My thought is that if you are going to wear something as skimpy as a G-string (whether you are male or female), why wear anything at all?You may as well just be nude.
Only reason I can think of is that in some locations, g strings are legal but nudity is not.
Why there is a law like that makes little sense, but it has to be obeyed anyway.
Either meeting the letter of the law or meeting the expectations of your peer group. I'm surprised about the trend to reveal so much bum in recent times and can only conclude it's social acceptability, especially when the rest of the suit is not particularly minimal.
The thing is, people wear them i would think Inthe main because nudity is illegal, here in the UK it isn't as long as there is no sexual element or provocation, yet I think, and see how many others agree, thongs, G strings and micro bikinis are a lot more sexually provocative than simple nudity, so sticking to the letter of the law in that case has the opposite effect of what they were trying to achieve in the first place!!
The thing is, people wear them i would think Inthe main because nudity is illegal, here in the UK it isn't as long as there is no sexual element or provocation, yet I think, and see how many others agree, thongs, G strings and micro bikinis are a lot more sexually provocative than simple nudity, so sticking to the letter of the law in that case has the opposite effect of what they were trying to achieve in the first place!!
I have argued this point for many years.
The thing is, people wear them i would think Inthe main because nudity is illegal, here in the UK it isn't as long as there is no sexual element or provocation, yet I think, and see how many others agree, thongs, G strings and micro bikinis are a lot more sexually provocative than simple nudity, so sticking to the letter of the law in that case has the opposite effect of what they were trying to achieve in the first place!!I have argued this point for many years.
Glad it's not just me then . !!!!
An interesting theoryclothing, was primarily "invented" ... for sexual attraction!!!but I don't think so. Man was millions of years nude and began to dress when they reached the colder parts of the world. People in Africa and Australia remain nude. People there believed in a world of good and bad ghosts. Some of them mainly women protected their body orifices against bad ghosts with some kind of clothing sometimes only symbolic with a string. Clothing for sexual attraction is an invention of the clothed part of the world.
I don't believe this theory fits with the anthropologists - they see we started to wear clothes when we started losing body hair, and well long before hominids made it to colder climates. We started to lose body hair when we started to perspire as very early hominids.
Various 'peoples' around the world (not just in Africa and Australia) remained 'nude' or partially nude because they either didn't develop the techniques to make clothes and/or did not have viable volumes of materials to make greater clothing covering more of the body. What did get made was that which protected, gave status and highlighted belonging!
I'm not certain that's correct - my understanding from the most recent anthropological studies is that clothing was developed to keep us warm at a time when humans had shed their fur and were pushing further north into Europe. This has been evidenced by many studies around lice across the primate group.
Around this same time (shortly after shedding fur) humans also developed the 'shame factor' to ensure they stayed as couples to raise the offspring - as humans not only have one of the longest gestation periods but also the longest timeline to independence from parents.
Maybe if clothing was invented to keep warm, global warming will open a opportunity to give it up.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!