After my last post, in which I mentioned my irritation at the many newspaper and blog pages that seem to have been taken up with criticism of Tony Abbott and his Speedos, I came across this absurd story about a British water park that has banned Speedo-type swimmers as being 'inappropriate' for a family theme park.
Is this not utter madness? Where is all of these new puritan modesty coming from? Why is it okay for all of these skanky singers to writhe about in their video clips with practically nothing on, but it is somehow obscene for men to wear bathers that (a) you can actually swim in, as opposed to ugly board shorts that have all of that material flapping about, and (b) are actually quite sexy?
I admit I wear brief swimmers, although sadly not because I look sexy in them but because they are very comfortable. They feel close to swimming naked, which is a very nice feeling indeed. I highly recommend it.
So I really see nothing wrong with brief swimwear, and I don't understand the criticism. Yes, for many years the only men that wore brief swimmers tended to be fat and old, but that has definitely changed, in large part due to companies like Aussiebum which have aggressively marketed the new generation of briefs to younger men. The problem was not the swimmers, I once read Sean Ashby (founder of Aussiebum) explain, so much as it was the kind of men that were wearing them. He had a goal to get hot men wearing them again, and he seems to have succeeded.
I note that a lot of the criticism about Speedo-type swimmers seems to come from young women. I suggest that it is rooted in some sort of sexual anxiety or embarrassment. It seems to me that all of these demands that men cover up is also related to the demands that men should be also look more androgynous and look, in fact, less like men.
Still, it's not all doom and gloom: I also found this story about a beach in New Jersey that has recently lifted its 30 year Speedo ban (and also a ban on bare chested men walking the beach esplanade), so maybe there is hope.
