Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Pics of you and your messenger/man-bag
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Pics of you and your messenger/man-bag - Page 3

post #31 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magician View Post
Seriously?


Quote:
Originally Posted by kwilkinson View Post
+1
For reals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lysol View Post
Don't slip on the ice when you're dropping off my mail.
Exactly right, it's called a messenger bag for a reason. It has a specific function and therefore a pedigree (meaning it conforms to certain rules), whereas shapeless blobs of man-purse leather have neither. Hence why the former is such a classic which will never disappear and the latter is inevitably an evanescent trend.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewRyanWallace View Post
This screams of sexual-identity insecurity.
No more than deploring men wearing dresses and high heels. If I had sexual identity issues, I wouldn't be posting on a forum dedicated to style/fashion in the first place.

However, it's clear that totes and purple leather purses are effeminate, as they are reminiscent of the bags that women carry. Simple as that, no two ways about it. Now, whether we should encourage their use or not despite this is arguably subjective. However, I am not interested in seeing armies of men on the streets looking like this:



It's embarrassing, frankly, and I cringe when I see it because these guys (not the Hilton sisters) are the objects of so much ridicule.

Quote:
Also, what are you wearing dude?
Workout gear. Hope that doesn't blow your mind too much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperBobo View Post
one of mine, thrifted greek leather bag, damn heavy.[/IMG]
Very nice.

EDIT: the green one, as well.
post #32 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by holymadness View Post
Jesus, there are a shamefully large number of man-purses in this thread. If you're going to have a messenger bag, get one with a wide strap, rectangular in shape, brown or black in colour, no handles like a woman's shopping tote, and large enough to hold at least a letter size file folder. Anything else screams vagina. See how it's done (taken just now):




Second pic true to colour.

EDIT: Also, don't wear it over one shoulder, Christ Almighty.

Ditto. There are a lot of fucking purses in this thread.
post #33 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by holymadness View Post

However, it's clear that totes and purple leather purses are effeminate, as they are reminiscent of the bags that women carry. Simple as that, no two ways about it. Now, whether we should encourage their use or not despite this is arguably subjective. However, I am not interested in seeing armies of men on the streets looking like this:

.

My aubergine bag could fit your fat ass in it. It's not a purse, it's technically luggage.
post #34 of 188
That thrifted one is great, Bobo. Nice find!
post #35 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCal2NYC View Post
My aubergine bag could fit your fat ass in it. It's not a purse, it's technically luggage.
It could be the size of the moon and it still wouldn't be masculine.
post #36 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by holymadness View Post
It could be the size of the moon and it still wouldn't be masculine.

I don't think everyone here is as concerned with their appearance defining their masculinity as you are.... errr... especially SoCal
post #37 of 188
There's nothing wrong with Socal's bags. The only bags I really despise are those cheap canvas library tote bags that I see hipsters carry on their shoulder while holding on to a short ass strap as if it's going to fall off.
post #38 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by holymadness View Post
It could be the size of the moon and it still wouldn't be masculine.

+1
post #39 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperBobo View Post
one of mine, thrifted greek leather bag, damn heavy.



I really like this messenger. Nice looking.
post #40 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by holymadness View Post
It could be the size of the moon and it still wouldn't be masculine.

Clothing has no gender.
post #41 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by holymadness View Post
Exactly right, it's called a messenger bag for a reason. It has a specific function and therefore a pedigree (meaning it conforms to certain rules), whereas shapeless blobs of man-purse leather have neither. Hence why the former is such a classic which will never disappear and the latter is inevitably an evanescent trend.
I don't deliver mail or messages nor do I want to give the appearance of such in most settings. I feel you would be hard pressed to find a true gentleman who believes that the pedigree of a messenger bag, no matter how much it looks as if you skinned the cow yourself, says anything other than that you're an unrefined boar of a man for finding refinement in an postman's device. FWIW, I think your bag and SuperBobo's bags look great. I have a similiar bag myself. I don't give a eff about being a true gentlemen which is why I would never use "pedigree" as such an empty argument. You wouldn't find me wearing a messenger bag with with anything other than a pair of jeans and a sweater, however, and your opinion that it's really the only masculine bag is terribly misguided. Additionally, you might want to visit awhile before assuming that SoCal cares anything about being subject to an "evanescent trend."
post #42 of 188
New bag

post #43 of 188
For those of you with manbags (ie without shoulder straps), what do you do when you need both of your hands for something? It just seems inconvient.
post #44 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaTionS View Post
For those of you with manbags (ie without shoulder straps), what do you do when you need both of your hands for something? It just seems inconvient.

I can't speak for all but I put my bag down.
post #45 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by slycedbred View Post
New bag


My bowling ball came with a bag a lot like that one.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Pics of you and your messenger/man-bag