Show the flesh with a care lest the action provoke flares from the gender without control when the skin is on display ration out the eye treats too much is bad for the health as the hands seek their prize solely based on prideful lust
there are options across the board back or front may be exposed consider legs as separate just enough goes a long way almost all should be a right caution calls for much less it's not the fault of those who wear garments for themselves
the masculine may have their charms wise restraint not one of those when the female makes a choice to show their gifts to the world perhaps libido is the term it's more likely that privilege rears it's head at the chance to press forward at sight of skin
an invitation is then assumed while not given before the hands take unkind liberties nonetheless exploring realms without permit the only recourse left to take is unfair to those who shine hiding beauty because of oafs are triggered by the sight of skin.
The poem “Sight of Skin” was inspired by a conversation I had with a friend regarding social dancing. They had an attractive backless top on. I learned that my friend had a policy of only showing a certain amount of skin with each outfit. The options were back, front, and legs. The total sum of skin shown could not exceed an amount set by my friend’s choice. Why? They had found that guys were “triggered” by a threshold of skin shown. Too much, and the guys would make assumptions. The is followed by the guys being far too forward (handsy). I remarked that a guy would have to be almost naked before this happened to them. My friend agreed but mused that their choice of garments was driven by the unfortunate factor that guys operated by different rules.