Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 13 Mar 2002 23:18:24 +0000 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I have read and observed that one of the pervasive changes in domesticated
vs. wild animals is juvenilization, in other words, that the adult domestic
version retains juvenile characteristics and behaviors of the wild forbear.
Stretching this a bit, I think every woman realizes that her breasts are
attractive to the "little boy" in each male. I wonder if this is not a
carryover of a juvenile drive to seek the comfort of the breast, or, at
least, a frustration and hunger for more of what might have been deprived
him too soon. Do breasts have the same sexual powers in societies where a)
they are constantly on view, and b) children are allowed to nurse as long
as they like, to whatever age?
The attractiveness of bulbous breasts may influence evolutionary choice,
but on the other hand, are there not many women of widely varying genetic
makeup who do not possess pendulous breasts? My eastern European line goes
back at least three generations with small breasts.
It's clear that our hormonal makeup has changed since Paleo times, and
probably diet-linked. Could not excessive estrogens also influence mammary
development? We are the only primate who has stepped from a natural diet,
after all.
Just wondering...
ginny
All stunts performed without a net!
|
|
|