Before Madonna we all managed to keep our underwear UNDER. The women of Yakima can surely manage.

...a response to an apparent "explosion" of coffee shops featuring scantily clad baristas

Tracy Clark-Flory is, as usual, a coward. She is ignoring the shocking truth of a far more extreme phenomenon sweeping America.

Right now, even as we speak, women wearing even less than thong underwear beneath their outer garments, even less than transparent blouses that sort of hint at their undergarments beneath, are lounging around with complete impunity.

They gather together, with scandalous lack of regard for public decency, in nothing but the skimpiest coverings, often even less than undergarments, and nothing else.

What's worse, they choose brightly lit, open-air public places for their obscene displays — beautiful, sandy areas that are in fact also a favorite destination to bring children!

The fact that these women can dress so scandalously without legal sanction is appalling enough. The one thing worse is that Tracy Clark-Flory and Salon are so unwilling to honestly confront this issue, and instead hide behind their tired old platitude about how "women in a free society should be able to wear whatever they goddamned want."

Ridiculous.

Look, it’s offensive and wrong to punish women with expulsion because SOME men cannot control their sexual harassment impulses, but throwing in that little story about the Washington area is comparing a mole hill to a mountain, and ignoring the fact that the United States have public decency laws that target men as well. If men’s fashionistas were prone to wearing sheer pants and codpieces, you can bet there would be some hullabaloo about it.

I am a young woman, and I am sick to death of being publicly confronted with other women’s unmentionables (not zombies.) I cannot comprehend why you are wearing a G-string at all, yet alone alongside pants that are low enough that your G-string might be revealed for all to see if you should bend over. Getting pants with a waste line that avoids this problem is not difficult at all! And what idiotic, moron woman doesn’t realize her dress is sheer in daylight?? Unless she’s dressing in a room completely devoid of light, she’s got to realize that thin material + non flesh-colored bra+ bright light is just not going to be a combination that turns out well. (And whatever happened to wearing a slip under a dress that was feared a bit on the sheer side?)

Before you start spouting off about women’s liberation, consider that women who insist on displaying their private clothing, whale-tail underwear, bras, and whatnot in public could actually be sexually harassing ME.

Hey, I'm all in favor of less butt cleavage. I can think of a couple of coworkers who display waaay too much of that. Of course these would be men, not women, so I don't know if the law applies- does it prohibit all cracks, or just scintillating cracks?

And while we're on the subject, let's ban tight jeans for men too. I don't appreciate having a "package" staring me in the face when I'm trying to have a serious conversation. :)

...and fleeing from the place 27 years ago, I can tell you, crazy butt thong laws are the least of that town's problems.

Now if they could do something about the cocaine trafficking...

Regarding the little town in Washington that wants to ban G-strings and sheer clothing: Why stop there? Why not ban clothing that is thin enough to tell when a woman's nipples are hard? How about banning midriff-baring tops, or anything that reveal a woman's "tramp stamp" or "ass antler" lower-back tattoos? Another thing: I happen to be a man who finds women's arms incredibly sexy, and I am sure there are other men out there like me. So let's be sure to keep women's arms covered up to their wrists. I also think a woman's neck is really sexy, where the hair gets really soft like duck down, right behind the ears. So mufflers are a must. Oh screw it, bring on the burkha.

How much you wanna bet that this mayor is being bribed by one of the local coffee shops that has an all-male staff and is losing its customers? Also, do people really have that much free time in Washington that they'd need a mayor to police what kind of coffee shops they attend? (Style note: Being on a caffeine high and aroused by scantily-clad women don't seem like the best mix, unless maybe you're an aspiring porn writer.)

Regarding the school's "no jeans" rule in India: Why single out jeans? Why not simply ban pants? (I guess jeans are "Western," but otherwise I can't see how they'd be any more arousing than corduroy or something.)

This entire problem could be solved with penile chastity belts.

Amity: "Right now, even as we speak, women wearing even less than thong underwear beneath their outer garments, even less than transparent blouses that sort of hint at their undergarments beneath, are lounging around with complete impunity."

You don't even scratch the surface on this problem. Right now, in showers and bathtubs across America, there are a great many women who are stark naked. These are the same showers and bathtubs that children sometimes use!!!

Even worse is when you realize that no matter how many garments a woman wears, they are always indecently naked underneath their clothing! The fact that woman can walk around freely, only a few threaded garments (mere millimeters in thickness) away from being totally naked, and do so without repercussions is a travesty.

rocket999: "And while we're on the subject, let's ban tight jeans for men too. I don't appreciate having a "package" staring me in the face when I'm trying to have a serious conversation. :)"

Why are you trying to have a conversation with somebody's groin, and what do you talk about?

and see through pants in public, I guess it's alright for women to do it.

I mean, really. It's not like the naked guy in Berkeley was ever arrested or expelled from Cal because female students felt harassed or anything. Oh, wait. Opps. RIP.