Who wants to hear about Paul Daniels' pants?

Whoever knew that men's underpants were so important? I certainly didn't until I read this highly entertaining article in The Independent this morning.

Apparently, for the first time in ages, women aren't purchasing the majority of men's pants (hooray!) and men themselves are becoming more exacting consumers (good for them). But despite variations in the size of men's tackles, there are no plans to adopt a "cup size" scheme:

There is one delicate area of pant advancement where men are not yet ready to go – universal package sizing. Stretch fit, says Ruth Steven, marketing manager at Jockey, is currently essential because the same waist measurement must fit a great variety of crotch dimensions. "There are no actual pouch sizes, as there are with women's bra cup sizes. We have discussed it, but I don't think it will happen. Men are a bit shyer than women. Can you imagine having to ask for a double-A size?'"

Quite. Unlike breast size, with penis size bigger is nearly always regarded as better, and being on the small side is a cause for serious embarrassment. The big difference is that with breasts, everybody can see what size they are and judge you accordingly as either "frigid" or a "nasty slut" if you fall outside of average. It's a good thing that men's penises aren't on display because they'd go through hell if they were. Sorry, where was I? Oh yes, pants.

I once bought my last boyfriend a pair of Superman Y-fronts and was highly amused when he actually wore them on quite a regular basis. And where I live in North London, there is a ridiculous fashion for young men to wear baggy pants so low their entire arse is hanging out, so you can't help but see their pants (usually tartan print boxers for some reason. I mean, if you're going to have your boxers hanging out, surely Calvin Klein is the way to go? Tartan just makes it look as if your mum still buys your pants, which I'm sure isn't the look they're going for) Other than that, I've never given men's pants much thought. I certainly don't have any "aesthetic preferences" as long as they're clean. Generally, if I've got to the point where I can see a man's pants, I'm much more interested in their contents. Frankly, he could be wearing a loincloth and I wouldn't care just as long as it was coming off. This makes me wonder why women's lingerie is considered so important for impressing men. Are men really that bothered by it? If a woman is posing in lingerie I can understand a preference for it to be of the sexy kind, but surely in real life, if the average guy has a real half naked woman in his bed, he couldn't give a toss whether she's wearing a full-cup or a balconette bra.

This article also contains the revelation that according to Jockey, the average British woman will spend £20,350 on underwear in her life, compared to just £1,200 for men. That is A LOT of money. I don't really understand how the "average woman" could manage to spend so much on smalls. Assuming that she lives to the age of 80, that's £254 a year.

Be warned though, this article definitely strays into Too Much Information territory with some of the celebrity interviews. There is the hilarious revelation that Blur, instead of making crazy M&M-related celebrity demands, used to request a new pair of M&S pants every day when they were on tour, but there's also the following from Paul Daniels:

I wear whatever Debbie buys me: a vast mixture of Y-fronts and boxers, whatever's on top of the pile, and different brands. I don't have a favourite, or a lucky pair – what's inside is lucky, and that's me.

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWW!!!!!!! Well, at least he didn't describe his tackle as "magic".

Only the ball should bounce

Sportswear pisses me off. Specifically, it pisses me off because of its unavailability. But all sports shops have women's sections, I hear you cry! All labels provide women's clothing! Well, it depends on your definition of "sports" and what your requirements are. Women's sportswear generally consists of silly little lycra numbers available in a size 8-14 - perfect for gym bunnies on macrobiotic diets who do yoga classes, chug vile probiotic yoghurt drinks and shun carbs; not so perfect for someone who competes in martial arts on a national level, who is disinterested in shaking her booty on a cross-trainer and whose enormous jugs need support.

Despite exhaustive searching, I have never found a sports bra in my size. According to Nike (whose lovely dri-fit tops I have to admit I am a bit of a fan of, so sue me) a woman should be able to exercise in a "supportive" top consisting of a rubber band underneath her bust and non-adjustable straps. That's perfect if you're 5ft8 and a 34A. But what if you're 5ft1 and a 30F? Well, Berlei finally saw the gap in the market for big sports bras a few years ago and started manufacturing their range up to a G-cup. They ran a memorable billboard campaign featuring Anna Kournikova and the slogan "Only the Ball Should Bounce". Thanks for reminding me how important it is to look after my boobs, but your bras still don't fit me. For starters, their back sizes start at a 32, but more importantly, the straps simply don't adjust short enough. I'd have to be at least four inches taller to wear a Berlei bra. Apparently, only tall women require sports bras. Here is what I've had to do to get a suitable sports bra: Buy one of these which comes in a suitable size and then take it here for the straps to be altered. Total cost per bra = £55. Boy is being short with big jugs an expensive business.

Women's trainers are not designed for running. If you go into a sports shop to buy a pair of trainers the first thing you'll notice is that the women's section is miniscule. The next thing you'll notice is that there are very few styles that are actually suitable for any kind of sport, as opposed to being simply fashion accessories. The next thing you'll notice after that is that if like me you're fortunate enough to be a size 5 or below, you're better off shopping in the boys' section - no VAT and they're actually designed for running in! Oh, and by the way, girls' trainers don't exist AT ALL. You can get cute things in pink for toddlers, but once your little girl is past the age of about eight, good luck finding her anything that isn't obviously designed for boys. No wonder teenage girls tend to lose interest in sport - they haven't anything to wear for it.

The cut of women's sportswear is not at all suitable for an athletic physique. I trailed round several sports shops last autumn to try and find a nice, comfortable yet stylish hoodie to go running in, and found that I could barely fit my arms into my usual size - the sleeves were cut for a skinny model rather than for an athlete. I had to go two sizes larger before I could move my arms comfortably, meaning that it was far too big on my comparatively slim torso. It's not as if my biceps are freakishly enormous - I'm a martial artist, not a weightlifter. Further evidence that the most strenuous exercise that sportswear companies think us girls are capable of is pilates. I never did buy a hoodie.

So, a sporty woman can look forward to chafing from ill-fitting clothing; droopy, stretchmarked breasts from ill-fitting bras; and joint and back problems from dodgy trainers. Great! It's enough to make anyone hang up their sweatpants in favour of a date with a large tub of Ben & Jerrys.

In short, women's sportsgear is all well and good if all you want from your hi-performance lycra mesh dri-fit hi-tech overpriced little spandex outfit is simply something to pose in which shows off your abs to full effect. But if you want something that's actually suitable for doing sports in, good luck finding it.