The problem is the vast (VAST) majority are not showing off a good ass. 95% are awful asses. |
Agreed, women’s swimwear bottoms have always been unflattering. I recall a swimwear manufacturer with a campaign years “ditch the diaper” in favor of a ruched rear bathing suit bottom. Far more attractive than the saggy, baggy bikini bottoms of yesteryear! Good to see women sporting modern swimwear bottoms with a Rio, Brazilian or thong style bottoms. |
What about shorts, like men wear? Wouldn’t that be the obvious solution to the diaper look? Why must women always be losing clothing in order to look better? |
DP. I agree that the high cut, cheeky bottoms on bathing suits are actually flattering. They high-cut leg makes you look longer and leaner. Those stupid shorts bottoms are horrendously unflattering on most women. For most of us they just accentuate the literal widest part of our frames. Really, who cares if you're 40 and you're butt looks like a 40-yr old butt? Big deal! A high cut bottom that is a bit cheeky is still, I'm willing to bet you, more flattering overall, than shorts or diaper-style bottoms. |
Cheeky is atrocious on me. I'm petite, thin, but I have wider hips. I have a saggy fabric butt (due to being petite and the material is cut too long) and then also cheeky because it won't cover my cheeks. It's the worst of both worlds.
And those of you saying it's nbd- do you even know what you're talking about?! It's inappropriate to be wearing a thong at the pool. I'm seeing complete cellulite butts hanging out. |
It's just unnecessary. The suit can be cut higher on the leg to be more flattering, but there is no reason for most of the butt check to be exposed, even when it's a great looking butt check.
|
If you're talking about a bottom that is approaching like a thong, then agree, unnecessary. But if you just mean somewhat cheeky...that is in fact necessary because science. A high cut swimsuit leg with a full coverage bottom is going to be wonky, and I'd imagine ill fitting somewhere. |
This. It's just not possible to control fabric over a volume without seams near the apex. By cutting away, the leg elastic is in placed for control and the suit is more functional. The other option is just more seaming, but this can look too engineered for a casual swimsuit, and it also becomes more body specific. Compare it to tops. A triangle bikini with no seams or control near the apex of the bust and an elastic band bellow the bust isn't the option most people pick. Swim bottoms with elastic entirely bellow the bottom are equivalent--it's just put the butt in a sack, and that's where the diaper look comes from. |
Cuz it’s cheaper to manufacture. |
It's always the women policing how other women dress. Just stop.
Wear what you want to wear!!! Are you worried your husband is ogling? |
Guess what! You can buy shorts swimsuits. There are so many options out there. You don't need to lose clothing and you don't need to worry about others. |
Full coverage isn’t flattering on me. Makes my butt look like one big diaper blob. Much prefer high cut cheeky styles, lots of cellulite and all. A few more inches of fabric isn’t going to hide the fact I have cellulite, which I’m not ashamed of since it’s just a normal thing for women to have.
I don’t care if you think seeing my butt cheeks is too sexy for the pool. That’s on you, stop looking. |
Using that logic, men’s trunks would resemble daisy dukes. They do not. Try again. |
This. Nobody gives a shit what you think is "appropriate" or not. |
Sure, swim shorts are fine. To me, that sounds horribly uncomfortable for actually swimming in and also frumpy, and I'd rather wear cheeky bottoms. |