IMHO this is one of the best (if not the best) bottomless pictures I have seen on here. I had to think why and what I have come up with is the hemline of the shirt is well above the coochie. ( I believe that is the first time I have ever used the word coochie. I guess I picked it up from reading Gloria’s books.) Many of the bottomless pictures we see on here just barely leave the coochie uncovered.
Now I realize we are limited in what photos we can find on the internet to post on here. So I am not proposing this as a NWO rule. But in the real PN universe, it has occurred to me that bottomless should require the hemline of the top to end above the navel. This would leave no doubt that the person was bottomless, but also show a very flattering view of the person to the world.
Any thoughts?
My take is that legally only the genitals need to be visible, so as long as the hemline is above to top of your slit/dick you’d be legal. But even then, I agree some images that I’ve used push it, especially where it’s stretchy material that doesn’t necessarily stay in one position.
Like you said though, we’re limited what we can find. I definitely have used some with short tops, but since you mentioned it I’ll try and keep it in mind next time I do a bottomless caption.
Again as far as I’m concerned, anything is fine on the NWO website as long as the genitalia and ass are visible.
I was just thinking about the convention that judges would use when imposing bottomless sentences. It seems that exposing the navel would be a natural yardstick that would allow law enforcement an immediate measurement to determine compliance. Otherwise some people would try to cheat the system by going long. I may be biased because while I definitely like seeing the pussy and ass of the bottomless women, I also enjoy seeing a woman’s tummy and bellybutton.
Since we’re on the bottomless subject, the convention usually agreed to on here is that bottomless is a punishment. I think that in the real PN universe, that bottomless should also be a voluntary option. Some women might not want to expose their breasts but wish to enjoy the exposure of being bottomless. Women who have scars from a mastectomy or breast reduction surgery are examples.
Yeah, bottomless being a punishment is just an old historical detail, and the setting is a fantasy, but not a utopia, if you get what I mean. Sometimes friction with the laws being imperfect makes for more interesting captions.
I agree that in an ideal world it would be nice as a voluntary option.
Hmmmm…it’s difficult to tell if you look better with your nipples visible or not. There’s a shirt in the way. Take off your shirt and then I’ll let you know which looks better.
-merged-
But just between you and me, I think nipples fully visible will look WAY better.
I combined your two posts. I regret that it’s not possible to edit your own posts to add additional thoughts (it’s a wordpress limitation I never found a solution to), but please try to get everything down in one if possible.
IMHO this is one of the best (if not the best) bottomless pictures I have seen on here. I had to think why and what I have come up with is the hemline of the shirt is well above the coochie. ( I believe that is the first time I have ever used the word coochie. I guess I picked it up from reading Gloria’s books.) Many of the bottomless pictures we see on here just barely leave the coochie uncovered.
Now I realize we are limited in what photos we can find on the internet to post on here. So I am not proposing this as a NWO rule. But in the real PN universe, it has occurred to me that bottomless should require the hemline of the top to end above the navel. This would leave no doubt that the person was bottomless, but also show a very flattering view of the person to the world.
Any thoughts?
My take is that legally only the genitals need to be visible, so as long as the hemline is above to top of your slit/dick you’d be legal. But even then, I agree some images that I’ve used push it, especially where it’s stretchy material that doesn’t necessarily stay in one position.
Like you said though, we’re limited what we can find. I definitely have used some with short tops, but since you mentioned it I’ll try and keep it in mind next time I do a bottomless caption.
Again as far as I’m concerned, anything is fine on the NWO website as long as the genitalia and ass are visible.
I was just thinking about the convention that judges would use when imposing bottomless sentences. It seems that exposing the navel would be a natural yardstick that would allow law enforcement an immediate measurement to determine compliance. Otherwise some people would try to cheat the system by going long. I may be biased because while I definitely like seeing the pussy and ass of the bottomless women, I also enjoy seeing a woman’s tummy and bellybutton.
Since we’re on the bottomless subject, the convention usually agreed to on here is that bottomless is a punishment. I think that in the real PN universe, that bottomless should also be a voluntary option. Some women might not want to expose their breasts but wish to enjoy the exposure of being bottomless. Women who have scars from a mastectomy or breast reduction surgery are examples.
Yeah, bottomless being a punishment is just an old historical detail, and the setting is a fantasy, but not a utopia, if you get what I mean. Sometimes friction with the laws being imperfect makes for more interesting captions.
I agree that in an ideal world it would be nice as a voluntary option.
October 22,2017. Bottomless soccer girl. Example of impact of the high hemline I’ve been talking about.
Hmmmm…it’s difficult to tell if you look better with your nipples visible or not. There’s a shirt in the way. Take off your shirt and then I’ll let you know which looks better.
-merged-
But just between you and me, I think nipples fully visible will look WAY better.
I combined your two posts. I regret that it’s not possible to edit your own posts to add additional thoughts (it’s a wordpress limitation I never found a solution to), but please try to get everything down in one if possible.