Why aren't all my boxer shorts the same size?

I guess it's a pipe dream, thinking someone can solve the major problems facing the world when two manufacturers can't agree on what constitutes large in men's boxer shorts. While I can't do much about fixing up the world, I suppose my personal problem could be solved by giving up on Hanes and Fruit of the Loom and buying one of those designer brands. Spending the few extra buck wouldn't make or break me but it seems kind of foolish when I seldom would start a conversation by saying, "I'm wearing Calvin Klein shorts."
Then again, it might be fun seeing the expressions on the faces of those who received this information. I'm sure "senility" would be said in whispers.
Anyway, all this came up when we drove over to Target this morning. That was my second mistake. The first was agreeing to go out at all. So after walking a couple of miles we arrived at the place where hundreds of shorts were hanging on metal racks. Two of them were packets of large size Hanes. Two lousy packets and I didn't like either of them. Each packet contains three pairs and not even one of the six pleased me. I may not do much talking about the shorts I'm wearing but I'm particular about the design.
So even though every pair at home was Hanes, I checked out Fruit of the Loom.
Both firms consider 38-40 to be large. That's where agreement ends. I found that out after buying two packs of the Loom and opening them at home. A pair of large size Hanes shorts is what you might expect for a man my size. A pair of large Fruit of the Loom shorts could do double duty as a sideshow tent for Ringling Brothers.
So this goes down as the third day this week when little writing will get done, and it's only Wednesday. I am well equipped with shorts, however. As for the problems of the world? Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn. Clark Gable said that when he was living in an Akron boardinghouse and spending his days building tires in a rubber factory. Or maybe it was a few years after that, I forget. I'm sure he said it, though, and probably more than once. He totally destroyed the undershirt business in this country by not wearing one. Where he stood on shorts, I don't know.

http://www.dickstodghill.com/