You would have to use the “reasonable person standard”. Would a regional person think that whatever was happening and was primarily designed to incite lustful thoughts.

The problem I see with that is some clothing may be designed to “appeal to prurient interest” but if it’s being worn by a pretty woman who was assigned ‘female’ at birth was wearing it, people wouldn’t think twice. For example, a backless dress that rides up on the legs and has a plunging neckline being worn to attend a public charity gala or something. Despite it appealing to prurient interest on some level (using the most commonly accepted legal definition I could find) on some level (as pretty much all slinky dresses are designed to do), I’m sure it wouldn’t get called into the cops. Now replace that with someone who was assigned ‘male’ at birth and all of the sudden it becomes a crime? Come the hell on. That’s nuts. And that is exactly the kind of clothing they will be looking for.

The bill talking about strip clubs and whatnot seems like subterfuge.. or rather, a distraction.