I can best relate to the Vietnam War era, as I was drafted then and have read many books and internet blogs from those who served.
Yes, the 11-Bravo (Infantry) job could be miserable. Companies could be inserted into mission via helicopter and "hump the boonies" in hot environments for patrols which lasted days, weeks and even up to a month with only the clothes in which they were deployed. And if 40 to 50 lbs of gear wasn't enough, most every night meant digging in with an entrenchment shovel. This wasn't boys scout camp!
Your comments regarding cock-heads was on-point. For a short period of time the Army issued BDU trousers with zipper flys rather than the customary button closures. It shouldn't take a whole lot of imagination to understand that dicks usually found a way to escape the flys of boxers and all day contact with a cock-head rubbing against a zipper wasn't all that pleasurable. Wearing a jockstrap certainly prevented this, but on the other hand trying to wear a sweaty jock continuously for days on end would have no doubt rotted both the jock and schlong away. Briefs were obviously an improvement but they also got sweaty and otherwise raunchy so many infantry grunts chose to go commando, in more than one way.
Once again, from personal experience I can tell you that the Army did not issue jockstraps for basic training, at least in 1967. For some reason there was a shortage of military briefs and I don't have a clue why Uncle Sam didn't simply send a truck to the nearest JC Penny's, Sears or Wards and simply grab some Fruit of the Looms, but they didn't. When I went through the initial uniform issuance line they had a board displaying both olive drab briefs and olive drab boxers, and some wise ass probably civilian stores clerk asked everyone whether they wanted briefs of boxers and when I am sure nearly everyone said briefs, the jerk said sorry we are out of briefs and handed me 4 one-size fits all baggy boxers. They were off white and not even olive drab.
I didn't have exactly low-hangers but when my boys got warm, they dropped down and would flop a bit against my inner thighs. I had worn a jockstrap for exercise starting in 7th grade, through high school and college and the boxers offered exactly zero support. I won't say it was painful, but I was uncomfortable when I had to do the few minutes of nude exercises during my visits to the military entrance examining center.
That is why I bought and wore a jock during basic training. I rinsed it out daily in the shower, hung it from my bedpost to dry and sent it with my other gear for the weekly laundry service.
Wrangler, you asked about the modified BIKE jock military specifications. You are correct that I do not have them. If you will look at my July 2022 posting in this thread you will see a photo of a small sized MIL_SPEC BIKE #10 jock, one likely issued to a Marine Corps draftee. It is my understanding that this is the exact same jockstrap sold for junior-high PE classes, with the exception that it had more threads in the waistband and the pouch was about 1/2" longer.
I previously posted that the military had a 22 page long specification for jockstraps. I don't know if it is on-line but it is probably available in some repository in a university library. I am confident you would be totally bored to read such a document. It no doubt specifies among other things, thread size, rubber fraction, number and style of stitches per inch in the seams, pouch and leg strap dimensions, testing results for waistband elastic etc. I can relate this because as a manufacturer's rep I once received a bid request from a school district including 100 dozen jockstraps with about 6 pages of similar specifications. I sent the inquiry to my distributor who directed it to Kendall, manyfacturer of BIKE. They looked at the specifications, sort of laughed and advised that these were the specifications for their BIKE 10 jock. I made the sale!
Till next time, Bob
