I think Ron knights said it best. DAZ states that the Catsuit would circumvent the need to buy Mike2 and shows an example. Then they show an example of Mike 1 in a pair of big pants. Next look at Ron;s post, and notice what he is really saying here. What if you not only gave away a pair of pants but also a shirt. Now look back at that big guy there imagine having a shirt for him, this would hide the lack of a belly and actually make this almost as bad as the full catsuit. Because of this I still don't see the distinction. Look at runstuff's post above. He has a pair of thermals, nothing wrong there. If he akes it one piece it breaks your current stance but if he splits it into two it doesn't. The end results are the same. With this in mind I would still have to say you have egg on your face in this matter because you are now saying there is a rule but you will be discrimitory in enforcing it. That will only land you in legal trouble rather than the other way around.