I know a guy who carries what resembles a large purse. He calls it his “man sack.” But even he can’t say it without giggling.
Older daughter’s current boyfriend carries his stuff in a WWII grenade bag. Convenient size, works for him.
How are we at 43 posts in and the name Jack Bauer has not come up once?
LL Bean has a great murse I bought for my SO. I tried to find it on their website but got bored. They also have “messenger bags” which would work.
When my wife asks me to hold her purse, I tend to tuck it into the crook of my elbow, and hold it like a running back carrying a football. Nothing unmanly about that. 
I carry a Jack Spade murse sometimes http://www.jackspade.com/messenger-bags/messenger-bags-for-men/nylon-canvas-port-case/NYRU0976,default,pd.html?dwvar_NYRU0976_color=001&start=10&cgid=bags, I’m a 45 year old adult, why the hell would I care what anyone else thinks?
I’m trying to talk my husband into getting a murse because I’m sick of him handing all of his crap to me to carry in my purse.
I’m slowly wearing him down.
I just had a vision of a Cathy Van Zeland purse with a bunch of tools hanging off of it by little chains
For the record, I am gay and have plenty of gay friends and i’ve never seen any of them use a purse. Several use messenger/laptop bags but they are professionals/IT people who honestly need them (and happen to be gay).
I honestly can’t say I’ve EVER seen a gay guy wearing a purse. So I don’t get why straight guys are so opposed to holding/owning a purse.
Right - but wouldn’t it be easier to put all that in one small bag than to constantly change it in and out of your pockets as you change clothes?
That Jack Spade murse looks really sharp. I would carry that. I like purses with clean lines.
Like I said, I prefer to just carry those things with me because then there isn’t a chance that I’ll forget the bag while I’m out and about. Although if I usually needed more than those few things on my person, I’d have no problem carrying a bag.
I’ve been carrying my stuff in a bag with a shoulder strap for years now. The first one wore out and I’m on my second. I got the idea from historical reenacting. In the 18th century men carried all manner of things in bags–there were hunting bags, haversacks, “market wallets,” carried over the shoulder and smaller bags and pouches hanging from the belt. There were few very few articles of clothing with pockets back then. (Women’s “pockets” were cloth bags worn on a ribbon tied around the waist, either on top of or under their skirts.)
Because of my job, I have to carry around two sets of keys. I also carry cash, credit cards, business cards, sometimes the check book, a couple of pens, tissues, shopping lists, receipts, etc. Carrying it all in a bag is far more convenient and comfortable that having all that crap stuck in various pockets.
When I first started carrying a small, rectangular brown leather bag, I had never seen the famed “European Carry-All” episode of Seinfeld, but I soon heard a LOT about it. Now, not so much.
Incidentally, my mother rid herself of her pocketbook about the time I adopted a bag.
My current bag, 8"x10", is a bit larger than the first one was, but it’s nothing compared to the thing my wife totes around with her. She could almost carry a change of clothes in there. . .
Honestly if I saw a guy wearing a purse I’d assume he was holding his wife’s for her- at clothing stores there is usually a small herd of bored-looking guys holding their wives’ purses while the ladies are in the changing rooms. I’ll hold my wife’s purse all the time.
I don’t have a problem with a ‘manbag’ per se, but generally would be a little :dubious: if a guy was holding it in an effeminite manner. When I have a messenger bag (like at the airport) I usually carry the strap diagonally with the bag part somewhat behind me, like a backpack.
Straight guys toting trendy purses is a little :dubious: to me. I mean, more power to them, but in general guys tend to lean toward utility over aesthetics. I have seen pretty flaming gay guys carry around trendy purses though.
You’re so vain
You always carry a purse around with you.
Men have all kinds of pockets built into their clothes all over the place. Most skirts don’t have pockets, and dresses with pockets are downright rare. So purses became a necessity for women, at least back in the days when they all wore dresses. The question goes back to why women’s clothes are designed without pockets (or if they are, the pockets are often not very functional). Obviously, a close-fitting dress designed with sleek lines could not include pockets, because they’d ruin the look.
In the 18th century, I think it was the other way around. Women had pockets with their gowns. But they weren’t built in. The pockets were two separate pouches worn around the waist on a cord, under the gown, which had slits in either side for access to the pockets. (Etymologically, a pocket is simply a ‘small pouch’.) This is why Lucy Locket lost her pocket, which is incomprehensible to modern people. Meanwhile, 18th-century men wore tight knee breeches that could not incorporate pockets without looking dorky, and they went without. So maybe men carried purses then. Or else they always wore coats with pockets sewn in?
It has amazing pockets too. I always carry it when I travel, my passport, tix, iphone, etc. all have their own pocket so I can never have to search for anything.
And even now that women wear pants, women’s pants often have no pockets, or scarcely functional pockets, still necessitating a purse. If men’s pants were made that way, dudes would refuse to wear them. That’s all it takes to set up a gender dichotomy for purses.