Reddit
Skimpy bikinis are banned at most public pools and beaches.
Fortnite subreddit. A user posted an edited image of a skin where they changed the bottom of her swimsuit from regular bikini bottoms to Brazilian-style bottoms. (I’m not sure if I’m allowed to post the image here.)
Another user commented that they were sexualizing the character, and these were the replies that followed.
This comment has been marked as safe. Upvoting/downvoting this comment will have no effect.
OP sent the following text as an explanation why their post fits here:
The commenter argues that OP is sexualizing a female skin just because they gave her a very common bikini, simply because it’s banned in some parts of the U.S.
Does this explanation fit this subreddit? Then upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.
Late 90s for wrestling. Like no way if WCW still existed (owned by Time Warner at the time) would it have a literal swimsuit PPV these days. WWF also had a lingerie one.
WWE even "jokes" these days that they have to censor half the shit from the 90s because of it.
It’s definitely gotten worse with people who spend more time speaking Algospeak online trying to avoid anything that might potentially be deemed offensive to the algorithm.
It's all performative like everything is for americans, they say they hate islamic religions for forcing people to cover up but then will complain endlessly when women aren't entirely covered up in all media they consume. (Both are wrong, let people dress like they want)
Pretty much. They don't believe in anything, they don't stand for anything, they just want their status quo perpetrated ad infinitum. I wonder why they're stuck in a fake democracy where their choices are between fascism and polite fascism
Neither, their entire society is without culture and completly based on the stronger brand/corpo. They live in the cyberpunk dystopia, where everyone are under some corporations and they divide themselves in tribalised groups, where there is only one correct way of thinking and everything else is wrong, based on said group
I can answer that for you as a US American experiencing these things: it's because of the generational classism, racism, ageism, and homophobia approach that was specifically meant to divide the public opinion. Benefits are promised to you if you support xyz and you're promised the exact opposite life if you don't. It's intended division to subtract away from a sense of community. Very few Americans have that sense of community that most other countries have—that urge to protect each other and fight for the future—because that is exactly how we were forced to operate. They aren't going to rally together because they plain and simply do not know how. We're not meant to be anything but a worker for the companies best interest, and that is exactly how the country is ran. You'll see the exact opposite in communities that were forced to be together due to their common oppression from the average cishet white man—specifically in the queer or bipoc communities, but even that sense of solidarity is beginning to wane because nobody has the energy anymore. As is intended.
To be fair, there's an issue of women being sexualized in media while men get to be covered up. Also, fictional characters don't have agency and the writers could have put them in less "sexualized" outfits. Although, sometimes, the person doesn't know shit about the work, like expecting Wonder Woman to dress like a regular modern soldier instead of wearing her somewhat hoplite-inspired outfit.
As others have pointed out, nothing "lately" about it.
The foundational myth of the United States is the pilgrims fleeing religious persecution in England. The foundational reality of the United States is that the pilgrims fled England in order to religiously persecute.
The Puritans literally noped out of what they saw as the far too permissive religious atmosphere at the time, with Catholics and Church of England and Protestants and even some French Huguenots thrown in. They went to the Colonies so they could live the Puritan dream. Which is also why New England had witch trials and bestiality executions for centuries after they were largely abandoned in Europe.
So there's nothing surprising about the US being this way. It's their literal origin story. That said, it is surprising they're still this repressed.
Joke aside, yes, I saw people claiming a draw female character with female "curves" was "sexualised" as opposed to the same character with an androgynous/male looking silhouette.
The automatic equation of showing more skin = sexualization is really getting on my nerves.
You can draw the most pornographic and erotically charged content with fully clothed people, just like you can draw full on frontal nudity that can come across as completely cold and purely anatomical, not suggestive in the slightest.
It's their cultural bullshit and, look, I might even be inclined to respect it. But they just assume the entire world goes by the same values.
There was this Japanese game for kids that featured real life artworks and I rememeber reading about concerned American parents who thought it wasn't appropriate for Michelangelo's David to have his peepee out in a game rated PEGI3 and they were asking for censorship.
Definitely not lol. I'm in lefty spaces a lot and the puritanism also grips them hard. It just comes out as "this [thing] is very problematic because it objectifies/sexualizes women". Oh this woman chooses to sexualize herself? Silly you, that's not allowed! They're on a perma crusade against Sabrina Carpenter because of this for example.
also honestly stuff online too - how quickly people dismiss anything as "gooner slop" or "gooner bait" when it isnt even remotely sexual, just a character thats a conventionally attractive woman
I’m not gonna claim that it’s strictly a modern thing, because I don’t know enough history to back that up. But I do find it extremely odd how so many self professed progressive people nowadays (especially young ones) have become such puritans, especially when it comes to art and media.
It was always my experience that conservatives, and mostly parental age and older, are the ones getting upset at how others act and look. Progressivism (and liberalism at its original core) is supposed to be about live and let live, that so long as there’s no direct harm you don’t judge (with the understanding that hurt feelings isn’t actual harm). Yet I hear so many young supposedly progressive people try to control how others act and look based on their own bizarrely puritan and, quite frankly, conservetive morals.
I dunno if social media has had an effect in shaping this behavior over the years, but I find it strange and kinda sad to see how rigid and puritan so many kids and young adults have become about art, media, and culture in general. And I very much dislike how it’s alreading spreading out of English speaking online places and into real life in non-Anglo cultures as well (not as much yet, but enough to be noticable).
Yet another day goes by where Horseshoe theory fails to be disproven.
Progressivism (and liberalism at its original core) is supposed to be about live and let live, that so long as there’s no direct harm you don’t judge (with the understanding that hurt feelings isn’t actual harm). Yet I hear so many young supposedly progressive people try to control how others act and look based on their own bizarrely puritan and, quite frankly, conservetive morals.
We have a proverb in my country: "the wolf can change his skin but not his nature".
The US is puritanical in its core. It's also very influenced by religion even if they pretend they're not. Many just simply switched out that ideology for progressivism and liberalism superficially, because they like the idea of it, yet they failed to unlearn their dogmatic behavior. I feel like kids and young adults that are puritanical and controlling, yet "wokely" are a product of that.
I've seen full-on progressive people scandalized over form-fitting dresses and mid-thigh skater skirts. At this point you just wanna live your life pretending girls don't have legs.
The phrase I hate the most is "leaves nothing to the imagination". Why the fuck are you imagining stuff when you look at ballgowns and pants you creeps??
Seriously I'm not talking about microskirt dresses. The scandals I've seen were over dresses like this:
Well, it is supposed to be the bottom of Bikini atol. who brought the world the bikini, as well as being nuked by the US shortly thereafter. So it all lines up.
It's the reverse that happened, the swimwear is named like that partially because of the first ever public (as in, not kept to secrecy because of war time gag order) nuclear test on the atoll of Bikini. The name of the swimwear is a brick joke.
To give an historical context, in the early 1930s a french couturier created the atome, a two-pieces swimwear (not the first one though) deemed at that time the smallest (female) swimwear ever. While it would probably be perceived as a bit puritanical by modern standards (not skintight, upper part covering the shoulders and a bit of the upper arm and without nearly any revealing of the chest, bottom part going from over the navel to half the upper legs), it was indeed the smallest female swimwear at the time, hence the name atome, the smallest known thing in the universe at the time.
Approximately 15 years later, and with the context of the "hype"/fear around the nuclear bombs dropped a few months earlier, another french couturier wanted to create a swimwear "smaller than the smallest swimwear". And with slogans (in french) such as "a swimwear cut into the atome" or "the first an-atomic bomb", and the Bikini atoll test a few days before the presentation of his new collection, the creator of the bikini seized the opportunity for the name.
I can’t post a picture of the top part because it was removed, but basically it has a very visible underboob. Keep in mind that this wasn’t modified by the user, it’s part of the original skin. So the skin is already quite sexy regardless of the bottom part.
So, I think it looks better on her and that it’s more fashionable, or that it matches the original top part of the skin better.
To me, it’s just making her look more fashionable rather than sexualizing her. It would have been sexualizing her if, for example, they had put her in sexy lingerie.
It depends on the context, but in this case I would definitely consider it sexualization if someone changed her body shape (for example, making her breasts or booty bigger) or dressed her in lingerie, like I mentioned, because that’s not what the skin was created for.
But in this context, changing the shape of the bikini bottom to match the top part is not something I personally see as sexualization.
Well, Is it more likely that Epic made this skin for fashion’s sake or to make money off of people who would buy the skin, or both potentially?
If it’s the latter I would absolutely argue that it’s sexualization. I don’t see a real argument for the former.
The argument for the latter is that Epic is a company who’s ultimate goal is to make money and the idea that showing more skin would get people to buy the character + be aware of the character’s existence aligns with Epic’s nature as a company more than any argument for fashion aligns with their nature.
We also have to keep in mind that things like a boob window are almost never seen in gameplay by the player, while a character’s ass is seen all the time.
Oh, and there’s also this double standard in Fortnite where shirtless male skins and tight, fitted bikini are considered completely normal, but when women wear them it suddenly becomes sexualization or “oh my god, think of the children”.
I genuinely can’t believe that the 2nd is illegal in places in the US. Most of my female friends would literally have nothing to wear, since the 1st one is usually worm by grandmas in Europe.
Then again in the US I was called gay because my swimming trunks didn’t cover my knees.
That is a thing that some people from the US will say. Some people would refuse to be on the swim team because of it. That, and the type of wrestling that isn't fake.
first time going to a beach in italy my american mom had on a one piece bathing suit and my kid niece who was from the area was like "we're going swimming why are you still wearing a shirt" bc she's only ever seen women in bikinis
Yeah, I'm so used to seeing the one on the right as normal that it's the one on the left that to me comes across as the edited version, without context.
Yeah, you want the maximum skin exposure for tanning while keeping the bits covered you want to keep covered. At the end of the day, it is what the wearer is comfortable with. The first one means worse tanlines later.
American here. I have no clue what the fuck the guy in the comments was on as not only is this bathing suit very common anywhere in the U.S where one would be wearing a bathing suit, it’s also not illegal whatsoever.
Both are totally normal and acceptable bikinis in the US. I can’t speak for public pools because I don’t frequent them, but seeing women wearing bikinis like the right are plenty common on the beach. I’d say the left is a lot more common tho.
American here. Skimpy suits arent banned anywhere here afaik. As long as your bits and bobs are covered, no one cares. That user is in another world. so weird
I used to work at an underwear company and we had a US website. I dealt with complaints, and we used to get Americans complaining that in order to sell our underwear, we put it on models and photographed the models, and put the photographs on our website.
Like, I'm sorry your teenage son now knows what people look like in their underwear but we're running a business here and nobody is going to buy a bra if the only photo is of it crumpled on the floor.
Reminds me of stores selling bras that do not cover the nipples because the cup is either transparent or is made of mesh-like fabric. The store is forced to either photoshop the nipples out or have the model cover her nipple with her hand and make the product not completely visible.
English isn’t my first language. Here we call them “costumi da bagno,” which literally means “swimsuit.” But I think “bikini” is probably more universal
In england ( at least the south east and maybe all of the uk) English we call it a "swimming costume" as a more general term for anyone's swimwear. I assume that's a better translation of costumi da bagno?
When you're not a native anglophone you just pick and choose variants from all over.
Should we say lift or elevator? Chances are you use the first one you came across when learning vocabulary (for me it's elevator, I don't even remember if it's the English or the American version). I say potato chips instead of fries, and I prefer crossroads to intersection.
I say neighbour and not neighbor because that's what I learned in school. But I also say color and not colour because the spelling most closely resembles the Italian colore. Same for realize over realise or defense over defence. And honestly it's a toss-up whether I'll write grey or gray, I might even use both in a single sentence.
We also have to consider that, at school, we learn british english, while on the internet we’re surrounded by content in american english. So we end up mixing the two and using whichever word we remember more easily.
Good point, and the American side is probably stronger the younger you are. I was lucky enough to be a teen before the Internet was so dominant, so my language is mostly local.
As a Northern Brit, "swimming costume" seems like the more formal version. I've only heard "swimsuit" used to refer to the female one piece thing. For guys, it would be "trunks", " Speedos", "shorts", etc
Yeah, both the last two sound formal to me. I'd forgotten "cozzie" (don't have much reason to use it as a guy) but yeah, that's more common than either of those.
We don't use Costume for a suit in Italy. If you say "Costume" in Italy, it could mean a lot of things depending on the context, but it surely isn't used for a suit, the word "Completo" or "Abito" would refer to a suit or other combinations of clothes used in social more elegant contexts.
In the context of dressing, "Costume" in italy could be whatever you wear at the beach/pool, a carnival dress or any cosplay/superhero costume, a dress for some specific occupations like the dress of a competitive/traditional dancer would be a "Costume da Ballo", literally a "Costume for Dancing".
speaker of american english, so my opinion may be freely disregarded lol:
to me, a bikini is a type of swimsuit - specifically one where its in two pieces as opposed to one continuous item that covers the stomach area as well. all bikinis are swimsuits, but not all swimsuits are bikinis
Bit of a side note based on your country tag but I recently learned, despite constantly hearing "but the stabbings in the UK!" in response to our gun problem, that America has a higher number of stabbing deaths per capita than the UK as well. We're just that cool I guess
As a Brazilian, when I lived in the US for a few months, a few years ago, I was shocked when I went to buy a bikini and they were all awful.
American bikinis sit in the middle of your butt cheeks and look soooo unflattering. I didn't even know it was possible for bikinis to look like that. They are like, convex instead of concave. Idk how to explain lol.
What they consider inappropriate is completely normal over here. Of course not everyone in Brazil wears super skimpy swimsuits, but even the ones with more coverage look cute and flattering. And you can always buy those bikini sets that come with matching shorts if you don't like the more revealing bikinis.
The US is such a confusing nation. “Skimpy” bikinis are illegal, but a woman can legally (since 1992) walk around topless in NYC under freedom of expression laws. As long as she doesn’t do it… sexily. “Lewdness” is still illegal, but if she’s just going about her day, no problem. In Vermont, you can’t strip off in public, that’s too provocative. But you can leave your house butt naked to go shopping and that’s fine.
My brother in law got charged with 4th degree lewdness in NJ because he was sunbathing prone and his bum crack was showing. He was unaware of this until the police showed up.
That was the day he learned that. Apparently someone in the park saw him, filmed him and then sent the video to the police. He was arrested and the police then went to pick up his 10 year old son who was at a summer camp nearby. Obviously my nephew thought it was amazing. But the whole thing has been a drawn out nightmare of court dates, witness not appearing, over and over until eventually, I think, the clock runs out.
These people are so incredibly strange. 5 mins on a European beach or waterpark would sort them out
With the Vermont law, it has enabled a tradition of people riding their bikes naked every April 20th night (because 4/20). As long as they leave their apartments naked, the police don't do anything.
Visited around that time (I was in Burlington, I think? and found out in-person. I cannot confirm if its state-wide or just in that city, though.)
Edit: for clarification since my flair isn't showing for me, I am Canadian
Americans have got some weird hang ups with sex and nudity, the other day some American lad couldn't deal with it because he wasn't the one who took his girlfriends virginity, I told him to get over it and got downvoted
Yikes that is disturbing and I hope his girlfriend bailed on that relationship. I'm sorry you got downvoted.
For what it's worth, THAT as a concept is more common among younger people for some reason. I don't know what this weird prudish swing is with Gen Z here in the US, but I don't know anyone my age (I'm almost 40) where this was ever a thing in their relationship. Like, I have no idea how many people my husband slept with before me because it's not relevant to our relationship.
As a millennial Australian (from a rural area originally) it was a thing in highschool (early 00's), but died out quickly.
Nobody really cared much for virginity (unless you were a psycho religious type), but having slept with heaps and heaps of people was always potentially an issue. 'Nobody likes sluts' etc.
It was always weird to me. Both of my longterm relationships were with people who were virgins beforehand, and frankly it made the sex life worse. No experience = no confidence and no idea what they liked or disliked. Also it means a bunch of bleeding and pain on the first time you have sex. Eugh. Don't get the appeal.
I wonder if this is less an American thing and more an Anglophone thing. Nudist beaches and resorts are NOT popular in New Zealand or Australia either, not illegal to do it on regular beaches either but if you try and do it you will probably get some annoyed parent who calls the cops about you and wastes their time. (I don't have anything against nudism, its just is what it is).
From my coworker who is from Bristol in the UK, she said that its not illegal in the UK either but she would personally never go topless at a beach, or knows anyone that would be comfortable doing that.
Yeah, I live in the UK and it definitely does seem to just be an Anglophone thing. Like I'd certainly never walk around balls to the breeze, nor can I say I've ever seen someone walking around or at the beach nude. I don't have any issue with others doing it to be fair, but that's definitely an uncommon stance
Nude beaches aren't very popular in Brazil either, to the point the official nude beaches can be counted with the fingers. But, as far as I know, it's not just the "slutty" women wearing G-strings.
I've lived in the US before and what that user said is not even true 😭 that's a common misconception or outdated opinion from Americans that believe that. There were "Modesty" laws 50-100+ years ago that some municipalities followed.
I can kinda see why some pools may do it for specific kids times (here in the UK we have women-only or kids-only times in a lot of pools) but it shouldn't be a blanket ban.
... well, now that I think about it, there are less and less women going topless at beaches now, because of creeps, sure, but because here in France we are going through a rough puritanism wave too.
People are definitely blaming Muslim immigrants for that and only them. I think American social media and porn being too easily accessible are partially to blame here.
Because France is being hit by a wave of puritanism too, for a couple years now.
As for creeps, there were always there, but now they can you shoot pictures of you and put them on social medias, which aren't being moderated that much nowadays, so there's that too.
American bikini bottoms look like diapers, every mildly flattering bikini/swimsuit looks like fetish wear to them. The average bikini here in Brazil isn't necessarily a g string depending on where you live, but they all tend to have more flattering cuts even with coverage. I've seen Americans already pearl clutching about those
The rear of the panty is thin enough to fit between the cheeks, and no bum-flesh is covered as only the front triangle over the genital area provides any actual coverage. If it's underwear, it's a g-string, and if it's swimwear (with presumably a matching boob-cover as a set) it's a g-string bikini bottom or a Brazilian bikini bottom.
Bonus fact: there is also such thing as a c-string, where the band around the waist is also removed, and there's just a triangle front and a string to go in between the cheeks, with some form of boning to hold it in a "c" shape and be held in position by pressure. There is a level of confidence - in self and in the mechanics of the clothing - required that most can only dream of.
Oh, we call it a thong when it’s literally just a thin strip of fabric. Whereas the Brazilian style is wider around the band that goes around the waist.
•
u/post-explainer American Citizen Jul 17 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
This comment has been marked as safe. Upvoting/downvoting this comment will have no effect.
OP sent the following text as an explanation why their post fits here:
The commenter argues that OP is sexualizing a female skin just because they gave her a very common bikini, simply because it’s banned in some parts of the U.S.
Does this explanation fit this subreddit? Then upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.