I have long been fascinated by breasts and the role they play in our society.

Men are often given very confusing signals re: breasts. It would appear that many women use their breasts to enhance their sexual appeal. Although the primary function of a breast is to provide sustenance for the young, they have somehow become much more than that.

So I thought I would ask the feminist what is the correct thing to do? Should we men empower the millions of women who display their breasts as sexual enticements? As it is their body and henceforth they have the right to display it as they see fit. Or should we demand that breasts be put away and only taken out when needed? As to use a feeding device for sexual purposes seems some what wrong.

When I was in New Guinea many of the women went about bare chested, after an initial period , one would hardly spare them a glance. Here it is the women themselves who use push up bras and exposed cleavage to gain attention. Of course when one stares, it is considered poor form, I wonder why?

Also is there any other animal beside humans were the female has breasts unless lactating? I can't think of one, very strange, eh.

Thanks you for considered reply.

Men are often very confusing about their moustaches. It would appear that many men use their mustaches to enhance their sexual appeal. Although the primary function of a mustache is to catch crumbs, they have somehow become much more than that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken The Kanuck:
Although the primary function of a breast is to provide sustenance for the young, they have somehow become much more than that.
KTK

---

quote:

---

I have long been fascinated by breasts and the role they play in our society.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldgoat:
(I'm reminded at this point of Rodney Dangerfield's famous line "We were so poor that if I hadn't been born a boy I would have had nothing to play with at all".)

---

quote:

---

Men are often given very confusing signals re: breasts. It would appear that many women use their breasts to enhance their sexual appeal. Although the primary function of a breast is to provide sustenance for the young, they have somehow become much more than that.

---

Well, the vagina is for giving birth with, but it can be a lot of fun in a sexual sense as well. Same with breasts -- they are part of the whole reproductive thang, taking part in more than one stage of it.

What puzzles me is the idea that some men seem ignorant of the fact that a woman's breasts are actually erogenous zones. They're there to turn her on, as well as her partner.

The post about the "cookie duster" demostrates a definate lack of orginality. Hopefully that is not the standard which prevails here?

"So I thought I would ask the feminist what is the correct thing to do?... should we demand that breasts be put away and only taken out when needed? As to use a feeding device for sexual purposes seems some what wrong."

From my feminist perspective this would be the very wrong thing to do.

"As it is their body and henceforth they have the right to display it as they see fit. "

To answer your questions in all seriousness, here's what I think:

1. Women don't necessarily use push-up bras and low-cut or clingy clothes in order to gain attention of a sexual nature. Sometimes we do, but sometimes we just think it looks nice.

2. It's none of my business what parts of a woman's body you find erotic, just as it's none of your business what parts of a man's body I find erotic. As long as you keep your admiration private, or at least low-key, my privacy/personal space/sense of propriety need never intersect with your sexualisation of various of my body parts.

3. Women run the gamut, from those who insist that breasts are not sexual, to those who never plan to use them for any purpose *other* than sex. My advice to you is to simply keep conversations about breasts off the menu until you know a given woman well enough to broach the subject without giving offense.

4. And as for staring, just keep in mind that most women have a name for men who ogle - 'boobs'. Just like you have your own assumptions about women - that we display our breasts to enhance sex appeal - we have assumptions that include quickly filing oglers in the 'not if he was the last man on the planet' pile. When in doubt, look us in the eye.

4a. And just remember your manners. One being, avoid comments about physical appearance in the workplace, except with people you have a fairly comfortable relationship with. Two, using a comment about personal appearance, even a complimentary one, isn't usually a good ice-breaker if you are approaching someone you don't know. Three, a woman who rejects a politely-worded and graciously-delivered compliment is not worth your time. Four, most women run, don't walk, from men who make sexual comments to, about, or even near us, so make *darn* sure that what *you* think is a politely-worded and graciously-delivered compliment isn't actually a sexual comment.

I seem to sense a defensiveness which I do not believe to be warranted. My question atleast in my opinion is a valid one, one which feminists should pay some attention to. Are women harming themselves with this double standard?

quote:

---

one which feminists should pay some attention to.

---

[ 25 February 2004: Message edited by: Non-partisan partisan ]

Saskatchewan too. I remember not long after the Ontario decision, a husband and wife drove up and down Regina's Albert Street in an open-top Jeep, the husband wearing the wife's bra and the wife topless, as a commentary of the double standard in the law. If I recall correctly, they were arrested and charged (as was their goal), and they fought the charges and won, overturning Saskatchewan's law against female toplessness.

quote:

---

Is it still legal in Ontario for women to be topless in public? I know it was for a while, and some conservative groups went apeshit about it. What's the status now?

---

As far as I know the court decision stands.

As usual the conservative groups went apeshit over nothing. Its still very rare for women to go topless on a beach or whatever in Ontario.

"Western civilization as we know it...blah blah blah" has not imploded.

And, I don't see that changing for a very long time given North American culture. Besides with the hole in the ozone layer and the UV radiation its probably not a good idea for men or women to go topless.

quote:

---

What puzzles me is the idea that some men seem ignorant of the fact that a woman's breasts are actually erogenous zones.

---

Git out! Really? Some guys don't know this?

Oh well, takes all kinds to make a world, I guess.

quote:

---

but I definitely think there are a lot of men out there who don't know how to touch a woman's breasts *properly*.

---

quote:

---

Is it still legal in Ontario for women to be topless in public? I know it was for a while, and some conservative groups went apeshit about it. What's the status now?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
The case is still good law in Ontario.

---

quote:

---

But the fact remains that normally men do use push up jock straps or underwire underwear to highlight the penis

---

A)Underwires are often used to help support large breasts taking some of the weight off the shoulders. I'm sure you could educate yourself on the functions of bras if you so desired. Therefore, although they may make the breast higher and more "attractive" they are not necessarily being used for that purpose.

and 2 give me a break about the penis not being highlighted.

Tight jeans, constant shifting of the jewels, and many other ways are employeed to draw attention to the penis.

quote:

---

...but I definitely think there are a lot of men out there who don't know how to touch a woman's breasts *properly*.

I blame early (teenage) access to porno - not that I'm anti-porno, but IMO men who've watched a lot of it, particularly as teenagers, have a *lot* of very bad modelling of how to pleasure a woman.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BleedingHeart:
According to Desmond Morris the breasts in humans are supposed to be substitutes for the buttocks.

---

quote:

---

Denis Morris is a quack. His book is interesting though. But there's a reason why we don't study humans like we study apes.

---

...because we can TALK to fellow humans.
...because we are humans ourselves so mix in our specific experience and cultural understandings...

With beluga wales, we don't have such complications or advantages. We come closer with apes, but not enough.

For instance, read old anthropology texts written around the time Europeans first made contact with the indigenous peoples living in previously unknown lands.... and see how we've progressed from there.

You can't understand people by just watching them. I mean, you can gain some insights, but you won't know what's really going on. Imagine someone coming from Mars and observing activity in a modern office building without asking what's going on. How's he to know what is done because of religion or economics...

Desmong Morris explained his interpretation of what he saw, but it's not a persuasive argument of what is. Read the premise to his books. He talks about how he was shunned like Darwin was!! Hardly, he just had crappy methods.

quote:

---

Originally posted by FPTP:
Take social science 101, my friend.

...because we can TALK to fellow humans.
.

---

I took psychology 100 many years ago. I also took a second year psychology course, a Zoology course on animal behaviour and four years of psychiatry courses.

Apes actually have quite sophisticated methods of communication. So do many animals.

[ 25 February 2004: Message edited by: BleedingHeart ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BleedingHeart:

I took psychology 100 many years ago. I also took a second year psychology course, a Zoology course on animal behaviour and four years of psychiatry courses.

Apes actually have quite sophisticated methods of communication. So do many animals.

[ 25 February 2004: Message edited by: BleedingHeart ]

---

Well, then you knew the answer.

Yes apes have a pretty good communication system. We would never have realised this if we used Morris' method, which was to watch people and draw your own commentary on what you are seeing. This method can give you insights, but it's hardly scientific. That's the problem. He's claiming people do this because of that, but there's no way to assume that from his erratic methods.

quote:

---

because we can TALK to fellow humans.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anchoress:

1. Women don't necessarily use push-up bras and low-cut or clingy clothes in order to gain attention of a sexual nature. Sometimes we do, but sometimes we just think it looks nice.

.

---

Please help a sensitive new age man.

Since the 1990s there has been marked increase in the amount of exposed breast that is visible. This is not only in movie stars and singers but also in public (my wife no longer lets me walk down Whyte in the summer) and even in the workplace.

Now it strikes me that much of the clothing and I suppose the underwear is designed to expose and display the breasts so that this is intentional rather than a casual display.

It's often occurred to me that, in the summer, I'd love to be able to run topless, but both the sunburn and bounce factors make that impractical. (having a couple of babies takes the starch out of 'em )

[ 26 February 2004: Message edited by: Zoot Capri ]

Two hundred years ago, womens' bustlines were so low the tops of nipples showed - and only men wore heels. The people then dressed like that because they wanted to follow the trends, and because they saw what looked nice on other people and wanted to try it for themselves. People today are no different.

Nowadays, although lots of women wear short skirts, only sex trade workers and a very small percentage of gutsy girls wear skirts as short as the shortest minis worn in the sixties. And although most of us who've seen reruns of Laugh-In and Georgie Girl have probably *seen* skirts that short, we'd still stare if we saw someone dressed like that wandering down a mall corridor, or stepping out of an office building.

And since micro-minis *aren't* the current fashion, I'd predict that such a gal probably did wear it in order to draw eyes.

Face it 99% of the men who walk around without a shirt are an eyesore to both sexes.

As a woman who prefers not to be ogled, I generally wear fairly modest clothes, and I'm realizing lately that I even slouch in order to minimize the visibleness of my chest. Seems that regardless of how one's dressed, people will stare. I find that even in my full winter gear, I get men ogling me, and it makes me pretty uncomfortable.

quote:

---

Lets ban the speedo while we're at it.

---

Well, having opened that door, I must insist that we also ban other eyesores:

- those huge ear piercings that look like they have winecorks in them. Sure, it might have been "kewl" back in 1997, but now it's just sad looking.

- any visible asscrack, for any reason. If you have to bend over, wear suitable pants. Or wrap your ass in a blanket.

- Bo Derek cornrows on caucasians, as well as dreadlocks on caucasians. If you don't want to wash your hair, that's called "disgusting", not "fashion".

- any attempts to embed fake diamonds in: teeth, fingernails, or the lenses of one's sunglasses.

- "ZZ Top" beards. Banning them will put thousands of mice and small birds out of a home, but we have to think of the bigger picture.

- any shapes, words, or corporate logos shaved into one's head. Including, but not limited to, Batman symbols.

- any garment which appears to lace up, from ankle to collarbone. Why do I need to see a continuous strip of your flesh from head to toe?

- "Lanny McDonald"/"70's Pornstar" mustaches.

- bowler hats, top hats, derbies and fedoras worn "ironically" by anyone under 80.

- "Doug Gilmour" Leafs uniforms worn by anyone other than Doug Gilmour.

quote:

---

Lizard Breath, don't slouch! This is your mum talking!

---

Thanks mum. I'm trying so hard not to. I've only just lately realized how horrible my posture really is. I'm even going to physio to help me straighten out because it would seem that my body has completely forgotten how to hold me up properly.

I'm a big thinker, though, and pretty introspective, so I'm always looking to adress the cause as well as the symptoms, and I think that at least part of the cause is a self-consciousness about my body, and a real self-protection drive that keeps me from thrusting my chest up and forward as good posture would have one do. (I also work at a desk job, on the phone and computer all day, which is not so great either.)

I don't think I'm alone, though, in compensating for unwanted attention by minimizing (at least some of) my feminine features...It's not particularly healthy, though, so I'm gonna have to find a different way to cope with Ogling Ogres.

quote:

---

Sorry, but when the 'hi-beams' are on, it's often hard to avoid getting caught in the headlights, ladies.

---

quote:

---

Just don't expect any sympathy when you turn into road kill.

---

quote:

---

By the way, your two pussycats are lovely. What are their names?

---

Is this question for me? Are you being lewd?

I only have one cat. His name is Harvey.

[ 26 February 2004: Message edited by: Lizard Breath ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
Lizard Breath, don't slouch! This is your mum talking!

We could also ban flourescent clothing except when worn as safety gear. And personally, I'm rather averse to baseball caps in urban settings in anyone over the age of 12 or so, unless he or she is actually playing baseball.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lizard Breath:

(I also work at a desk job, on the phone and computer all day, which is not so great either.)

---

Just a quick bit o thread-drift:

instead of a chair, try a ball like these ones.

They are usually used for fitness trainers, but if you sit on one in front of your desk, you can't have bad posture... you simply fall off.

Maybe I'll just buy one of my own, and then I can take it with me when I leave this job...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:

Well, having opened that door, I must insist that we also ban other eyesores:

- those huge ear piercings that look like they have winecorks in them. Sure, it might have been "kewl" back in 1997, but now it's just sad looking.

- Bo Derek cornrows on caucasians, as well as dreadlocks on caucasians. If you don't want to wash your hair, that's called "disgusting", not "fashion".

---

Anyone who has stretched their lobes to "winecork" size hasn't done it to be "kewl", they've done it because it was something important to them, somewhat akin to getting a tattoo. A lobe stretch of this size is a permanent body modification as it is very unlikely that the hole will shrink down to a "normal" size.

quote:

---

bowler hats, top hats, derbies and fedoras worn "ironically" by anyone under 80

---

Hey hey hey. I like fedoras. I hope to have some rather lovely pics of me in one from federal council shortly (thanks Bendp!) I wouldn't classify my wearing it as "ironic" - it was just darn cute!

i'm in medical school and recently did a stint in palliative care where i saw a number of women with breast cancer. it's no surprise that after mastectomies women have a difficult time with body image. however, in conversations with others it's horrifyingly common for marriages/relationships to end post-mastectomy. perhaps it is also the stress of going through cancer, however after uterine resections for gynecological cancer it is also common for this to happen thought to be because sexual function can be altered, thus affecting a relationship. is this shallow? is this a sexist/chauvanist thing? it's often men leaving women in these circumstances.

on the flipside, it was interesting to see reactions to a very sick lady, 76 years old, who had bilateral breast augmentation. it made for quite the conversations. given that implants haven't been around for that long, she probably only had them for maximum 15 years, possibly a bit more, but unlikely. people couldn't understand why a lady of that age would have them.

I guess I'm not suprised that marriages fail after a battle with breast or gynocological cancer, but it is awfully disappointing.

The 75yr. old women with breast implants does raise some interesting questions hey? I guess a lot of those conversations you mention would center around why she would bother? Seems a reasonable enough question at first, but she had a whole part of her body removed. I would think it's pretty natural to want to replace it with something...to at least feel a semblance of wholeness?

I know of lots of marriages that broke up in the face of terminal or life threatening illness'.

If terminal and life threatening illness' are frightening for the persons who have them, they are also frightening for the people around them.

quote:

---

The 75yr. old women with breast implants does raise some interesting questions hey? I guess a lot of those conversations you mention would center around why she would bother? Seems a reasonable enough question at first, but she had a whole part of her body removed. I would think it's pretty natural to want to replace it with something...to at least feel a semblance of wholeness?

---

This lady actually had not had her breasts removed because of cancer. I saw her in the ICU, a very sick lady, unable to have a conversation, so I have no idea what the motivations were behind her surgery. So, the conversations that centred around that were around the purely cosmetic reasons that she would want implants, based on that presumption. I suppose that is another example of the ageism in our society where we think that old people shouldn't be too concerned with their looks. I've also heard the same sentiments from physicians with regards to women with severe osteoporosis whose spines are very curved at the top, they lose height, and because of the curve of their spine their ribs are lower and their bellies are compressed outward. Thus, their appearances are markedly altered (i think we can all picture bent-over-little old ladies in our heads) and they express embarassment at their appearance and despair at the fact that their clothes don't fit well anymore.

Back to breasts.

quote:

---

so what is the function of breasts? they are nutrient-giving organs for a very short part of women's lives, if at all.

---

Clarabel condensed the essence of this thread with this phrase. Today I am pondering the whole notion of breasts and how young women's relationships with their bodies have developed (no pun intended).

How far have we really come since the braless abandon of the seventies? This story on the news today stunned me, with a gut-wrenching sorrow for the absence of women's physical empowerment and the lack of respect for one's body.

Isn't this like the fourth thread started by a man about breasts in the feminism forum in recent history, or something?

edited to add: Oh, okay. It wasn't recent history.

[ 25 June 2005: Message edited by: audra trower williams ]

I have seen many marriages break up because of amputation, regardless of cause and I have seen some become stronger.

The issue of sexual attraction to people with amputations has an interesting paralell to this thread. "Devotees" are people that are sexually stimulated by the site of an amputee, usually sans prosthesis.

There are many web sites dedicated to this phenomenon. I have written extensively on it myself on my website. Many liken it to men who are attracted to womens breasts or hair colour.

90% of devotees are men that are attracted to women with amputations of a specific level. There is nothing more sexually stimulating to these men than a woman on crutches with a short skirt and peaking stump from underneath said skirt.

A good "devotee" site is http://overground.be

My site can be found at http://amputee-online.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by clarabel:
If my hypothetical partner had a mastectomy, would it have the same effect on our relationship if, say, she had a leg amputation? Who knows? Both alter body form, and would make one somewhat more self-concious and thus alter relationship dynamics.

---

[ 25 June 2005: Message edited by: rockerbiff ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by rockerbiff:
90% of devotees are men that are attracted to women with amputations of a specific level.

---

You may be assured that there a good number of gay amputee/disabled 'devotees,' as well.

I am not an amputee; I have MS. But in the 4 years since I started using crutches to get around, I've been approached by such fellows twice-- and I don't get out much.

It seem to me that only someone who is not confident in their own values and is uncomfortable in their own skin would need to seek absolution for something that is as natural as breathing and regulated by social conventions about which there is very little to say because they are both very familiar and totally arbitrary.

Whether a woman's body is there for me to enjoy or not, I'm going to enjoy it. And whether she would mind my staring, or not, I'm not going to, because it's not polite in any context and because the convention says that enjoying a woman visually is something that is to be done discreetly.

quote:

---

so what is the function of breasts? they are nutrient-giving organs for a very short part of women's lives, if at all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

quote:

---

Should we men empower the millions of women who display their breasts as sexual enticements? As it is their body and henceforth they have the right to display it as they see fit. Or should we demand that breasts be put away and only taken out when needed? As to use a feeding device for sexual purposes seems some what wrong.

---

IMHO it's their business what they wear so I'd both reserve criticism and I don't think it's within the scope of anyone's role to "demand" anything of someone else's breasts.

quote:

---

Now I know from childhood that it is unpolite to stare under any circumstances but the question is: if a woman intentionally exposes part of her breasts does she want men to look (not stare) at them. By woman I mean not only women who read Babble but also the others.

---

Not necessarily.

quote:

---

Mine increased in size after the birth of my first daughter, and then again after the second. 36B to 38C to 38DD. I find them uncomfortable, annoying, hard on my back, clothes don't fit properly anymore, a real pain. Men stare at them, and that used to annoy and embarass me when I was younger. Now, it just amuses me.

---

It's extremely annoying.

It always seems that the person that is staring seems to think you woke up that morning and were thinking of THEM when you dressed.

quote:

---

As usual I can only tell the truth. If a woman's breast/cleavage is showing, then one thing is for true, SHE really likes her breasts as both mammary glands for her young AND she really likes her breasts as part of the entire foreplay/climatic part of her sexuality

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hailey:
It could be all of those things and/or it could be that she feels that her outfit looks nicest this way.

---

¡Ex-act-a-men-te!

Parents seem to be reinforcing the mentality that plastic surgery is an acceptable way to make oneself feel better. Uh, why not take that $5-7,000 and get therapy? Grapple with and work through issues as opposed to going under the knife to conform to the media's idealized female figure?

I have had issues since my teens relating to my breasts. I learned early that boys (later, men) liked looking at them and that they provided me with some sort of legitimacy, or inclusion, even before I opened my mouth to speak.

Growing up my parents, who I adore and consider good people, spent an undue amount of time worried about us being covered up. To this day the whole idea of someone else deciding what is too much or too little to wear drives me crazy. I'm not responsible for other people's sins, issues, deficits, nosyness or anything else. If they can't go outside without behaving poorly then they should stay home.

As for oglers... they remind me of little kids with their noses pressed against the glass at a candystore or bakery... someone should wipe the drool off their chins...

Now, granted I'm speaking about reduction rather than augmentation. But in both operations there is a change of the body made, and the benefits of a reduction are partly psychological as well as physical. So I'm reluctant to take away any opportunity for someone to make their body better match what they feel it should be, even if it involves plastic surgery. I'm similarly reluctant to force someone to stop compulsive weightlifting or an ED if they genuinely feel it's what they want. Of course in the later 2 cases there's some serious health problems that have to be dealt with but I still am reluctant to condemn someone for what they do with their own body.

quote:

---

Lets ban the speedo while we're at it.

---

I always find it fascinating when women subconciously stare at other womens breasts. I get quite a hoot out of that one

[ 27 June 2005: Message edited by: Lukewarm ]

quote:

---

Guys certainly do the whole talk to the chest thing (annoying)

---

[ 29 June 2005: Message edited by: Lukewarm ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
What if a guy checks out your ass at the gym? OK with that too?

---

Quite frankly I can't picture a straight guy complaining about getting checked out by too many women

[ 29 June 2005: Message edited by: Lukewarm ]

quote:

---

I think you're comparing oranges to apples there.

---

No. I'm comparing "staring" with "staring".

quote:

---

What does one's opinion of homosexuality have to do with "a compliment"? Are you saying it's only a compliment when it comes from the opposite sex??

---

quote:

---

why are women supposed to 'enjoy the compliment', every single friggin' time a guy stares at their breasts?

---

[ 29 June 2005: Message edited by: Lukewarm ]

quote:

---

Please understand I was kidding. I also get quite offended whe I'm excessively hit on by women I don't particularily find attractive, thankfully I don't have breats for sleezebags to stare at.

---

So what DO you have to stare at, big boy? Nice package? Calves? How's the ass? Tight? High?

Quote: "Men are often given very confusing signals re: breasts. It would appear that many women use their breasts to enhance their sexual appeal. Although the primary function of a breast is to provide sustenance for the young, they have somehow become much more than that."

Response: You're first misktake here is equating breastfeeding with signals. Breast play more than one role in a womyn's life, as stated earlier by another poster. In north america, they are used for both sexuality and feeding our young. But please don't suggest that womyn choose to have their breasts be used as troughs...that is just a natural occurance.

Quote: "So I thought I would ask the feminist what is the correct thing to do?"
Response: The correct thing to do is not black and white. Not even among feminists. The issue of sexuality is a great debate in the field. My suggestion, one can look at breast, as one looks at other parts of anyone's body naturally. Often I find the issue surrounds not the looking, but the operations of a man's brain while doing so. You should be able to glance at a womyn's breasts, if you're attracted to her. Don't run to them first, don't look at them first. The idea is not to look at breasts as 1 part, but rather, taking them in the whole of a womyn's appearance.
The issue some feminists bring up is that of the objectification and the "dismemberment" of womyn. We are often viewed in parts...how is her ass? how are her tits? the thighs? eyes?...We ask that people start looking at womyn in the whole. Are you attracted to her.

As well, the other issue, of course, is basing your attraction to someone on their looks. Guess what, that's superficiality and no, feminists don't like that. It's about getting to know someone. For example, I might see someone who i think is attractive, so i immediately go to talk to them, find out who they are, what they're about...if i don't jive with that..goodbye. Be interested in the womyn, not the body.

Quote: "Should we men empower the millions of women who display their breasts as sexual enticements? "
Response: Men cannot empower womyn...you're not special. This is a chicken and egg question as well. Ask yourself why womyn "display their breasts"...are you certain they are "displaying" them or are they just wearing a low cut shirt. Why do they feel the need? Is this perhaps our culture and media telling them they must.
For example, I don't wear a bear, but I'm not trying to display my breasts by walking into a cold room...I just don't like bras. It's about perspective.

Quote: Or should we demand that breasts be put away and only taken out when needed?
Response: You cannot demand anything, you have no control. It is mysogynist and pig-headed of you to suggest this...even though I assume you didn't realise it at the time.

Quote: As to use a feeding device for sexual purposes seems some what wrong.
Response: Guess what, tongues are for food and air...belly buttons were once for air (but oh so cute)...everything about sexuality involves the entire body and the entire body has other uses. Sexuality is not about function, it's about pleasure. Reproduction is an consequence/result of having sex...but sexuality is so much more. There is no other function but pleasure. Christ, just enjoy it.

Quote: When I was in New Guinea many of the women went about bare chested, after an initial period , one would hardly spare them a glance. Here it is the women themselves who use push up bras and exposed cleavage to gain attention. Of course when one stares, it is considered poor form, I wonder why?

Response: seriously, it's about persepctive. Could one not consider just outwardly displaying them an attempt at "displaying" ones breasts. They are less sexualised in other countries because of attitudes. Of course you shouldn't stare, staring is objectification...we need none of that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by waterDeva:

That would be like stating that although the primary function of the penis is to empty the bladder, it has somehow become much more than that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lukewarm:
I always find it fascinating when women subconciously stare at other womens breasts. I get quite a hoot out of that one

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Ujj:
Everyone likes tits. I mean, they are just so fun and exhilirating to be next to, around, or even in between.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EFA:
How do you know it's subconscious?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anchoress:

It's pretty obvious; the moment they realise they're staring, they get embarrassed and look away.

---

Maybe it's the moment they realize it's being noticed that they're staring that they look away.

[ 02 July 2005: Message edited by: EFA ]

On a sort-of related note... I hate it when people (sometimes virtual strangers) say to me... "Smile." It just irks me that people have the gonads to order me to change my appearance for their viewing pleasure!

quote:

---

Originally posted by steffie:
Anchoress: Those are the ones with scruples. The ones who creep me out are those who stare, then when I catch them at it, smile at me like they've just paid me a compliment. Or - they look at me as if to say - "Yes, I noticed that you were displaying your breasts for me ..." As if my appearance was solely for the pleasure of others!!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anchoress:
EFA: I really don't think so. Do you?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by steffie:
On a sort-of related note... I hate it when people (sometimes virtual strangers) say to me... "Smile." It just irks me that people have the gonads to order me to change my appearance for their viewing pleasure!

Am I over-reacting?

---

As a woman, I admit to checking out other women's bodies, breasts included.

Nice set o'breats ya got there, toots.

That replaces my previous favourite term, "breasteses", inspired by the testosterone-addled men I've known and loved.

[ 02 July 2005: Message edited by: Hinterland ]

When it comes to assessing looks, if it seems the person is just mesmerised by me and can't drag their eyes away, I always take it as a complement. Even though I dress for myself, I'm not going to begrudge an admiring gaze even if it's not from someone whose attention I particularly want.

quote:

---

So what DO you have to stare at, big boy? Nice package? Calves? How's the ass? Tight? High?

Signed - Sleezebag.

---

quote:

---

It's not my fault you're a savage moron

---

Lukewarm this is the feminism forum. Usually, when talking about women's sexuality, it's completely innapropriate to make little remarks about how turned on you are by women, no matter how innocuously you intended it.

Along with your gun threads, it makes you sound like a troglodyte. And as a man, that bugs me.

[ 04 July 2005: Message edited by: Hinterland ]

quote:

---

Don't be too hard on Lukewarm, Scout. It took him five days to come back at me with that bit o'brilliance.

---

quote:

---

Lukewarm this is the feminism forum. Usually, when talking about women's sexuality, it's completely innapropriate to make little remarks about how turned on you are by women, no matter how innocuously you intended it.

---

I appologize, the I'm appauled by the female race

quote:

---

Along with your gun threads, it makes you sound like a troglodyte. And as a man, that bugs me.

---

[ 04 July 2005: Message edited by: Lukewarm ]

quote:

---

I thought someone like Hinterland would be out playing in the sand box, do they have computers at day care these days?

---

That's it? This is the best you can do?