I have an old copy of Playboy magazine from 1966, and it's filled with all sorts of interesting art. Here's a nicely-drawn sketch of Dad parading around in his tighty-whities, and as you can see, good manners insist that he keep his "unmentionable body parts" strapped in to the max--the flatter, the better.
This next picture is really something. The image of the all-American man with slim, long legs is understandable, but this is just stretching things all out of proportion!
The design looks like a 1950's advertisement. Although I must say due to my age, the 60's would be more appropriate. His legs are definitely way too long.
ReplyDeleteThe design DOES look like the 1950's---I'll bet this artist started his career at that time, and then just kept cranking out pictures of praying-mantis-type men, far into the 1960's....
Delete...and I just notices the price $1.50 for each the brief and the t shirt. Now that same stuff depending on the brand name it goes anywhere from $17.50 to $35.50 a whopping 1000 to 3000% increase if my math serves me right. Amazing, but maybe not, we are talking around 57 to 60+ years ago. Oh well!!!
DeleteYou're right--those prices they charged over 60 years ago are absoltely incredible!
DeleteI'd love to see you tweak that first drawing showing Dad getting some relief from that 'strapped in' feeling!
ReplyDeleteLOL--If I do, I'll put it on my Tumblr page!
Deletebut the rendering of the muscular definition otherwise, particularly the thighs and calves in the legs, definitely make it worth a LONG look for me. I mean, I don't really pay much attention to a dick on a hunk of MAN-CUNT like that!
ReplyDeleteNo matter what the size, a man-cunt's dick is just one more thing to toy around with, so it probably merits SOME attention!
ReplyDelete