Definitely Maybe

Okay, this is a bit silly... I can understand the evolution of sexual attraction, but why are we men attracted to boobies and not just the nether regions? What would be the point of being turned on by thems gems?

Camaban

More to look at.

I mean, if you tried looking at the "nether regions" while talking to someone, you'd probably get kneed in the face while trying to get an upskirt.

Camaban

although, I dunno

bigger ones = better able to feed children as a suggestion?

The Lone Ranger

The size and shape of a woman's breasts actually reveal a fair amount about her health, which may help explain why men tend to find them so fascinating.

As a rule, firm breasts are a sign of youth, for instance, since the collagen fibers that give them shape tend to break down as one ages. Other factors being equal, women who are well-nourished and healthy during puberty/adolescence tend to have larger and more symmetrical breasts than women who are malnourished and/or sickly during this portion of their lives.

The size of a woman's breasts is not correlated with her ability to produce milk, however, so far as I know.

In other words, men who are attracted to women with relatively large, symmetrical, and firm breasts will be (on average) picking relatively young and healthy mates.

Cheers,

Michael

[ August 22, 2002: Message edited by: The Lone Ranger ]</p>

Blinn

<a href="http://www.breastfeeding.com/reading_room/breasts_shaped_babies.html" target="_blank">Breast shaped by evolution for babies, not men</a>

Must be an Oedipus complex then, 'cause I really like perky titties.

Doubting Didymus

Are you sure? I agree with you on the health and youth signifier, but I would have thought that a larger volume of lactating material would be directly correlated with the amount of milk produced.

Doubting Didymus

No, that's the thing, see. Men are bound to be attracted to perky breasts BECAUSE they are helpful to the child. Not, I hesitate to add, because they make a concious decision ('hmm, those breasts would really help out my child, yum yum') but because men whose genes predispose them to that shape will leave more decendants than men who choose a shape that babies can't use.

Blinn

But according to that article, breasts are not eroticized in many cultures, so it would seem it is an acquired fetish, and not inherited.

The Lone Ranger

The breasts themselves are just fat and other connective tissues surrounding the mammary glands. So far as I know, the size of the mammary glands is no greater in large-breasted women than in smaller-breasted women.

Cheers,

Michael

The Lone Ranger

It's difficult to say. Certainly, in many (perhaps most) cultures, breasts aren't the overtly erotic features that they are in most Western cultures. That doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't objects of sexual selection, however.

For example, studies consistently show that people (of both sexes) find people whose body features are more symmetrical more attractive (other things being equal) than those whose features are less symmetrical.

This is true despite the fact that "symmetrical features" is rarely listed as a particularly sexy trait, and that few of the people in these studies can say why they find these individuals particularly attractive.

One way in which these studies have been done is by using computers to subtly alter photographs in order to make the facial features more symmetrical. People consistently find the altered pictures to be more attractive than the unaltered ones, but can seldom say why.

[For what it's worth, there's no reason that these two hypotheses have to be mutually-exclusive. Perhaps the shape of the female breast evolved to help babies feed. After that, there might well have been selective pressure for men to prefer women with firm, symmetrical breasts as mates, since they're likely to be healthier.]

Cheers,

Michael

[ August 22, 2002: Message edited by: The Lone Ranger ]</p>