Lucky's "Best" Swimsuits Also The Smallest, Least Supportive

In addition to the $6,000 closet, Lucky‘s May issue also features a “Best Swimsuits Of The Season” feature, in which “best” means “teeny bikinis which barely cover the areolae and pubic mound.”

Yes, the string bikini is a “classic.” That cannot be disputed. But does this one fit? Do the strings need to be tied a little tighter on that top? Do I sound like my mother?

Please to be explaining how this is “sporty.” Also, will someone please help this woman? She is clearly stranded on some sharp rocks, and the hat won’t be of service.

Just in case the swimsuits haven’t been small enough for you, or haven’t shown enough skin, here we have some cut-outs.

This is alright. But isn’t it funny how the suits in Glamour, which offered more coverage, seemed more flattering to the body and less strained?

The single one-piece shown in this feature seems to lack both lining and support. It does offer boobsquash! Is this a desirable look?

Frankly, these cups could be a smidge wider.

This is a heavenly little suit, which is maybe why we only see one set of footprints.

Earlier: Lucky’s “Month Of Outfits” Breaks The Bank
Lucky Editor Ponders Purchase Of $225 Sweat Shorts
Recessionistas: Lucky Will Help You Spend What Little Money You Have Left
Lucky Promotes “Nude” Shoes, But For Whom?
You’ll Need Gold Bars To Afford Lucky’s “Loose Change”
Lucky Magazine Brings Outrageous Fortune To The Less Fortunate
Ali Larter: Lucky Girl