I worked in a developing country for three years. Women’s breasts were not considered private. As a result, I saw breasts frequently. By about month two, a uncovered female breast was about as interesting to me as her elbow. There’s no reason to sexualize the breast. They are baby-feeding organs. Not to go all Freud on you, but I wonder if it’s a remnant of the breast-feeding positive feelings.
Idk, I see my wifes breasts a lot every day and I love them. Idk what are you talking about.
I mean, there are people who go freaky at the sight of feet even though you can see bare naked ones on every beach in the world.
Could it be that you were never really interested in breasts in the first place?
There’s no reason to sexualize the breast. They are baby-feeding organs.
I take it you’ve never been with a woman who enjoyed breast stimulation as part of sex? Baby feeding might be their “original” purpose, but it’s not the only purpose.
Well clearly there is no reason to sexualize masterbation either. Pretty sure orgasms can be desexualized as well. Artificial insemination is sexual though. /s
“there’s nothing sexual about breasts”
I never understand this opinion. Do you expect me to feel bad for getting aroused by breasts? Do you expect me to try and change that about myself? Do you expect me to explain it academically and defend it like a view that requires an argument?
If there wasn’t anything sexual about breasts, it doesn’t seem like people would get aroused by them. Simple as that.
Context matters and self control exists. Yes, boobs can be arousing but if just seeing a random boob in public gives you a boner there might indeed be something wrong with you.
Hell, gynaecologist and a doctor doing beast exams look at boobs and even vaginas all day and they manage not be constantly horny.
Get your shit together.
Only people in a handful of Western countries get aroused by them. Remember, men in western countries used to get aroused by ankles.
This is an extremely silly statement. People can and will be aroused by anything. Some people like feet. Feet are definitely not a sex organ. Some people get turned on by biceps. Some people really like legs. Definitely doesn’t need to be a sex organ to arouse someone.
Only people in a handful of Western countries get aroused by them
That absolutely cannot be true. Is Japan western, for example?
Remember, men in western countries used to get aroused by ankles.
Um, yeah that would be because they’d seen nothing more. Are you really implying they wouldn’t have been aroused by breasts??
In any case, “breasts aren’t sexy, billions of people are wrong” is a bad take. Maybe you win this community.
What country is not western to you???
This is a great reason to not see breasts too frequently.
This is true for every primary and secondary sexual body attribute.
In my country, we have a widespread “FKK” scene (“Freie Körperkulture” - “Free Body Culture”).
Which means just being completely nude, mainly outside.
Every major city has its FKK-beach somewhere, where it is essentially forbidden to wear any clothing.I have never tried it, but apparently the effect is the same as you describe for the breasts.
Quite soon after being at an FKK-area you just don’t care about the nudity any more.The more you hide stuff, the more interesting it will become.
That’s why things like hijabs don’t really make sense at all.
I e.g. just find them really alluring and quite erotic…Weird. You saw titties now so people who like tits are twisted. Let me know after you take a job in butt country, what’s wrong with butts. Have fun in the meantime finding a part of the human body that has evolved for pure aesthetic pleasure.
Almost all mammals have some form of secondary sex characteristic used to attract a mate, caused by hormone differences between the sexes.
Breasts are an example of secondary sex characteristics in humans, much like visible muscles are a secondary sex characteristic in human males, caused by testosterone. You may not find breasts particularly interesting, which is totally cool, but it’s also understandable why many humans do, as secondary sex characteristics are often evolved specifically for that purpose.
There’s no reason to sexualize the breast. They are baby-feeding organs.
Disagree. As with other body areas and organs, they can be multipurpose.
AFAIK the other great apes and other mammals don’t sexualise mammary glands, but in humans they do have a lot of extra sensory cells, and that can easily tie in to sex, mating, attraction. In humans they’ve also evolved a (somewhat unnecessary) layer of extra fat cells expressed in the female in order to better-resemble the buttocks, according to some theories.
Given the unusual helplessness of the human infant and its long development time, sexual attraction between partners is emphasized in all kinds of ways, and unlike most animals, sex is something that’s on the table all year-round.
Fun fact (updated): male breasts can evidently become functional in some circumstances.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-but-true-males-can-lactate/deleted by creator
Will do. I’ve read about this being easier for older men, perhaps due to lesser testosterone levels and whatever else.
It’s thought that if elbows were covered all the time those would be sexualized.
Well, the interesting thing about human breasts is that they’re enlarged at all times, not only when feeding a baby. To the chagrin of many spines…
It’s thought that if elbows were covered all the time those would be sexualized.
Isn’t that basically the joke about ankles in the victorian era?
And Amish peeps.
I think this holds true in general. Just don’t sexualize people, their bodies, body parts or whatever. Let them be. No catcalling, staring… do away with the associated old religious shenanigans… It’d be a more comfortable and free society for everyone.
I feel that way about nudity broadly. Nobody looks better naked than wearing something nice/sexy - not even the few who actually do look good naked as well.
