4 ms·

Why Women Have Breasts

25 points by mhb 5y ago

71a54xd 5y ago
Incredibly, this is a controversial "view" in 2021 ;)
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tmsh 5y ago
Interesting article, but I hypothesize about the origins differently. Why do men have external penises? Part of the external physicality and "emphasis" in our anatomy is as a mutual pleasure seeking signal. The idea of erogenous zones is what is attractive in both breasts and penises. It's the fact that the person can be sexually stimulated, which in turn can lead to joint sexual stimulation (and side effects related to reproduction). It's why fundamentally a sensitive, healthy breast is most attractive (not necessarily the size). It's a biological part of the reason of why we project our own desires onto other people. Hormones are strong in most men and women (and have other network effects with precocity and resource accumulation/survival).
- amelius 5y ago
  But women have erogenous zones which are less accentuated.
  - tmsh 5y ago
    True. I guess it's more of a visual reminder tho which maybe helps with reproduction.
amelius 5y ago
But why do men have (permanent) nipples?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
throwaway_vcqQs 5y ago
> If breasts were merely for feeding babies, then most women would not have them. They would develop them only during pregnancy, and would lose them again when they stopped breast-feeding. Well, that's exactly what my wife did for each of our kids: nearly no breasts volume, then during pregnancy developed huge breasts, continued while feeding the baby, then nearly disappear after and back to initial state. Rinse and repeat. That's only one data point, yet it's funny how it fits so precisely the hypothesis rejected by the author.
simonblack 5y ago
More to the point, why don't men have breasts? The have the nipples and the underlying breast tissue, but the breasts just don't develop. If you think about it, why halve the available sources of milk for the next generation of humans when external food sources are low? That's a very poor human-survival policy.
- MrDresden 5y ago
  In situations where a lactating woman is starving, her body reduces or stop altogether to produce milk. As a human surival strategy, it makes much more sense to have one human gather resources and bring them to the lactating human to feed the growing human. Two starving humans with the ability to lactate would still starve, and take the baby with them.
  - andrewflnr 5y ago
    Or... they could take turns? Or both gather resources and lactate while carrying the kiddo? Complete division of labor is not necessarily the only way.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 5y ago
  I presumed breasts are considered an obstacle when hunting, as such men "lost" breasts
  - simonblack 5y ago
    That's why the Amazons of Greek mythology supposedly removed their right breasts: so they wouldn't interfere with their bows and arrows.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

25 points by mhb 5y ago

71a54xd 5y ago

Incredibly, this is a controversial "view" in 2021 ;)

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

tmsh 5y ago

Interesting article, but I hypothesize about the origins differently. Why do men have external penises? Part of the external physicality and "emphasis" in our anatomy is as a mutual pleasure seeking signal. The idea of erogenous zones is what is attractive in both breasts and penises. It's the fact that the person can be sexually stimulated, which in turn can lead to joint sexual stimulation (and side effects related to reproduction). It's why fundamentally a sensitive, healthy breast is most attractive (not necessarily the size). It's a biological part of the reason of why we project our own desires onto other people. Hormones are strong in most men and women (and have other network effects with precocity and resource accumulation/survival).

amelius 5y ago
But women have erogenous zones which are less accentuated.
- tmsh 5y ago
  True. I guess it's more of a visual reminder tho which maybe helps with reproduction.

amelius 5y ago

But why do men have (permanent) nipples?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

throwaway_vcqQs 5y ago

> If breasts were merely for feeding babies, then most women would not have them. They would develop them only during pregnancy, and would lose them again when they stopped breast-feeding. Well, that's exactly what my wife did for each of our kids: nearly no breasts volume, then during pregnancy developed huge breasts, continued while feeding the baby, then nearly disappear after and back to initial state. Rinse and repeat. That's only one data point, yet it's funny how it fits so precisely the hypothesis rejected by the author.

simonblack 5y ago

More to the point, why don't men have breasts? The have the nipples and the underlying breast tissue, but the breasts just don't develop. If you think about it, why halve the available sources of milk for the next generation of humans when external food sources are low? That's a very poor human-survival policy.

MrDresden 5y ago
In situations where a lactating woman is starving, her body reduces or stop altogether to produce milk. As a human surival strategy, it makes much more sense to have one human gather resources and bring them to the lactating human to feed the growing human. Two starving humans with the ability to lactate would still starve, and take the baby with them.
- andrewflnr 5y ago
  Or... they could take turns? Or both gather resources and lactate while carrying the kiddo? Complete division of labor is not necessarily the only way.
Fire-Dragon-DoL 5y ago
I presumed breasts are considered an obstacle when hunting, as such men "lost" breasts
- simonblack 5y ago
  That's why the Amazons of Greek mythology supposedly removed their right breasts: so they wouldn't interfere with their bows and arrows.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]