steve at ActivSkin explained to us that it was an extra cost to have it put in as it required hand stitching to have them done. That and most of his customers really went for the non fly versions so they fly option was discontinued in favor of the lower priced version. Still a very good product as there is a bit of extra room for the boys but They are unfortunately for me out of my price range right now.

I still have a few pair that I bought from ActivSkin several years ago so I can attest to the durability of the product.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2016 5:25 pm
by Caultron
I buy women's tights because of the greater selection and lower price. One you take them out of the package, no one can tell how they used to be marked. And as for that other business, I just go over the top.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2016 10:37 pm
by Bertino56
Look at leggings as one milepost on the road to practical clothing without any gender assignment.
Every female in the country is now wearing black leggings. That's no big deal, but more and more
are wearing spectacular patterned leggings as well. Especially as students return to school and the weather
becomes colder.
Now it's men's turn, and I am starting to see some patterned leggings showing up. They are sold
and worn as a sportswear accessory. Black thermal underwear or footless tights have been common
on cyclists, joggers, etc., for years. Same thing. Nothing you would ever notice. But I saw a
middle-school soccer team working out, and several of them had on what looked like patterned tights
or leggings. Some of the back-to-school flyers from retail stores, inserted into newspapers, had
what looks like menswear leggings. I have seen casually dressed men around the college campus wearing
what is probably athletic or thermal tights with shorts. Same around popular hangouts like sports bars and
coffee shops. So it's no great leap for mankind for men to start wearing leggings in colors and patterns,
rather that just basic black. There is a huge selection available already.
Look at the variety on this web site. 100 pages of designs. https://society6.com/leggings
Some I would gladly wear, some not. Unfortunately they have them listed in the "women's" category
which is unnecessary and, by now, unrealistic.
For the record, I own one pair of leggings. Black, perfectly comfortable, $6.99 at Goodwill (new, not used).
I have worn them with shorts. Nobody says diddly or even notices. I wore them once on a brief shopping trip
with nothing but a t-shirt which barely covers my ass. Same non-response.
My only complaint about leggings is that they have no pockets!
This really has nothing to do with skirts, except as sort of a parallel situation of how and where and when do we
start wearing what we want to wear without risk of misrepresenting ourselves. Leggings and tights have already
come a long way, baby.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:36 am
by Dean
My wife got me started on Lularoe leggings. Unbelievably comfortable. The lack of "pouch" makes no difference, although I've learned that if I wear them commando then the boys don't stay where they're supposed to be (a pair of briefs or panties fixes that).

Solid colors are safer, of course, but they also come in lots of prints, many of which aren't "feminine" at all. In my experience, there might be a brief snicker if it's mentioned that I wear them (to which I reply "hey, they're comfortable), but I've gotten many compliments and nothing negative.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 4:32 pm
by moonshadow
The lack of a fly is what pushed me away from leggings and tights in general as it makes a trip to the restroom quite an ordeal. On my trip to the store the other day wearing my "hurricane" tights, between the tights coming up to my high waist, the skirt about an inch above my navel, and the top tucked into the skirt going down below my belly, and a petticoat to beat all, I had to fumble through quite a few layers to just take a piss.

It all came down to the tights, if not for them I could have simply raised the hem on the petti and skirt and took care of business.

Henceforth I'm thinking of trying out thigh high tights.

I know this is a thread about leggings, but I'm wondering if there is a "legging" version of thigh highs... I'd be interested in giving them a go as I typically only wear leg coverings either a) for looks, or b) in cold weather, and always under a skirt, never by itself.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 6:40 pm
by Sinned
I wear thigh highs quite a lot in winter and find them comfortable and warm enough without being too hot. They stay up as they are supposed to do but all the ones I have are sheers. Not really looked locally for thicker ones but they would be my next step. Of course I wear tights as well. For me to wear leggings MOH would definitely know that I was dressing like a woman as she wears them every day, almost exclusively. So I would be trying to be like her.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:25 pm
by Darryl
In my 60+ years I have had occasion to be in a hurry...and for some reason that translated to an inability to find/access the fly in a pair of briefs in a sufficiently speedy manner. I simply gave up, hooked a thumb in the waistband and fished out the flexible hose, aimed and fired. :oops:

Now, if I'm all wrapped up like a mummy, I'm going to give myself a few minutes in order to use a stall and sit. I pull the bottom of the skirt and any shirts up to my armpits, and then push everything else down while I sit and take care of whatever I need to. If everything will stay up, and so far it does, then I leave the support hose, leggings, tights, whatever down around the hips unless I'm really into layers due to cold...support hose under fleece-lined tights/leggings for instance. But I've been wearing support hose/tights since 2007 while I joined this forum in 2014. So even if your tights are pulled up to mid-abdomen and you've got pants and a belt on....you'll have to manipulate the tights down far enough to clear for action or give up and take care of business seated. If things will stay up and not look like you're wearing a couple of money-belts or something, then leave things down to where you are already cleared for emergency action. :roll:

Last winter I went skirted every chance I could. That included (sometimes) both fleece-lined tights and fleece-lined leggings. Today it was about 55 when I went to church, so I wore a pair of black leggings with lace around the bottom of the legs. The only remark was delivered with a smile: "well....now we know what's under the kilt." :shock:

Re: Leggings

Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:01 am
by partlyscot
moonshadow wrote:
Henceforth I'm thinking of trying out thigh high tights.

I know this is a thread about leggings, but I'm wondering if there is a "legging" version of thigh highs... I'd be interested in giving them a go as I typically only wear leg coverings either a) for looks, or b) in cold weather, and always under a skirt, never by itself.
When you say "thigh high leggings" Do you mean stay ups in heavier deniers?

Try looking for Opaque Thigh Highs. I have several pairs of 60 denier pairs from Sarah Borghi. Cannot find any retailers of the brand, which is a pity, as I would consider paying full price. Very smooth and slightly shiny, extremely stretchy, very comfortable, have worn them for more than 12 hours at a stretch with very little irritation from the gripper band. I personally love the look, and would love to find something similar with interesting patterns.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2016 9:53 am
by crfriend
moonshadow wrote:[...] I'm wondering if there is a "legging" version of thigh highs...
"Leg warmers". Yet another '80s fashion victim statement, although leg warmers are definitely useful for dancers. Very, very, few of us are dancers, however.

Re: Leggings

Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:12 pm
by moonshadow
crfriend wrote:"Leg warmers". Yet another '80s fashion victim statement, although leg warmers are definitely useful for dancers. Very, very, few of us are dancers, however.
Googled that, seems like the "style" was to have them scrunched up. Perhaps unscrunched they might not look as bad? With the over all goal being to not be able to see the top of the "warmer" because it's way above the bottom hem of the skirt.

I'm curious as to what makes this useful for dancing. I would have thought the purpose would have been to aid in the warmth of legs. :D

Interesting that pretty much all the google images I see illustrate the leg warmers used in combination with leggings and tights, not by themselves.

Shall I try them unscrunched, sans leggings or tights, under a skirt, on a man's legs?? Du-du-duuuuoooonee! 8)

Re: Leggings

Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2016 4:28 pm
by phathack
moonshadow wrote:
crfriend wrote:"Leg warmers". Yet another '80s fashion victim statement, although leg warmers are definitely useful for dancers. Very, very, few of us are dancers, however.
Googled that, seems like the "style" was to have them scrunched up. Perhaps unscrunched they might not look as bad? With the over all goal being to not be able to see the top of the "warmer" because it's way above the bottom hem of the skirt.

I'm curious as to what makes this useful for dancing. I would have thought the purpose would have been to aid in the warmth of legs. :D

Interesting that pretty much all the google images I see illustrate the leg warmers used in combination with leggings and tights, not by themselves.

Shall I try them unscrunched, sans leggings or tights, under a skirt, on a man's legs?? Du-du-duuuuoooonee! 8)
Might as well buy long socks that come up over the knee.

:ugeek: