Why Do Women Have Breasts?

[Lorizael]

When I sit down and think about it, I always think it's really funny that men are so attracted to lumps of fat. But that detracts from the fun, so I never stay on that line of thought for very long.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Velociryx


Doc Strangelove nailed it. For an excellent, exploration into that, read Desmon Morris' "The Naked Ape." (he goes on to say that the same line of thinking is why, even today, there is an almost primal fascination with women painting their lips bright, vibrant shades of red, and why pouty lips are considered "sexy." (I'm sure it won't take most of you but half a second to draw your own conclusions there).

Both this, and the development of fleshy brests were designed to "draw the male's attention 'round to the front" as Morris put it.

As a milk-providing apparatus, the human female breast is actually quite poorly designed, requiring substantial work and risk to human infants (as compared to say, female chimpanzee breasts....thus, they (the breast of the human female) must have evolved with some other purpose in mind.

-=Vel=-

D****t, that Morris guy stold another of my ideas!

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Gatekeeper


Aww, I bet Ming's heart will melt when he sees the beautiful picture of motherhood that you posted, Dissident. But then you'd still have to hop rah's heart melts, too.

Gatekeeper

rah and ming are simply alter egos in the same body. if ming likes it, rah will hate it.

but if ming's heart melts first, rahs heart will already be liquified, so, um, i dunno.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Boobs were created in a plot by evil male chauvisnists to weaken women militarily. Big tits interfer with them drawing bows and present increased target area, with no added benefit, to be cut by swords.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Boobs were created in a plot by evil male chauvisnists to weaken women militarily. Big tits interfer with them drawing bows and present increased target area, with no added benefit, to be cut by swords.

You'd cut a woman's breast off with a sword? I don't know which tribe you're descended from Lefty, but I'm utterly positive it's not one of mine!

[Neutrino]

The development of breasts in human females was probably a result of Darwinian sexual selection working on the existing mammalian genome. Individuals that display the trait(s) that the opposite sex find attractive will be passed onto offspring. Those who lack the traits will likely not mate.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Doc Strangelove nailed it. For an excellent, exploration into that, read Desmon Morris' "The Naked Ape."

Desmon Morris is completely off his rockers on this one. Don't forget, the Great Apes and humans share a common ancestor, but we don't come from the Great Apes. The feeling theory is much closer to the truth. Since we can have sex all the time, that means women need to feed the babies at all times. Hence, they have breasts all year around, instead of just seasonal.

Besides, Morris was trying to explain why (most) men are fixated about women's breasts, not why they have them biologically. He is a behavioural scientist, not a biologist.

[Dis]

I need to address breasts being made naturally selected for men to find attractive.

It would be safe to assume men found women attractive no matter what size their breasts were, or we would not be here. The argements above assume women at some point in history had small breasts, and they evolved big ones. I disagree. Men were just as attracted to women with small breasts, or they wouldn't have reproduced in sufficient numbers to sustain the human population.

Also many populations have small breasts. I think diet and environment are factors there. Many asian women have small breasts for example. While european and americans tend to have larger breasts. Although I can't fully explain why african women have large breasts- for their nutrition can be poor depending on where they live.

[Neutrino]

There are many possible factors, including genetic drift due to isolation events, that may contribute to women's breast size.

My theory does not assume that women had small breasts to begin with; it assumes that males in general prefer larger ones to a certain extent. Over time, the genotypes for larger breasts will be selected for. Perhaps the size of breasts indicated how healthy a particular female was. There does not need to be a large population of humans to begin with.

But given our present knowledge on this subject, it will be very difficult to determine the exact cause, if any.

Populations with different breast sizes may have undergone some change specific to their population, but dietary factors cannot be ruled out.

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Boddington's


Explain this.

All the Y chromosome does is tell other genes to masculanise the body. It's got one active gene and a bunch of junk DNA that's gotten dumped there. All the interesting stuff is on the X chromosome. A person born with only an X chromosome or an unfunctioning Y chromosome will be biologically female. You need an X chromosome to live but you only need one.

There's also lots of other stuff like how the X chromosome and the Y one are at a state of genetic war since it's to the advantage of the X genes to mutate so that it benefits females even if it hurts males since genes on an X chromosome spend most of their time in female carriers. But interloci warfare isn't something I can quote off the top of my head.

[Soul Survivor]

......because even god can only listen to a woman for so long

[DanS]

Both this, and the development of fleshy brests were designed to "draw the male's attention 'round to the front" as Morris put it.

The problem with this theory is that in many societies, people didn't have sex from the front, but rather from the behind.

[Ted Striker]

Fun bags!!!!

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Starchild
All the Y chromosome does is tell other genes to masculanise the body. It's got one active gene and a bunch of junk DNA that's gotten dumped there. All the interesting stuff is on the X chromosome.

The latest research indicates otherwise. The Y chromosome, while smaller than its genetic mate, the X chromosome, is supposed to be a palindrome. IOW, it's capable of self-repairing itself by simply folding over and exchanging genetic sequences as necessary. So, in essence, the Y chromosome doesn't necessarily need the X chromosome for much of anything, which is why only the tips of the X and Y are capable of exchanging DNA information. Also, the Y chromosome is more prone to genetic mutations than the X, and it's these changes that drive a good part of our evolution — they're introduced, permanently, into the human genome when the Y- or X-bearing sperm unites with the X-bearing egg.

A person born with only an X chromosome or an unfunctioning Y chromosome will be biologically female. You need an X chromosome to live but you only need one.

I was under the impression that you needed XX or XY in order to function. Any other combination simply won't do.

There's also lots of other stuff like how the X chromosome and the Y one are at a state of genetic war since it's to the advantage of the X genes to mutate so that it benefits females even if it hurts males since genes on an X chromosome spend most of their time in female carriers. But interloci warfare isn't something I can quote off the top of my head.

See my first statement regarding genetics. I'm not expert, though, just relating some of what I've read as of late.

Gatekeeper

[Velociryx]

Dan, true 'nuff, but the paralells are both obvious and compelling. Add to that, the fact that it's a pattern we've seen repeated in nature in other creatures and it's a pretty solid idea.

-=Vel=-