>

I’m still waiting for ball cleavage to be a thing. Let’s rattle the nest a bit.
This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)
Rule-breaking posts may result in bans. >

Underboob implies the possibility of gravity making it full boob >

Yeah, underboob carries a much higher risk of loss of containment. >

and then you get a warp core breach. >

Stop it, you're overloading my PPS conduits >

Sounds like someone needs to scrub their plasma manifolds >

Let me know if Dax is available >

Kurzon? >

No, I blame him for Jadzia's death lol >

Jadzia dies!? >

Depends on your definition of "dies" >

it defines the actual shape of the breast. 
Also, it’s less common to see. Calves used to be risqué at one time. >

Yeah baby, show us that ankle
-Victorian Era bros probably >

Fun fact: table "legs" were deemed potentially too arousing, hence the development of the table skirt.
Victorian's were fucking weird. >

Well TIL
thank you for that fun fact. I couldn't agree more with your take on Victorians >

Victorians turned out to be almost as hypocritical about sex as Puritans. >

They just had a national public shame kink >

As opposed to Puritans, who were limited to public shaming only in Massachusetts. >

When I say public shaming I don't mean individuals. I mean in both Victorian England and Puritan Massachusetts a religious leader would get up and tell people that humans were disgusting, sinful creatures. Everybody would enthusiastically agree, and participate in abstinence activities. Then, once they were behind closed doors they'd begin furiously fucking and/or masturbating because getting called disgusting and sinful turned them on. And we let that culture make all our rules.
"Oh yeah daddy, my whole species is a bunch of barely restrained sex fiends. Now tell me I'm going to Hell unless I do what you claim that book I can't read says." >

Fair point. Restricting access to what people generally like (sex, drugs (and alcohol) and rock ‘n roll) has worked so well, historically speaking. >

Gene Roddenberry once said that when designing costumes for the original Star Trek back in the late 1960s, network censors allowed some top cleavage but forbade - to use your term - “under-boob cleavage.” >

Interesting! This is a fascinating confirmation of my hunch. >

I have been diagnosed with dementia. >

You know damn well that this is a common bug on reddit. >

Perhaps he forgot >

True. Also, 
GitHub.com/MOABdali/MegaCheckers >

This will make a fine addition to my collection >

This was from before I became a "professional coder".  I'm a bit better now, so I've begun working on the game from scratch now, utilizing less spaghetti code. >

It’s not necessarily more risqué, but it certainly is more risky. One sudden movement and it’s over 😭 >

You mean under, right? >

No, the cover is over. >

Yeah but the part of boob is under, tis a joke >

Tits a joke? >

Ayyyy >

How many times have you seen someone's tits fall out a normal cleavage? Coz I haven't? But have you ever seen a girl with an underboob shirt lift her arms? Tits come flying out >

I used to work as an airport security screener and had one girl wearing a suuuper cropped shirt want to use the full body scanner instead of getting a pat down. As soon as she put her arms above her head, all tit was out >

What was her reaction? >

She didn't even notice at first. And when I was like, "girl your tatas are out", she kinda just shrugged and was like "oops" >

She knew and just played dumb. But nice >

OP missed the assault rifle and RPG in the waistband. >

rookie mistake >

gotta love the underboob.  the sight of it is guaranteed to improve your day. >

Unless you're at Walmart, and they're hanging over a belt >

Yeah but still >

Once you’ve seen one pair… you wanna see every pair.

Ron White >

"Gotta see 'em all! Underboob!" >

Underboobs often comes with a visible tummy. 
It's a great combo. >

There a sub for that? Asking for me. >

There is definitely an underboob subreddit. >

There are at least two. >

Left and right? >

They’re usually a little more gradually sloping at the top, allowing for a bit more plausible deniability of exactly where they start. At the bottom it’s bam. >

Under is closer to the nipple so I feel that makes it more risqué. >

Not when you’re 40 >

oh yea gimme some of that granny underboob.
She's showing underboob cleavage, but its a normal XL shirt >

Granny? At 40? >

Imagine you have a kid at 20. And that kid has a kid at 20. How old are?
Now have you ever met anyone that had a kid BEFORE 20?... I bet you have. >

I know it’s technically possible to be a granny at 40. The vast majority of 40 year olds are not grandmothers however. I’m 40, husband is 43, our kids are 6. >

Lol well I'm about to hit 37. I know what you're saying. I'm just saying. Lots of grandparents across the globe are our age. >

It does, under boob makes me far hornier than regular cleavage >

Same, side boob and top boob are regular everyday occurrences. They have become somewhat played out. You can go to a church and you may see some top boob.
Under boob is a treat. An occasion. Something special >


You can go to a church and you may see some top boob.

I'm ready for conversion. Will there be a test of some sort? >

There's a wet t-shirt contest >

Probably just normalization. Top-of-boob is extremely common whereas bottom-of-boob is more difficulty and so more rare. >

Under boob cleavage basically shows that it’s not a bra doing the work and they really ARE that perky/voluminous. Plus lol it’s seen less so is just that more hot. >

I would like to break the illusion here, I'm so so sorry. 
We have a thing called boob tape... It's a miracle wardrobe item. It 100% can give you perky underboob illusion. 
Source: am girl >

What...you totally left out side-boob exposure?  Now I'll have to go for a shower myself and give this topic some serious thought. >

Underboob cleavage is like dogs watching you eat food waiting for you to drop some. Regular cleavage is dogs seeing food on the counter and knowing they're not allowed up there. >

Under boob and no bra… oh my gawd. What a time to be alive man. >

Man, Dr. Károly Zsolnai-Fehér is really branching out. >

Under-boob is 1 abrupt movement away from full titties. Normal cleavage needs a full handstand for that. >

Side, under, top are all OK to be seen these days.  My conclusion is ladies who want to show off should just put some pasties on and be done it. >

Yeah, agreed. Culturally, we’ve created a fetish out of boobs by forcing them to be concealed. It’s a feedback loop… they’re sexualized because they’re hidden, and they’re hidden because they’re sexualized. Gotta break the cycle. >

Why would you want to take some of the magic out of life?! >

To show underboob, you’ve got to have your belly out too, no? >

Not unless you cut out a little window in your shirt >

Underboob windows are possibly the best thing >

This is called Australian cleavage.
Because it is from down unda >

Underboob usually means the entire torso is exposed while regular cleavage is just a few inches of chest and neck. >

Underboob is more provocative imo.. depending on the occasion it can br very sexy. >

You typically only see the bottom of the boob when you can see the entire boob, so that's why I think it's so much more alluring. Way less common to see without also seeing a nipple. >

Swimsuit vs underwear. Same amount if skin, but one is scandalous for people. Logic. >

Swimsuit vs underwear is more about the situation, not the amout of skin showing >

Also they wildly different type of fabric.
It's not much different than wearing a speedo becomes wildly less acceptable the further from water you get >

"Fred, why the fuck are you wearing a speedo? You are a fucking bank manager. Act like one." >

but u r less like to accidentally flash someone if u just have upper boob cleavage rather than lower