Never saw anyone lose their shirt in this manner, but I fully support any method that allows a clear view of a nice stomach and belly button. Bravo, sir! :3

"I fully support any method that allows a clear view of a nice stomach and belly button."
Oh, you too? X3

Well, you'd better get to developing a vaccuum cleaner then, dude!

I could've sworn I have a vacuum just like that. (The design of it, not the overly-perverse personality)

Mine looks a lot like that, except it's red, and the shirt was already red. I Googled for ideas.

This is really interesting, goodness. :O

I hear that's a fairly common household accident XD

this scene was my favorite part of Airplane 2

a bulge shouldn't be something that immediately draws attention to itself, for anyone "normal"


(incidentally: how does one deal with a depiction of a guy whose junk's flaccid endowment is naturally large, thereby creating a noticeable bulging in underwear, in spite of what he might desire at that moment?
this individual's depiction is not supposed to be inherently erotic/enticing, of itself; but the "situation" down there will usually be eye-catching, anyway

may this gentleman not ever be allowed to show himself off in the sort of gear that his "lesser" brethren do, without an automatic age-restriction slapped on him?)

So no arrows and neon signs then? Got it!

(I...wouldn't know myself, that's for sure. I get the feeling it's a no-win situation, since there's no, uh, PG-rated way for him to prove it's all his, no?)

arrows' and neon signs' pointing at any guy's "situation" (irregarding if it appears average, small, not-depicted, not-noticeable, or meaty; nor if the package is already obscured by one "layer" or more) would likely automatically-merit some sort of age restrictioning, if any "normal" person may reasonably interpret what he sees as being that which has the primary or a secondary (or even tertiary) intention to draw focus to the existence of the subject's private parts

(mind you, vince — the entire context and content of the depiction shall determine if there might be an advisory posted, or not

as i am sure you're aware)



i wouldn't know, either.
(although, as it happens for me: i hadn't ever drawn any complaints

{plus, i seem more than capable of gagging a guy (who has a standard-issue maw) without too much problem, should i so desire it, besides

_})


da.
our own lascivious natures shouldn't be mister McBulge-a-Tron's problem.
but...
...i guess until we sort out a way to be less repressed/sex-negative, even an innocuous appearance of The Dick Print can be cause for some sort of controversy.

Well, I guess I'd have to use boxers to be sure then. Considering he's being sucked by a vaccuum, "context" is a bit iffy in this one XD

I didn't know you could draw at all XD (take THAT! XD)

I wonder if ladynipples are treated the same way.

(aren't you a cheeky lad?
i'll draw you something, buddy boy!)

i know that, for myself: in terms of inherent "sexualization potential" (but not "sexiness"), it's

gym shorts < boxers < boxer briefs < briefs < speedos < thongs ≈ jock straps

(there are some other sorts of underwear and under•garments; but for the sake of simplicity, i don't wanna list them here — the short of It is, the less visible/noticeable the goods {which can also include, when visible: the hips, buttocks, and the span of that area of the upper thigh that's adjacent to either side of the span of the groin}, the less likely there'll be controversy, amidst those who.. ..might take note of such things)


i suspect that this hierarchy also represents the cultural-societal norm (regarding this subject matter), in the united states, as well, vince.
(but, again — all basic stuff.)

socio-cultural norms and mores.
...
standards that, by no means, are universally-applicable, but not necessarily universally-negligible either.



accordingly: it boils down to the "out of sight, out of mind" principle that we tend to observe.
it is true that we can "overlook" a person who happens to have large jugglies, that are sufficiently covered,

,

but even obscured-but-noticeable nipples (on a shiksa) may also be viewed as 'sexually-expressive,' and can conversely warrant an age-restriction for the depiction in which it appears, depending on the overall context of said depiction. (i don't believe this standard is usually applied to males.

usually.)

i didn't make these rules.. ..i am only explaining them, to the best of my understanding and ability, mister suzukawa.

i reckon it's better than trying to completely over-simplify or minimize the subject, just because i happen to not be very, very conservative about such things as this.

for this specific drawing, above..
..hmm...

...i guess i'd rank it at a PG-13. . . .



as there is an obvious element of potential eroticization present in your portrayal of the orca, though there isn't really any sexually-oriented content, at all ... nor is it your primary, or secondary, explicit intention to induce major sexual arousal for the preponderance of those individuals who will look at this admittedly cute orca, here

even if there was no sucking vacuum: a panicked, denuding, "ideally-portrayed" orca, of itself, isn't something to fap-to-completion over (unless the viewer happens to be a hornball, or has a sexual compulsion — which is not your problem)



i rank Jeff Burke at a PG-13, partly because i remember what i was doing with my "self" at age 11.. ..and, maybe more importantly, age 6 or 7 (i think)

And this is why you unplug the vacuum before checking any blockage.

Many thanks to you, sir. I really love how this came out, hee hee! X3

....I don't know why, but somehow that just sounded like it was supposed to be dirty to me XD

Kewl! Glad to hear it!

Well accidents in the home you know :)
*chuckles* I hope he doesn't catch cold ;)

I know I've been watching a lot of Shirokuma Cafe if the first thing I thought of was [this].

. . .

I...

Wat...

I...???

(watch the show)

*heh* Panda Mama's go-to motivator to counteract her son's laziness. It's a running gag in the series. Just watch the first episode... you'll understand. XD

http://www.animeseason.com/shirokum.....afe-episode-1/

That expression reminds me of two things- Daffy's face when he realizes he's about to be shot by Elmer again, and Agrajag from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

WABBIT SEASON!

Haha, wow that vacuum has a strong suction power. Hmm, it made me wonder, if they is a guy wearing a shirt that you like to see shirtless, slyly vacuum near him and suck off his shirt.
Also, something I love got my attention right away, it's not the bulge but something a few inches abovethat.

Gee, who would've guessed you'd see that first? :P XD

By habit, that is the first place that I look.

Well, that's certainly a unique way of losing a shirt Did he also lose his pants or was he going without them?

Yanno, I was asked to draw him in just undies, so Iunno, maybe that IS what happened to the pants!

Wow. You have to be a genius in incompetence to pull off an accident like this. Either that, or this vacuum is possessed by a very silly poltergeist.

You don't watch enough cartoons, man XD J/K.

hahah just how? XD

I'm reminded of some interestin' cartoon where this happened. Though for some guys, it's sometimes for the better. ;-3