Wetlook World ForumCurrent time: Thu 18/04/24 06:18:50 GMT |
Message # 24639.3.1.1.1.1 Subject: Re: To me, it's not "real" wetlook ... Date: Wed 06/09/06 07:40:30 GMT Name: Telcontar Email: mrnemesis@ntlworld.com |
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
|
Count me in as another ... I find bikinis boring anyway, and girls just look really odd wearing both a bikini *and* normal clothes. And it's cheating. I want to see proper clothes :P I don't mind if I can't see through the outer clothes to bare skin or underwear, but seeing a bathing suit underneath just looks like a cop out. I also imagine it feels a little different, as part of your body is shield from the feel of wet loose, clingy fabric by a stretchy, tight material that cannot cling.
Then again, some have argued that as more and more girls do wear a bikini top as regular underwear, it is now pretty much normal clothing. But I would still imagine that this is normally for when they think they might get wet...
As for why swimwear under normal clothes? My own guesses: Skin and swimwear dries faster than regular clothing; if you are wearing a bra or no underwear, you cannot take off your cold, wet top as you'd be in your bra (which may be translucent) or half-naked. It gives you more options as you can remove your to swim properly with less drag in the water. Or to tan. All without looking indecent.
There's nothing unnatural or bad about it, sadly, no blame we can place on any girls ... But sadly it just doesn't match what we want to see. |
In reply to Message (24639.3.1.1.1) Re: To me, it's not "real" wetlook ...
By Bostonwet - Wed 06/09/06 06:06:50 GMT I argee, it`s not the wetlook I like if there`s a bathing suit involved in any way. Ban bathing suits! |
In reply to Message (24639.3.1.1) Re: To me, it's not "real" wetlook ...
By wet gooner - Wed 06/09/06 05:42:57 GMT same here,i rather have a bra underneith,than bathingsuit any day |
In reply to Message (24639.3.1) To me, it's not "real" wetlook ...
By Wet Guy - Wed 06/09/06 03:15:44 GMT In my opinion, there's no point in wetlook if there is a bathing suit underneath. The whole point is to get wet in your clothes - undergarments included. A chick in a pair of white see-though pants with a little thong under them and a tee shirt with a skimpy bra with nipples showing saying "I'm all wet!" is 10X sexier than the same chick with a bikini underneath.
One man's opinion ... |
In reply to Message (24639.3) Re: Bathing suits under clothes??
By courier - splash@hot.ee Wed 06/09/06 00:31:11 GMT I have seen same thing at poolparties too, its just more 'normal' for them to get wet. When you have swimsuit on, its just like doing that in correct way |
In reply to Message (24639) Bathing suits under clothes??
By chriswet85 - Tue 05/09/06 20:20:12 GMT One thing I've started to notice more and more recently is that a lot of girls, when visiting amusement parks or other such places, will wear a bikini underneath their clothes (You can see it tied behind their neck). The odd thing is, that they have no intention of taking their clothes off for the wet rides, so what is the point? Also, as a ride operator on a ride where you can get VERY wet, I have heard many people comment to their friends as they get off the ride things like "Look how soaked I am! I'm not wearing a bathing suit under this!" Or, "good thing I had a bathing suit on under this!". These people were not just splashed, or sprayed...they were SOAKED head to toe, through and through. Why does it matter if you are wearing a bathing suit or not if A) you're wearing your clothes anyway and B) you're not taking your clothes off after you've gotten soaked. This seems to be quite common, at least from where I'm from (Long Island, NY), even some of my friends do it. Personally, I dont really care either way, its just something I've noticed. Any ladies of the forum care to comment on why people do this? |
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs:
(you can change amount)
|
[ This page took 0.036 seconds to generate ]