Are bun huggers dead?

Cate wrote:

I have very fine hair and if I grow it too long It splits.

Could be worse. My hair split a long time ago.

Bigger than Ben Johnson wrote:

You'll have to ask the 40+ year old men why they let themselves go.

It's due to a combination of beer and low testosterone (not necessarily in that order).

Very narrow range of chicks can rock the huggers. MUST BE A HOTTIE, NOT A FATTIE. In general, age 13 to 22, 5'6" 100 pounds or proportionate to that size. No muffin tops or cellulite. No undamped harmonic motion.

Also, never want to see eurotrash dudes in speedos or tights, ever.

Also, why do so many of the idle rich soccer moms in my neighborhood jog in tennis skirts?

Cate wrote:

Looking at these shots, I can't see how any halfway serious female runner could accept being issued boy shorts, let a lone choose them voluntarily.

Haha, I was thinking the opposite!

another bump for this one

Bun Huggers Goofd! wrote:

http://www.sportressofblogitude.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/yelena_isinbayeva3.jpg

I see your Yelena Isinbayeva and I raise you an Ivet Lalova.

http://i.mkt.lu/cont/557276/665/400/ivet-lalova.jpg

Bigger than Ben Johnson wrote:

It seems shes been blessed with the "age slowly" genes. I don't know how many age 40+ women could pull of this look.

http://www.letsrun.com/photos/2013/carlsbad2013/images/Padilla_Grace1-Carlsbad13.JPG

With a complete bikini waxing, that's how.

I hope not

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqqCQKo7qUU

went thru all 12 pages

didn't read a single word

just looked for blue links

thx guys

required login name wrote:

After reading through this thread, I think there's no chance the Cate is female.

Cate wrote:

I'm 100% female and proud of it, which is why I'm happy to run in buns.

This point makes so little logical sense it only seems LESS likely that you are female.

Cate wrote:

I think what separates us is that for you, buns are about body image, and for me, they're about performance.

another average american wrote:

Do you honestly believe that the drag caused by two extra inches of material will make a substantial difference in the athletic performance of your average high school girl?

(Yawn. Five pages of back-and-forth later, AAA is still owning Cate post for post here.)

Cate, you have for DAYS now failed to address the fact that your argument implies that men should be wearing shorts with a boxer brief cut, or better yet a speedo style.

There is clearly no need for those inches of loose fabric in men's running shorts, so why are you not arguing adamantly for male runners to run in short briefs, and for that to be mandatory? Simple question.

There is simply no coherence to your arguments. You really fall on your face by suggesting they should be mandatory. Are they a good CHOICE for most runners? Maybe. Should ALL runner be forced into them? Ridiculous.

Very narrow range of chicks can rock the huggers. MUST BE A HOTTIE, NOT A FATTIE. In general, age 13 to 22, 5'6" 100 pounds or proportionate to that size.

Dude- look at this picture again, she's in her 40's:

http://www.letsrun.com/photos/2013/carlsbad2013/images/Padilla_Grace1-Carlsbad13.JPG

rupp-certified saladbar wrote:

you have for DAYS now failed to address the fact that your argument implies that men should be wearing shorts with a boxer brief cut, or better yet a speedo style.

You have failed to address the fact that men and women are different. Even if you don't care whether you screw a man or a woman, for the rest of us genders are for real.

Any scroll through all 12 pages ignoring anything written and only clicking anything blue? I fit women's bodies.

No way! I repeatedly wrote that guys would ideally wear buns too were it not for the fact that their different biology means they can get grain strain if certain parts are not properly supported. My boyfriend had that problem from just not having a correctly adjusted jock strap. Plus I think there are worse injuries still suck as twisted nads and hernias.

Cate wrote:

No way! I repeatedly wrote that guys would ideally wear buns too were it not for the fact that their different biology means they can get grain strain if certain parts are not properly supported. My boyfriend had that problem from just not having a correctly adjusted jock strap. Plus I think there are worse injuries still suck as twisted nads and hernias.

No guys wear jockstraps running nowadays. Most runners who wear running shorts are supported by the inner brief and that's it. Guys who wear soccer or basketball shorts typically wear boxer briefs or something similar. So by your "girls just need bunhuggers" reasoning, guys just need that inner brief or boxer briefs.

(And it's pretty obvious you're an older guy from your obsession with jockstraps.)

apple bottom shorts wrote:

Cate wrote:

No way! I repeatedly wrote that guys would ideally wear buns too were it not for the fact that their different biology means they can get grain strain if certain parts are not properly supported. My boyfriend had that problem from just not having a correctly adjusted jock strap. Plus I think there are worse injuries still suck as twisted nads and hernias.

No guys wear jockstraps running nowadays. Most runners who wear running shorts are supported by the inner brief and that's it. Guys who wear soccer or basketball shorts typically wear boxer briefs or something similar. So by your "girls just need bunhuggers" reasoning, guys just need that inner brief or boxer briefs.

(And it's pretty obvious you're an older guy from your obsession with jockstraps.)

You're obsessed with the idea that I'm actually a guy. Surely the fact that I don't know the finer details of men's athletic undergarments undermines your theory and suggests I might actually be female?

I was just thinking that even though I know tons of guy runners, was married to one, have coached HS for a number of years and have a teenaged running son, I don't know anyone who actually wears a jockstrap anymore. I'm surprised to hear that they still exist! I think that most guys wear just the running shorts with the liner and if they need extra "support" that they use supportive underwear/briefs, not the cheek baring jockstrap. Of course, I could be wrong, but I think those went out of favor a long time ago.

And AAA - Thank you for your rational thoughts on this topic. I completely agree with you on pretty much everything you say. I'm female and have run for nearly 40 years, and although I've been issued running briefs (not as low cut as today's version), I've for the most part refused to run in them (I did actually try it a few times and refused to do it again!).

I do not buy for one instant that "buns" are better for performance. If you like them, okay, fine wear them. I'm sure I have more drag for having long hair in a ponytail than I do for wearing shorts.

But wearing "buns" has nothing to do with increasing performance, although being forced to wear them may make cause you to either hate your body or be compelled to lose weight (which is what some coaches want anyway). Many of the comments of photos of women running in them talk about how bad some women look in them. In the college racing world, there are many more women who don't look that great in them as those that do (at least from my view in the middle of the pack).

It seems like one reason the professional women wear them with the cropped tops, exposing as much of their body as possible, is a way of showing off how thin and fit they are - kind of the "psyching out" type of thing that sprinters do - especially since women tend to add any extra weight in our middles or butt. It seems ridiculous, though, to see the "professionals" racing in "buns" and bra top in cold weather, exposing their middles to the elements and having to pile on arm-warmers, compression socks, headbands and gloves to stay warm! Why not add a singlet or shirt and maybe longer tights or shorts?