brrrrritzkeee (another theory on breasts)

[Guest guest]

is that the first women with breasts would have been a) more frequently

provisioned by their mates than other fertile women, as males were accustomed to

provisioning mates who appeared pregnant or lactating; and not as confined by

their mates as other fertile women, because they appeared nonfertile. So, they

would have gottten more nutriment than other fertile females while being freer

to sleep around - ie, pursue prime genetic material.

Having breasts could also help conceal fertility status - as would the lack of

obvious estrus, which is unique among primates. Concealed fertility/infertility

would encourage males to invest more (time, food) in individual females in order

to assure conception.

Early humans were reaching their limits in terms of bipedal pelvis v. infant

skull; the conflict was resolved by birthing infants at progressively earlier

developmental stages. Newborn humans are immature and incompetent relative to,

say, chimp babies; they require more attention, and their hot little brains must

be fed, fed, fed. They cannot hold on by themselves, which would reduce the

food-gathering effectiveness of early human mothers, who presumably did not have

Maya wraps.

So continuous provisioning would be crucially important to human mothers. Any

female able to elicit long-term male investment would be better able to assure

survival of her offspring. Concealing fertility with " fake " breasts might be

one way to keep mates guessing - and bringing home the bacon.