(07-10-2021 19:35 )Rake Wrote:  

(16-09-2021 14:41 )hornball Wrote:  

(16-09-2021 13:06 )derekdas Wrote:  Would it not be possible for the babes that appear on the Chat to be able to wear some stockings instead of the bare leg look. It would be so much more sexy, showing an odd stocking top or two. Especially for the two babes on today.

No it wouldn't!! Particularly stockings!! Tights are bad enough, but just about passes the scrutineer, but stockings Most legs (not all) are tailor made for bare unhindered freedom

A note on tights and stockings:

These items are never to be called “pantyhose”. We will leave that to the Americans.

While superficially similar to the casual and undiscriminating viewer, hold ups/stockings are aesthetically and erotically at different ends of the spectrum to tights. The former, as the skirt rides the thigh, offer up incrementally denser circumferential banding into the control top, tantalisingly charting the inch by inch teasing ascent of the hemline, until, thrillingly, it breaks out into beautiful bare upper thigh and an unfettered pathway to the panties and beyond. The hated tights by stark contrast flatter to deceive, commencing banding only to cruelly disappoint, yielding not silky flesh but a ghastly heavier-gusseted nylon mesh, obscuring visual and blocking physical access to panties and beyond, suffocating eroticism.

The interesting thing is that the seasoned observer can tell the difference between tights and stockings purely from the way they lay about the curves of the thigh and knee, without recourse to actually seeing the stocking top or banding. Tights lie very flat and the legs appear contourless, whereas stockings reveal more detail and will crease subtly about the flexion points. revealing muscular and fascial planes, and emphasising curves and tensions. For that reason, in addition to obvious lack of a barrier to the crotch, stockings are infinitely superior in sexiness, and tights are to be prohibited.