Here’s a little food for though on a Kristina-Lloyd “Man Candy Monday” on her obviously NSFW Erotica Coverwatch blog. Mark Potter of Reuters “Oddly Enough” column comes up with an odd headline for an even odder product.

Men risk anticlimax with anatomy-boosting pants
LONDON
Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:56pm EST

LONDON (Reuters) – Hundreds of British men are risking a Valentine’s Day anticlimax for their partners by stocking up on anatomy-boosting underpants ahead of the most romantic weekend of the year.

Oddly Enough

British department store group Debenhams said Thursday it had seen a 76 percent surge in online sales of the 18 pounds-a-pair ($28) underwear in the past week.

The pants work by using a lift and hold feature at the front, like a male version of the cleavage-boosting Wonderbra.

“The briefs mean that no man ever needs to feel inadequate again on the most passionate day of the social calendar,” said Rob Faucherand, head of men’s accessories buying at Debenhams.

“However we can’t be held responsible for what happens once the pants come off,” he added.

(Reporting by Mark Potter)

Read all about it here.

Potter’s post doesn’t mention it but a bit of Googling suggests it’s a line of push-up underwear from an unknown-to-me designer, Gregg Homme. Here’s a link to a safe-for-work Google search page for Homme’s “Maximizer Briefs” full of links to mostly-mainstream but visually not-as-safe pages.

A few thoughts:

• Whereas there’s a tendency to deplore makers of Wonderbras or thongs who’s products emphasize or “enhance” stereotypical women’s physical attributes it’s more common to deride makers of of products that similarly enhance stereotypical male attributes. Manties, pectoral implants, hair implants, heel lifts, and now these “maximizer briefs” all collide, violently, with the bogus Rule #2. By convention (but not in fact, as Lloyd, Amanda Marcotte, and several billion other women would tell men if they bothered to ask) men’s worthiness or ability to act or “provide” is the only valid measure of their attractiveness. And by convention the Smallville character Lana Lang was supposed to be unmoved by the Clark Kent character’s physical beauty, while on the other hand According to Jim’s Cheryl character was supposed to be impressed by Jim’s… um… well, not his looks. Consequently padding one’s crotch isn’t just a mark of vanity, it must be a mark of misplaced priorities as well.
• What, exactly, the heck is the idea behind the sentiment that men’s padded pants will lead inevitably to disappointment or even “anticlimax” when the pants are removed? Once again there’s a presumption that men’s appearance must reflect utility (e.g. signaling wealth, taste, age, or health) rather than decor.
• And not to turn around a common gender trope or anything, but aren’t Potter and Faucherand still presuming that men are more likely than women to dress for potential partners than than, say, for themselves or to signal competitive status or intent to each other?
• That said, there’s often an implicit assumption that prominently displaying one’s “package” is interesting only to men. See, for instance, women’s frequent snarks about online dating sites looking like “mushroom farms” because so many men post penis photo. On the other hand, while it’s rarely acknowledged see also research suggesting women are more likely to check out men’s crotches and, just as unexpectedly, men first check faces. So… I dunno.

• Final point: Potter and Faucherand are men, and at least statistically speaking anyway they’re probably straight. And so, also statistically speaking, they may not be the best people to ask why or whether anyone would be disappointed when a man in what amounts to a subtle codpiece undresses. For instance to the best of my knowledge, it’s mostly men who grouse about the “hot chicks with douchebags“ phenomena, and I’m dead confident that sooner or later they’ll feature someone who, though not visually appealing to men, will end up being mocked for… still having a “hot” girlfriend.

The funny thing, by the way, is that I initially clicked on the bare headline I thought the article would be a warning about health consequences of squeezing one’s genital up and out that way. Sort of like the ones about bicycle seats causing numbness or impotence. If the things catch on (or I should say catch on again) we can probably look forward to those kinds of warnings.