I really wish that I hadn't posted the pic of the girl in leather, given the rise in blood pressure that it caused you, dear reader. I have no idea who the girl is (if anyone) or what she might represent if identified, and I don't care. As I said before, I merely spotted a pic of an attractive female wearing some rather nice leather clothes and shoes who conveyed a look that combined smartness and sexiness. Provocative - yes, but only in the sense that it hinted at latent desire in a rather sultry way. And most women who make a reasonable attempt at 'dressing-up' (and not all do, alas) are surely attempting at least a little provocation? The top was scarcely indecent and the knee-length skirt, albeit partially unzipped, showed a lot less than many do - with the caveat already noted that it could be adjusted as would be appropriate (or not!). If that zip was either fully-down, or fully-up, we would likely be in a different realm - imagination is a fine thing but it can run away with its owner. (I'm reminded at this point of the schoolmaster who rebuked a boy thus: 'Stop whistling that filthy tune!').
For the record, I would be distinctly embarrassed to be seen out in an ordinary public setting with a female companion if she was really provocative/tarty in appearance (however one might define the boundaries of such a look). Most of the women in so-called reality shows (not that I am a fan) provide examples. But I wouldn't consider that the girl in my pic has crossed that line. And certainly not as closely as do skin-tight latex or PVC skirts or dresses, even if showing no thigh (see examples above), or wet-look leggings. And conceivably - now there's a word to ponder - my opinion of any of these women would change for the worse when she opened her mouth - and I'm referring to how she spoke and what she might say - or if her conduct was in any way raunchy.
Time for a cold shower, methinks.