I am totally and absolutely a "leg man", but - and maybe this is in some way related to my interest in nudism - I find the bare leg (and, in the right circumstances, to a not inconsiderable extent, the bare foot) to be extremely sexy.
Stockings, as I see it, are a way for women to wear things like skirts that would normally show off the legs, but without actually baring the legs. Which, to me, is a travesty. Why would you cover up one of my favorite parts of a woman's body? It seems too much like censorship.
Fishnet stockings can be considered an exception, due to their highly porous nature. Thigh-high stockings may also be considered an exception when paired with a miniskirt, or worn with lingerie, since they draw emphasis to the exposed thigh. Still, they don't trump bare skin.
I know there are practical reasons for wearing stockings - like, for example, maybe it lets women wear skirts in cooler weather, or if they don't consider their legs to be of a sufficient quality to bear showing off (or if they just haven't bothered to shave their legs in the last couple days).
And that's fine. I'm not saying that stockings should be outlawed. But generally, I view them as a turn-off. Much like skorts (obviously dreamed up by a prude), which tease with the promise of a potential panty flash, without any of the risk of that actually occurring (and isn't that largely the fun of wearing short skirts?).
There are a lot of articles of clothing that I do find sexy - probably even to the point of fetishism - but they are almost without exception skimpy garments where the emphasis is on what they expose rather than what they cover up (e.g., short shorts, miniskirts, bikinis, flip flops).
Whatever exceptions there may be to this rule probably include uniforms of a certain sort (like cheerleader uniforms). Of course, I have an appreciation for things that are feminine and girly, like curves and flowy garments and sparkles, but I'm not sure I would class those as styles that I find particularly sexually appealing, so much as attractive on a different scale.
Here are some more fishnet body stocking pictures, for your enjoyment:
Very nice. I like bare skin, too, but the fishnets aren't bad because they sort of draw attention to the fact that they're giving you a peek underneath. Still, bare skin is tops.
ReplyDeleteYour hard cock looks great too. Did it just immediately get hard by itself? lol.
I think this same shot would be interesting with your hard cock on the outside, and everything else covered by the fishnets. The idea appeals to me.
Yes! I think it's definitely the peek factor that makes fishnets so alluring. Regular stockings can be sheer, but it doesn't have quite the same effect.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that is, for me, unforgivable, is "nude" stockings that trick you into thinking it's bare skin when it's really not. I guess that's kind of the point, but that moment when you realize it's actually a stocking you're looking at, and not bare skin. . . ugh! You've been deceived! It's kind of like the moment when a girl does a cartwheel, and her skirt flies up. . . only to reveal shorts instead of panties underneath. Foiled again! lol
Anyway, since you've expressed an interest, I've uploaded a few more fishnet pictures to the post. Enjoy!
Oh I agree. "Nude" stockings are so lame, in both concept and execution.
ReplyDeleteThanks so much for the additional pictures. They're wonderful, and go far beyond what I imagined.
I especially like #3 for your interesting expression (playful biting of the lip) and for the look of your hard cock pointing straight at the camera.
I like #6 even more for how incredibly erotic it is. You hard cock is impressive in this one, and your body is so so sexy. I also like the background, with a view out to the "real" world, lol.
Number 4 is hot too. It unleashes instincts that make me want to get between your legs and "hook up." Wow, you're so attractive.
Thanks again for sharing your thoughts and photos.
I'm glad you enjoyed them!
ReplyDelete