AFAICT, Patagonia had a monopoly on boxers that are stretchy synthetic microfiber, but also baggy. They had a recycling program for them as well.

There is nothing else like them. Other boxers that are stretchy are almost always skin tight. I think I found some loose fitting ones but they were still short on breathing space.

There are baggy boxers but they are always cotton and often ridgid. But even the cotton stretchy baggy ones are a non-starter for me because cotton absorbs sweat and then keeps you soggy.

It’s just baffling that Patagonia was the only supplier to figure out how to design boxers properly, baggy and moisture-wicking, because not everyone wants their male equipment strapped in with ball-huggers. Some of us want Prince Albert breathing freely and swinging dry in the wind. Even more baffling that Patagonia decided to ditch a great product that they effectively had a monopoly on. Disappointing as well that they made them less baggy in the last year of production.

I had some baggy silk boxers. The rigidity caused the fabric to pull along a couple lines when sitting down and the stress led to a short life due to blown out crotches. Hence why they need to be stretchy despite being baggy. Patagonia’s microfibers were about as smooth as silk as well.

Am I wrong about Patagonia’s monopoly? Is there another comparable product?