How little is to little?

[fourof14]

I just ordered a, Marcuse Arrest Me. I’m not sure I can wear it in public, but I’m okay with that if I can’t. I know the laws on public decency are different in different places, but how little coverage is too little?

[Mazda3mps]

i think at the minimum, should cover front and back completely? could be low waisted but not below the butt crack

[Scottiebum]

i think at the minimum, should cover front and back completely? could be low waisted but not below the butt crack

I would agree with that, low at the front but should be trimmed at the least. Unless a dark colour probably double lined at the front.

[BJE]

I’ve looked into this some. In the US I’d say that the general rule is that you have to keep your genitals covered. However some states and certainly many local areas are going to require that the genitals and butt be opaquely covered. There are some statements saying that the pubic area must be covered. That’s a tricky one because the pubic area is defined as the lower abdomen extending to the genitals. Any low cut swim brief or woman’s bikini is going to show some or most of the pubic area. That’s one reason I shave my pubic area. If pubic hair is showing then it’s going to be more obvious that the pubic area is not covered than if the skin is bare in my opinion.

To what extent the butt must be covered may be up to personal interpretation but I don’t like my crack to show, though the very top of it likely shows a little and I don’t like my lower outer butt cheeks to show either.

In this photo the waistband is down nearly to the base of my penis so almost all of my pubic area is showing but it’s no different than what you would see on any man or woman wearing a low cut suit so I doubt there’d be a problem.

[BJE]

Here’s an example

Under Idaho indecent exposure laws, any person is guilty of this crime if he or she willfully and lewdly:
• Exposes his or her genitals, in any public place, or in any place where there is present another person or persons who are offended or annoyed by the act.

Utah lewdness laws on the other hand prohibit this among other things.

Performing any of the following acts in a public place either in front of another person who is at least 14 years old, or under circumstances likely to cause affront or alarm:

Exposing his or her genitals, the female breast below the top of the areola, the buttocks, the anus, or the pubic area.

Utah’s law prohibits exposure much more than Idaho’s law. Note the buttocks, anus, pubic area and woman’s breasts.

Idaho is a free nipple state and woman can legally go bare breasted anywhere men can though I’d suspect local rules in most places in Idaho would prohibit it.

[yamamay]

In North Carolina there is state supreme court precedent that interprets "private parts" in the state's indecency laws as not including buttocks, for the reason that they don't intend to outlaw thongs. So exposure of the butt (except the anus) is not a crime in NC, although there are areas that explicitly outlaw thongs (Kure beach, Carolina beach). So theoretically all that is necessary to meet the standards of legality is not showing your dick, balls, anus, or vagina. Women can legally go topfree as well, but again, there are districts where this is restricted.

[Scottiebum]

Presume this is a thong, too small at the front? It does cover everything!

[sandford50]

Presume this is a thong, too small at the front? It does cover everything!

Although it’s a photoshop manip, it’s still a hot picture.

[chicagoswim]

Presume this is a thong, too small at the front? It does cover everything!

Although it’s a photoshop manip, it’s still a hot picture.

I’ve seen that picture several times before and I don’t think it was a photoshopped one. I’ll see if I can find the original source.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BJE]

Presume this is a thong, too small at the front? It does cover everything!

Although it’s a photoshop manip, it’s still a hot picture.

I’d say the ab definition has been color enhanced. It looks a little fake.

[Scottiebum]

Presume this is a thong, too small at the front? It does cover everything!

Although it’s a photoshop manip, it’s still a hot picture.

I’d say the ab definition has been color enhanced. It looks a little fake.

Yeah, I can see that now you have pointed it out, is the pouch genuine do you think?

[BJE]

Although it’s a photoshop manip, it’s still a hot picture.

I’d say the ab definition has been color enhanced. It looks a little fake.

Yeah, I can see that now you have pointed it out, is the pouch genuine do you think?

I think the pouch is genuine. I just think the ab definition was enhanced by makeup before the picture or by computer afterwards. I know that for shirtless magazine photos they airbrush the abs to highlight them and on the US tv show Dancing With the Stars the men’s abs are airbrushed to look better on camera when they are shirtless.

[MrMusik]

Presume this is a thong, too small at the front? It does cover everything!

To answer the actual question:
No, not too small at the front. Rather, it looks just right for this fellow.

Is it skimpy? Sure, no question about that. Too skimpy? I guess that depends on how confident you are.

[chicagoswim]

I’d say the ab definition has been color enhanced. It looks a little fake.

Yeah, I can see that now you have pointed it out, is the pouch genuine do you think?

I think the pouch is genuine. I just think the ab definition was enhanced by makeup before the picture or by computer afterwards. I know that for shirtless magazine photos they airbrush the abs to highlight them and on the US tv show Dancing With the Stars the men’s abs are airbrushed to look better on camera when they are shirtless.

Oh makeup, airbrushing and post editing is most certainly used! When I hear people say “photoshopped” I think of extreme manipulations or turning a sunga into a thong for example. I use photoshop and it’s amazing and can do anything and everything! Any professional photograph will likely have had some post editing manipulation done, no question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sandford50]

Presume this is a thong, too small at the front? It does cover everything!

I stumbled on the original picture of this guy showing the unedited version. Still a hot hunk despite the photo manip.

[MrMusik]

I stumbled on the original picture of this guy showing the unedited version. Still a hot hunk despite the photo manip.

Dang... I love pierced nipples. Too bad his are not actually pierced.

Though this pic looks a lot better without all that "ab enhancement" in the modified pic.

[chicagoswim]

Presume this is a thong, too small at the front? It does cover everything!

I stumbled on the original picture of this guy showing the unedited version. Still a hot hunk despite the photo manip.

That’s a pretty good photoshop job they did! Even added extra water drops and enhanced the size of the bulge. All very hard to tell unless you’re able to compare both side by side. Color was a little over saturated but everything else was pretty flawless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BJE]

The unedited version looks a lot more natural.

[blueflinch]

I actually prefer the unedited red suit - I think it's incredibly sexy. There's more "hang" than in the edited one. More mystery - that can be sexy.

[fourof14]

Thanks all: my take way to this discussion is, wear it. If no one complains, your good. Really what brought the question to mind was the Marcuse suit, Arrest Me. I bought the suit and wondered whether it might be to small? I wore it by mistake yesterday, and no one cared. Not that there were a lot of ppl, and the ones there were, were in small Speedos. The suit felt great in the water, and I’m glad I bought it.
I’ve enjoyed the discussion, and learned a lot. Again.