Thoughts on Lululemon shorts? Good or are there better alternatives for lower prices?

>>18473629 (OP)
What top would go with this?

>>18473629 (OP)
Don't wear polye-
>checks webm
Stop posting gay shit for the sake of posting gay shit faggot

>>18473629 (OP)
...are those shorts or are those underwear? like don't get me wrong, below the knee shorts look awful. i'd argue even knee-length is still slightly too long. shorts should be above the knee, yes. but these look like fucking boxers. we've gone too far in the other direction

>>18473749
Is something like this better?

>>18473764
Why does he always do that stupid thing where he spreads his cheeks? It's very unattractive. I say this as a top.

ngl an asian male would mog him

>>18473792
i went back to collect new content and he deleted all his videos, so it seems like he’s ashamed at the least

>>18473792
i think he's just trying to be funny but it's just extremely stupid not funny

>>18473629 (OP)
Short-inseam shorts are fine (3", 4", 5" inseams) but those ones are not cut right, legs are too tight and the fabric is puffy around the bum

Plenty of (typically running oriented) brands have better short-inseam shorts than those, otherwise wear regular (7" inseam) athletic shorts, never longer

>>18473629 (OP)
I want him

>>18473629 (OP)
What is the fabric ?

>>18473629 (OP)
I can literally see his Norwood 2 it's over for him.

>>18475408
OBSESSED

I got some half tights from them and the crotch seam ripped after 2 wears. I bought the size they recommended for a 30 waist.

So, I'd have to say they're overpriced for the quality.