Are skin-tight clothes a form of nakedness?

aa180
Is she really covered here?
Is she really covered here?
I personally hold the view that skin-tight or form-fitting clothes are undoubtedly a version of nakedness. My analogy to explain/justify this would be to compare it to a woman wearing no clothes but simply painting her body with some paint. She's still naked even though her skin is "covered". And social experiments have even been done where a woman had her jeans painted on and walked around like that in public, and interestingly enough no one could tell that she was naked.

And note that this is not a question of whether it should be allowed or banned, etc, I'm simply asking the one question.

So do you agree?
Yes, skin-tight clothes are a form of nakedness
No, skin-tight clothes are not a form of nakedness
Other
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Updates
+1 y
Most people are going about it from the technical standpoint, but I'm talking it from the visual perspective. If the outline of her genitals our visible (e. g cameltoe), what difference is there between my brain's perception of it and seeing a naked vagina that's simply been painted on? Same goes for her breasts, ass, and legs.
Are skin-tight clothes a form of nakedness?
36 Opinion