Re: Ecological Nursing was Glucose... and relatives

November 28, 2004

Just spicing things up a bit:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en & c2coff=1 & q=desmond+morris+breasts+secondary+s\

ex+characteristics & spell=1

" The evolution of desire may also determine why we look the way we do,

and what turns us on. The human breast consists of fat, not milk

glands, and breast size varies greatly among human females without

affecting their ability to nurse. Thus, the explanation cannot be

based on the need to nurse infants. Rather, human female breasts are

secondary sexual characteristics that evolved to attract mates.

According to Desmond (The Naked Ape, 1967), this took place

along with the switch from dogstyle to missionary mating, the

pendulous shape and cleavage of the breasts mimicking the previous

attractiveness of the female buttocks. This also explains why men find

other pendulous shapes (like ear lobes) and other cleavages (like toes

in low-vamped shoes) such a turn-on. "

B.

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:13:19 -0800, Blazey

<teresa.blazey@...> wrote:

> Yeah, but they look like a rump...

> B.

>

> On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:53:52 -0800, Lenz Kim, Charlie and Riley

> <lenz3@...> wrote:

> >

> > Somehow I managed to miss out on this thread...

> > I am nursing my 47 mos old son. When he was under a year old everyone

seemed to accept me pulling out my boob in public to nurse him. But, when that

magical 1 yr mark came everyone seemed to freak out, family, friends, strangers.

I am not really the kind of person who cares too much about what people think

but by the time my son turned 2 people were insinuating I was some kind of child

abuser, and that did kind of get to me.

> >

> > I tried to print out articles for people I knew but it didn't have much

effect. Strangely, soon after people seemed to just give up. My mom still says

once in a while " you're still nursing him right? "

> >

> > I have to agree with a previous poster that nursing gets much easier after 2

1/2 or 3. I think it just gets easier to communicate and negotiate with the

little one. When my son was 2 and still wanting to nurse around the clock and I

was getting so much social pressure to stop it was really difficult. I was glad

to have the support of my LLL list.

> >

> > Luckily my husband is totally supportive. My sisters husband pressured her

to wean at one year because he said he wanted her breasts back. Maybe if he

would have been nursed by his own mother he wouldn't need his wife's boobies so

much he felt he had to compete with his child. <giggle>

> >

> > This could get a whole new thread started as to the reason WHY our culture

has such a sexual fascination with breasts. Hello! they are not anywhere near

the genitals.

> >

> > Kim

> >

November 28, 2004

Aven,

I think you have hit on something. Being one of those women who hardly

has enough fat on her body to sustain life (and yes, I can out eat

most men), I can personally attest to hard it is to " reproduce well " .

I have always had to be extremely careful of what foods I consume, or

I will start dropping weight like most people gain it. And I suffered

a few miscarriages before I was blessed with healthy children. And I

have always felt it was because of my health that I did lose the

pregnancies. (Even though the doctors said I was " healthy as a horse " ,

and they couldn't understand what could have happened.)

Perhaps fat (in a healthy sense) is more attractive because it is an

indicator of how easily a male could produce his heir.

Catz

> Another thought: A truly FLAT-chested woman may be

> lacking the body fat to reproduce well. And some of us

> GO flat after nursing lots of babies. It seems to me that

> men love young, firm breasts, whatever their size -

> indicating a ripe young woman with enough fat to be

> healthy.

> Aven

November 28, 2004

This is a better quote:

http://www.niia.net/~alsman/fetching.html

" In his book The Naked Ape, speculates that, as humans evolved

from the other primates and began to walk upright, the human female

breasts became fleshy and round. This was not due to a biological need

to feed children. Females of other primate species are flat chested

and have no problems feeding their offspring or attracting mates. But

these other primates, as our ancestors most certainly did, use buttock

presentation to indicate when they are ready to breed. Since the human

female is almost always in a sexually capable condition, the breasts

would seem to have become an ever-present sexual display and a form of

" self mimicry " as they are intended to frontally duplicate the

female's own round fleshy buttocks, a trait also not found in other

primates and one to which the human male had already become

conditioned (74-75). "

On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 12:24:20 -0800, Blazey

<teresa.blazey@...> wrote:

> Just spicing things up a bit:

>

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en & c2coff=1 & q=desmond+morris+breasts+secondary+s\

ex+characteristics & spell=1

>

> " The evolution of desire may also determine why we look the way we do,

> and what turns us on. The human breast consists of fat, not milk

> glands, and breast size varies greatly among human females without

> affecting their ability to nurse. Thus, the explanation cannot be

> based on the need to nurse infants. Rather, human female breasts are

> secondary sexual characteristics that evolved to attract mates.

> According to Desmond (The Naked Ape, 1967), this took place

> along with the switch from dogstyle to missionary mating, the

> pendulous shape and cleavage of the breasts mimicking the previous

> attractiveness of the female buttocks. This also explains why men find

> other pendulous shapes (like ear lobes) and other cleavages (like toes

> in low-vamped shoes) such a turn-on. "

>

> B.

>

> On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:13:19 -0800, Blazey

> <teresa.blazey@...> wrote:

> > Yeah, but they look like a rump...

> > B.

> >

> > On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:53:52 -0800, Lenz Kim, Charlie and Riley

> > <lenz3@...> wrote:

> > >

> > > Somehow I managed to miss out on this thread...

> > > I am nursing my 47 mos old son. When he was under a year old everyone

seemed to accept me pulling out my boob in public to nurse him. But, when that

magical 1 yr mark came everyone seemed to freak out, family, friends, strangers.

I am not really the kind of person who cares too much about what people think

but by the time my son turned 2 people were insinuating I was some kind of child

abuser, and that did kind of get to me.

> > >

> > > I tried to print out articles for people I knew but it didn't have much

effect. Strangely, soon after people seemed to just give up. My mom still says

once in a while " you're still nursing him right? "

> > >

> > > I have to agree with a previous poster that nursing gets much easier after

2 1/2 or 3. I think it just gets easier to communicate and negotiate with the

little one. When my son was 2 and still wanting to nurse around the clock and I

was getting so much social pressure to stop it was really difficult. I was glad

to have the support of my LLL list.

> > >

> > > Luckily my husband is totally supportive. My sisters husband pressured

her to wean at one year because he said he wanted her breasts back. Maybe if he

would have been nursed by his own mother he wouldn't need his wife's boobies so

much he felt he had to compete with his child. <giggle>

> > >

> > > This could get a whole new thread started as to the reason WHY our culture

has such a sexual fascination with breasts. Hello! they are not anywhere near

the genitals.

> > >

> > > Kim

> > >

November 28, 2004

> Why else do you think the general preference is for larger rather than

> smaller breasts?

Gee , I don't even care to go there with you.

For the first time I've read posts by you that seems like you are trolling,

or else very closed minded. So while this will probably fall on deaf ears,

here's a little bit of info about breast size and nursing babies.

In my years of nursing and attending LLL meetings, I've met many women of

all sizes nursing their babies and children just fine. The very large

breasted women do have a harder time, as expressed to me by them, because

they don't have that extra hand free. While I would have a hand free to

caress my babe's face, brush back her hair, or hold the book I'm reading to

her, large breasted women will be using that hand to hold the fat of their

breast off the baby's face and away from the baby's nose. I can't wait to

hear you explain that away. Are the very large and the flat chested both

meant by nature to not pass on their genes? Or is it the diet they received

as children? Hormones! That's it! Why it's amazing they even managed to

find a mate, let alone get pregnant!

As for myself, flat chested. Apparently my husband wasn't thinking about

the survival of his line when he fell for me.

With the first pregnancy more fat was stored in my breasts (along with other

areas) and I became a very full C cup. With engorgement after the birth,

even larger. Thankfully that didn't last forever and as I lost weight after

the birth, the extra fat that had been stored in my breasts left too.

My oldest recently turned 10. That means that I've been a nursing mama for

a little over 10 years, the only break being the last 3 months of my last

pregnancy. And when I say I nursed my babies, I don't mean they had nums

and something else, my babies were exclusively breastfed until they showed

an interest in mouthing food, usually around 8 months. Yeeha for small

breasts! I'm currently barely an A cup and still nursing my 3 year old who

thinks nums is the greatest food on the planet. And it is. There isn't any

meal I could prepare her that would meet the needs of her growing body and

brain the way mother's milk can.

I'm reminded of using the students' hospital at Purdue once for a check-up

and being told by the nurse that I'd be able to nurse babies just fine and

not to listen to those who would tell me otherwise. This hit me out of the

blue being as I was A) 19 and not planning to have babies any time soon and

What kind of an idiot would think that a woman's breast size had anything

to do with nursing babies, let alone speak such stupid information out loud?

Well now I know. : )

If there are any flat or small chested women reading this, know that your

body is beautifully designed to grow that baby, birth that baby, and nurture

that baby. Hold to that truth, and ignore those who would tell you

otherwise.

Rhea

November 28, 2004

----- Original Message -----

From: " Idol "

> Suzanne-

>

> >Size is merely degrees of fat

> >tissue.

>

> It's not a random variation, though, even if all women have about the same

> number of milk-producing ducts. It's due to factors like the prevalence

of

> sex hormones, diet, and so on.

Right, but we're talking about whether big breasted women are biologically

more desireable candidates from a reproductive standpoint. And it still

doesn't change that size and function are two separate characteristics that

are mutually exclusive. Environmental influences can affect menarche and

onset of puberty, but even sex hormones imposed externally can't change the

genetic predisposed size. Once the external hormones subside, so does the

breast tissue resume the size it was genetically disposed to be.

Environmentally, milk sufficiency is more related to the environment in

which a woman labors and delivers and the support and/or interference with

the nursing diad postpartum than with breast size. (There is the exception

that large breasts can be difficult to manage while teaching an infant to

nurse effectively. There small breasted women have the advantage.)

Size is fat tissue, function is glandular.

--s

November 28, 2004

Right, but we're talking about whether big breasted women are biologically

> more desireable candidates from a reproductive standpoint.

Oh, I'm so afraid to say this, but...

the female with the attractively-perceived breasts is, in theory,

better able to keep her male around for support in raising the

offspring.

B.

On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 16:08:39 -0500, Suzanne Noakes <snoakes@...> wrote:

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: " Idol "

>

> > Suzanne-

> >

> > >Size is merely degrees of fat

> > >tissue.

> >

> > It's not a random variation, though, even if all women have about the same

> > number of milk-producing ducts. It's due to factors like the prevalence

> of

> > sex hormones, diet, and so on.

>

> Right, but we're talking about whether big breasted women are biologically

> more desireable candidates from a reproductive standpoint. And it still

> doesn't change that size and function are two separate characteristics that

> are mutually exclusive. Environmental influences can affect menarche and

> onset of puberty, but even sex hormones imposed externally can't change the

> genetic predisposed size. Once the external hormones subside, so does the

> breast tissue resume the size it was genetically disposed to be.

> Environmentally, milk sufficiency is more related to the environment in

> which a woman labors and delivers and the support and/or interference with

> the nursing diad postpartum than with breast size. (There is the exception

> that large breasts can be difficult to manage while teaching an infant to

> nurse effectively. There small breasted women have the advantage.)

>

> Size is fat tissue, function is glandular.

>

> --s

>

November 28, 2004

Yes, maybe, but let's face it, much of what men are looking at at least

in this age of implants - is not a biological attribute. So at least

for those gals with augmentation, all biological arguments fly out the

window.

Deanna

Blazey wrote:

> Right, but we're talking about whether big breasted women are biologically

> > more desireable candidates from a reproductive standpoint.

>

> Oh, I'm so afraid to say this, but...

> the female with the attractively-perceived breasts is, in theory,

> better able to keep her male around for support in raising the

> offspring.

> B.

>

November 28, 2004

You Go Girl...

On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 11:58:23 -0900, Rhea Richmond <honeysuckles@...> wrote:

>

> > Why else do you think the general preference is for larger rather than

> > smaller breasts?

>

> Gee , I don't even care to go there with you.

>

> For the first time I've read posts by you that seems like you are trolling,

> or else very closed minded. So while this will probably fall on deaf ears,

> here's a little bit of info about breast size and nursing babies.

>

> In my years of nursing and attending LLL meetings, I've met many women of

> all sizes nursing their babies and children just fine. The very large

> breasted women do have a harder time, as expressed to me by them, because

> they don't have that extra hand free. While I would have a hand free to

> caress my babe's face, brush back her hair, or hold the book I'm reading to

> her, large breasted women will be using that hand to hold the fat of their

> breast off the baby's face and away from the baby's nose. I can't wait to

> hear you explain that away. Are the very large and the flat chested both

> meant by nature to not pass on their genes? Or is it the diet they received

> as children? Hormones! That's it! Why it's amazing they even managed to

> find a mate, let alone get pregnant!

>

> As for myself, flat chested. Apparently my husband wasn't thinking about

> the survival of his line when he fell for me.

>

> With the first pregnancy more fat was stored in my breasts (along with other

> areas) and I became a very full C cup. With engorgement after the birth,

> even larger. Thankfully that didn't last forever and as I lost weight after

> the birth, the extra fat that had been stored in my breasts left too.

>

> My oldest recently turned 10. That means that I've been a nursing mama for

> a little over 10 years, the only break being the last 3 months of my last

> pregnancy. And when I say I nursed my babies, I don't mean they had nums

> and something else, my babies were exclusively breastfed until they showed

> an interest in mouthing food, usually around 8 months. Yeeha for small

> breasts! I'm currently barely an A cup and still nursing my 3 year old who

> thinks nums is the greatest food on the planet. And it is. There isn't any

> meal I could prepare her that would meet the needs of her growing body and

> brain the way mother's milk can.

>

> I'm reminded of using the students' hospital at Purdue once for a check-up

> and being told by the nurse that I'd be able to nurse babies just fine and

> not to listen to those who would tell me otherwise. This hit me out of the

> blue being as I was A) 19 and not planning to have babies any time soon and

> What kind of an idiot would think that a woman's breast size had anything

> to do with nursing babies, let alone speak such stupid information out loud?

>

> Well now I know. : )

>

> If there are any flat or small chested women reading this, know that your

> body is beautifully designed to grow that baby, birth that baby, and nurture

> that baby. Hold to that truth, and ignore those who would tell you

> otherwise.

>

> Rhea

>

November 28, 2004

----- Original Message -----

From: " Blazey "

> Right, but we're talking about whether big breasted women are biologically

> > more desireable candidates from a reproductive standpoint.

>

> Oh, I'm so afraid to say this, but...

> the female with the attractively-perceived breasts is, in theory,

> better able to keep her male around for support in raising the

> offspring.

> B.

Eeew. Pity the woman who settled for him. Glad we're talking about theory,

that way I won't offend anyone when I say

that her male's sticktoitiveness wrt her breast size has more to do with

*his* character....or lack thereof....than her anatomy. After all, if

larger curves are so important to him, why would he chose otherwise?

--s

November 28, 2004

>>Oh, I'm so afraid to say this, but...

the female with the attractively-perceived breasts is, in theory,

better able to keep her male around for support in raising the

offspring.

B.<<

~~~,

I think you're correct, but what is attractive to men is variable to say the

least, from my experience. I've known men who really don't like large breasts

on women. (And, I'm not saying that because I am flat chested, because I'm not.

)

Carol