Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmarath
She was wearing a 'tapasexo' which only covers a small part at the front but lost it while dancing.
Compare pics 1 and 2.
The pictures were taken in the Sambodromo during the carnaval parade.
|
Hey guys, if you need a microscope to see it, then isn't she for all practical purposes nude?
I look at the before and after pics, and the difference is so small, its ridiculous.
You know, I'd like to be a judge: it would be like....."hey, come here for a minute, por favor...."
"I need to check and make sure you are wearing your tapasexo as it says you need to be in section 4.4.5.9 of the Rio Carnival Decency Code"
"come closer please....."
"I can't see it yet, please come closer......"
"closer still........"
Well, in my mind she is nude, tapasexo or no tapasexo, and I think that is great. It just makes me laugh thinking from a legal point of view what you'd have to go thru to prove that someone is wearing something you can barely see with the "naked" eye at ten feet.
Klondike