"Switzerland is to allow female members of the army to wear women's underwear for the first time in an effort to boost recruitment, local media report.

Under the current system, the standard uniform issued to military recruits includes only men's underwear."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56581129

I’ve been reading this today. Do you think they mean base layers and thermals? Surely women weren’t stopped from wearing their own bra and knickers??

Boxers or Jockeys?

they should have waited until Thursday.

Yes but their chosen colours clashed with the camouflage.

From this quote it sounds like they're only talking about underpants, perhaps confused in translation by the American terminology where that's the more normal use of the word 'underwear'.
Clearly only talking about below the waist garments, which were apparently so presumably they were only issued with boxer shorts.

Would this actually have been enforced though? Surely they wouldm't stop women, or men, for that matter, wearing whatever type of underwear they're most comfortable with, even if they had to supply it themselves?

Black lace? That goes with everything!

Did they mean thermal stuff? Long-jones? I sometimes wonder about Mormon undies. Loosey goosey.

These female (Israeli) soldiers do not appear to be wearing mens' underwear unless, that is, fashions in the services have changed recently.

https://static.timesofisrael.com/www...9.51.55-PM.png

Picture credit: https://www.timesofisrael.com/female...litary-assets/

There appears to be an extra leg in that picture, not that most males would notice.

"Female military assets"? Is there a typo?

in belgium i hear its the other way round

Very odd as my son had to provide his own underwear and socks which had to be black, grey or dark green when he did his Army recruitment service. The only underwear he was given were thermals. I don't envisage a huge rise in female recruits no matter what underwear is on offer.

We never know.

It looks like a job where people have some security e.g. - financial, not easy to be fired (I suppose) etc. I don't know, if they advertise it properly they might have a surprise. But I guess one has to like this kind of stuff...

if you shift your attention to the upper parts, you will see that there are 4 women, so, no extra leg...

How can you tell that fourth person is a woman? No underwear on display, a white top and one leg in dark trousers.

They may well all be of any gender and just dressed and formed as women, but the fourth person definitely has long hair, which would hardly be welcomed for a men soldier in Israeli army (unless he is an orthodox, but their hairstyle with the head covering is even more distinct). Not a proof, as well as the photo itself, since it could be easily doctored in parts or as a whole.

On the Swiss Army note: I have a wild guess, that many potential women recruits would much more appreciate a clearer career prospects and promotion of equal opportunities, rather than someone messing with their underwear. Schweizer Army is not famous for a very diverse senior stuff (is there actually any woman in their higher command?), so no wonder women with ambitions are not excited about the idea of recruitment.

Same for my son. I’m pretty sure the female recruits would also have had to provide their own underwear.
The article must be referring to the thermals.

Like you I don’t really think it was the underwear preventing more female recruits so I can’t see this making much difference to the numbers.

TIS!

Tom

My wife prefers men's jockeys!

Tom

My stepson did two tours in the Balkans as a an (armed) peace-keeper, which counted towards his military service, so was out at 27, PLUS he got paid really well for doing so!

Tom