I wish they would embrace shirts to cover their stomachs.

I like shirts that don't cover the stomach. Maybe merely as self defense, since they tend to ride up on me higher than most mortal waistbands.

Also, I think the lower stomach is, in prime form, lovely, and in unprime form, no worse than most of an unprime body.

Is that a roundabout way of saying you've bought me one?

Maybe.

Or maybe I don't know how much a 円 is....

Well the girls that tend to wear these are in unprime form and they usually wear them in combo with the too tight low-rise pants or skirts. It's just a lumpy look when these girls aren't really lumpy, they are just soft and soft is fine, they need to wear clothes that fit.

What msbelle said.

The girls I see around here all the time are exactly the ones msbelle describes. Soft is good, bellies are lovely, but bellies are loveliest when they're naked and not oddly bound up, and the extreme low-rise jeans with the very snug belt around the softest part of the curve of the hip does nothing but take a curvy and lovely body and make it look oddly lumpen. It's a world of wrong.

It's just a lumpy look when these girls aren't really lumpy, they are just soft and soft is fine, they need to wear clothes that fit.

I think the soft exposed underbellies often look fine, except when squished by the pants. Which is the pants's fault, not the top.

From that "Human Intelligence" link, I don't think der bush understands the huge gap between these two ideas:

"Human intelligence, the ability to get inside somebody's mind, the ability to read somebody's mail, the ability to listen to somebody's phone call(snip)"

and

"my view that freedom is necessary for peace and that everybody deserves to be free."

I need a modern fashion trend explained to me. There are several women in my building who have worn khaki or beige cargo pants that are just-below knee length (maybe mid-calf), over tall boots that are usually brown, round-toed, and block-heeled. Now, I will admit that my sense of what is fashionable stopped about a century ago, but this look completely confuses me. Is there someone on the planet it looks flattering on? Did they all join a cult?

It's pretty much the same theory as the rolled up jeans over tall boots. I like it with pointy boots though, not round. I think it looks fine if you are slim and have really long legs and a small torso.

speaking of my dislike of the low low-rise. The past two Sundays, I have gotten a view of thong from churchgoers sitting in front of me that was way more Girls Gone Wild than Mid-town Manhattan Protestant Church.

This is why shirts should be longer and possibly why belts should be worn (I know, I argue against the belt sometimes). People in back of you should be spared seeing your underpants when you sit down and stand up. It's as bad as plumber crack.

Also, I think the lower stomach is, in prime form, lovely, and in unprime form, no worse than most of an unprime body.

The problem is that women who are in sub-prime form (that would be me) can't find shirts that will shield our lumps from a grateful populace.

The retinas you save may be your own.