To my readers......

If you want to contact me use the link in my profile which you can now reach via the new 'contact page' below

Thanks for visiting Mitchell's blog

(Oct 28th 2018)

Sunday, 25 December 2016

Vintage Season 9 / Men Sharing Clothes No 22 - No flannel please!

Darryl Powers by Champion
 You will recognise the plunging shape of this G-string/Pouch with attached side-string from my last post. The material shows an astonishing amount of detail of this cute guy's uncut cock but it looks like it's made out of flannel or towelling. Easy to wash I suppose, but flannel is usually thick, coarse material, not ultra comforting down there for the boys! And that fluffy surface, it's not very sexy is it?

Perhaps I ought to qualify that, I am sure there will be people who find it incredibly sexy, nappy fanciers maybe, but your average man on the Clapham Omnibus by and large, I suspect, not. I suppose it's possible that all that white stuff behind Darryl is snow not sand and this is the studio's idea of winter drawers........ (and that's my sole concession to the Christmas spirit!).

Tuck Powell by Champion
Here's Tuck Powell looking very sweet on the beach. I featured him also in my last post wearing a similar pouch, in fact it's entirely possible that it's the same garment. If so, the black and white photo somehow conceals that furry texture which is clearly the same here as in the picture of Darryl above.
Luckily yellow is my favourite colour.

Jim Johnston by Champion
I don't recognise this model at first but I certainly recognise his fluffy G-string. It may have also occurred to you by now that there is also a striking similarity between his pendulous cock and those of the two men who precede him in this post (and for that matter Rock Granger in my last post). I always thought most American men were circumcised but not these four. It's even more unusual to find 4 men with cocks of near identical sizes and how clever of Champion to capture them all in identical states of arousal, with just the penis tip showing forth.
Or is there something fishy going on here?

Unidentified model by Champion
Another flannelled jock, another droopy cock.
Actually this guy looks the best so far in this parade. He wears his G-string well although you will perceive a certain bagginess around the bulge.

Tore Lind by Champion
Well at least Tore Lind is wearing something different - or is he? The colour looks different but that drooping cock looks suspiciously similar to his companions above. Click to expand the picture and the G-string material also looks like it just might be some more flannel. I don't suppose Champion made new pouches for every model (aye, keep it as a souvenir, lad) so it wouldn't be surprising if they faded in repeated washes would it? (Oh aye lad never you mind, we always wash 'em between shoots, trust me). Of course the faded yellow effect could simply be a colour cast caused by the artificial lighting/flash.

Wally McCray by Champion
It's clear that all these models are wearing the same flannel (ugh!) G-string and it looks suspiciously as though Champion have not just contented themselves with augmenting the model's natural assets in the conventional way (with hidden rings and under-padding to push things forward, say). It looks like they have actually provided a penish, (sorry too much Christmas sherry!) Ahem, they have provided a penis-shaped insert to take the place the model's own contours.
Hardly flattering to these seemingly virile chaps. 

The implication is that not only are they sharing the same clothing, sorry flannel, but also sharing the same 'inserts'. We can speculate as to whether they have to insert their own tools inside the substitutes.... more cleanliness issues?

Actually Wally's pouch, above, is not obviously padded in the same way, but it does look somewhat unreal. If you scan all these images you can make a case for there being two different inserts

What is more interesting here is that Wally gives us a sight of his undercarriage and if you look closely down there (concentrate lads!) it is apparent that the material of the G-string does not continue underneath his groin. If there is any back string at all anchoring his pouch, it's well hidden from us, recessed inside his crack (concentrate!) So instead of the pouch supporting his balls as underwear would, there seems to be a pocket at the bottom, an extension, so to speak, into which his balls can dangle together with his droopy cock, fake or otherwise.
(see also Rock Granger in my previous post)

Unknown Model by Champion
 This is the consequence of that feature, a pouch that is 25% bigger than your brain would expect it to be. It just looks wrong, although this is a more extreme example than the other Champion images I have posted (both here and in the preceding post). The 'pocket' seems to have become a separate entity and you wonder if there is anything at all inside it that belongs to the model. You can see a similar tendency in some of the other pictures as well. I think this is another reason (alongside the flannel material) why I have always had an instinctive aversion to these garments, though I never spotted this cause before.

Having said that, I really have enjoyed putting these images together as a serial example of men wearing shared intimate clothing. I would be surprised if they had been washed between every shoot, but it's a nice control and direction scenario anyway. The use of an 'insert' only makes the embarrassment factor more acute - for the streetwise and naive models alike. Delicious.

The paradox is, why go to the trouble of trying to make cock and ball so artificially visible when the whole purpose of a G-string is to conceal them? And why make the G-strings out of coarse flannelling? Answers on a postcard please!

There's a 2005 book available called 'Champion' (Goliath Press) with lots more images like this.

More next time
Read this series from Part 1

There are more examples of vintage men sharing posing gear in Part 3 and Part 10 
 of this series or click on the 'sharing' label below for the whole group of articles

No comments: