Deeply shallow question

[Whanmore]

So, my boyfriend and I were at the rock gym at the weekend and had a fit of giggles when we realized we were both checking out the same girl. Which led to a discussion about the process.

Now I know not all cis guys are the same, but what he confided was that - especially in an environment where girls are often wearing leggings or shorts and contorting their bodies to climb - he often has his eyes drawn to asses first. Though he said sometimes hair as well. He then admitted that he checks out her face next.

Yes, Girlfriend. I can certainly say thats the case. I played Football (American) and we always went to the volleyball games. It was specifically the shorts they wore that accentuated theire beautiful bootys that you may not have other wise noticed. Same thing for me with the Track Athletes. (Totally evident in my stories now that Im thinking about it) But i definitely think the clothing matters. Athletic wear is tight so, spandex, jogging wear, swimsuits all makes you stare ath the rump. Love a pretty face to match but that's why God invented Doggy-style lol

 

[gunhilltrain]

Do these sort of disputes every end with, "I see now that I was wrong and apologize for this misunderstanding." Or does it just continue endlessly until someone calls someone a cunt, someone reports and gets the thread deleted?

This is Authors' Hangout, not Utopia.

 

[ronde]

I’m not denying male programming, but neither of those assumptions (about breasts and hips) is actually true.


Em

I agree that neither assumption is necessarily true today but probably wasn't in the past. Breast size is related to genetics, but also to available nutrition and any sign of a healthy woman would make her more attractive as a mate. Wide hips are the result of a woman's wider pelvis, and even today, there are women who deliver by caesarean section because of the shape of her pelvis. Wider hips can also be the result of good nutrition. In the days when food was a sometimes thing, a healthy mate would have been a huge advantage to any man in furthering his genes.

 

[Bramblethorn]

There is a significant research about what attracts men to women, and most of it is the product of our evolution. When shown women's bodies without their faces and asked to pick the most attractive, most men will pick a women with larger breasts and wide hips. The evolutionary reason for that choice is pretty easy to understand. When 40 was probably considered to be "old age", men selected women who could bear and raise children to adulthood in order to proliferate their genes. Wide hips equated to the ability to carry a child to term and then deliver that child safely into the world. Larger breasts equated to the ability to feed that child until the child could eat solid food. In the not so distant past, that meant the woman would breast feed a child until the age of at least 2 and sometimes until the age of 3.

Perhaps I've missed something in the literature, but it seems to me that an awful lot of evo-psych proponents are content to come up with explanations like this, a Just So story that could explain some of what we observe, without doing much work to test their hypothesis. How do we know that the reason you've given is the actual reason for that preference, not just something that sounded good to the guy who made it up?

It seems particularly questionable given that standards of beauty can vary greatly within a generation or less, even within the same country.

1 - Does she look happy and comfortable with herself? I tend not to be interested in a woman walking around with a frown on her face or with her shoulders slumped forward. Both tell me she'd not pleased with how she looks. The same goes for things like an exaggerated walk that makes her hips sway a bunch. That tells me she's trying to make up for what she thinks she lacks. I also don't like most forms of piercings and a lot of visible tattoos are a turnoff for me. All that decoration is probably there to take my eyes off what she considers to not be good enough.

...or maybe she got the tattoo because she liked how it looked and didn't give a shit how some guys might react to it. You'd be surprised how often that happens.

If I'm walking around frowning, it's probably because I'm thinking about something more interesting than maintaining a smile for the benefit of those around me. But some folk need to interpret everything in the universe as a message for them personally.

 

[TheRedChamber]

Perhaps I've missed something in the literature, but it seems to me that an awful lot of evo-psych proponents are content to come up with explanations like this, a Just So story that could explain some of what we observe, without doing much work to test their hypothesis. How do we know that the reason you've given is the actual reason for that preference, not just something that sounded good to the guy who made it up?

It seems particularly questionable given that standards of beauty can vary greatly within a generation or less, even within the same country.

It's very easy to put the cart before the horse with a lot of this stuff.

There was a big hullabaloo a few years ago when a school textbook said something like 'the purpose of human female breasts are to attract a mate and feed their babies' It ended up getting watered down after the outcry but it is a fact that humans are one of the few (only?) species where the females have permanently large sized breasts (growing only slightly after child-birth) rather than only when lactating. Ands it's pretty hard to deny the extent to which men like them. They do seem to be a form of pea-cocks tail. It's not necessarily the case that they evolved as a sort of front arse to make up for the rear are being less prominent on us now that we're walking around on two legs but it's weird why gorillas don't have have massive pairs of sweet sweet jugs bouncing around and we do.

(Incidently in most species it's the males that tend to develop the more extravagant body parts to show off. )

Regarding hips, I'd certain hope men are attracted to them. Since our bodies started evolving to walk upright child-birth became significant more risky and prolonged. It be nice if things became easier in a few million years or so. (Speaking as a man who has witness child birth.)

 

[stickygirl]

Bouldering mostly. It's a fast, easy setup (all I need is a crash pad and chalk bag) and there are a few good spots nearby. Some top roping now and then when I have more time. I've never done any trad or lead climbing. How about you?

I’ve done some trad in the UK - Snowdonia and The Peak District. Mostly sport in the US. Took a look at the Gunks and didn’t like the pro.

But I mostly boulder - V4-V6 - what’s that 7a, right. Then I’m light and have tiny fingers, so I’m told that’s cheating, right . Been to Bishop a couple of times and RMNP once.

Em

If we're still talking about attractions at the climbing wall and 'pudenda' in particular, I once heard a male colleague comment as he looked up at the young woman he was belaying "Fuck, I can practically see her womb." From anyone else it would have been gross, but this guy has the knack of making crude into 'funny, but I shouldn't laugh' kinda way.

I used to climb trad in the Peaks - Stanage etc. I've been to the Roaches gritstone and it was weird, though I managed an E3 using a couple of tiny pebbles. That was an outlier - I'm more a 6a max outside on trad, then 'lets go to the pub/ice cream van'.

@onehitwanda and you guys might like this vid of the gorgeous Margo Hayes *sigh* 'I literally slipped on my own blood.' She also has a ... curiously familiar body shape. Only saying.

I'm no fan of women body-builders, nor men for that matter, but a person who is fit and making the best of the body they have is always a joyous sight. Even the out of shape plodders in the park deserve praise for having a go - good for them!

If I'm walking around frowning, it's probably because I'm thinking about something more interesting than maintaining a smile for the benefit of those around me. But some folk need to interpret everything in the universe as a message for them personally.

Thank you.
I don't believe it is possible to smile and think at the same time. Often the non-smiler turns out to be the most interesting person.

Going back to first attractions... With guys it's hands, forearms and face. With girls it's everything, all-at-once but I guess my eye is caught first by hair. I'm a bit short sighted so I'm used to recognising people by their hair at a distance.

 

[Bramblethorn]

It's very easy to put the cart before the horse with a lot of this stuff.

There was a big hullabaloo a few years ago when a school textbook said something like 'the purpose of human female breasts are to attract a mate and feed their babies' It ended up getting watered down after the outcry but it is a fact that humans are one of the few (only?) species where the females have permanently large sized breasts (growing only slightly after child-birth) rather than only when lactating. Ands it's pretty hard to deny the extent to which men like them. They do seem to be a form of pea-cocks tail.

That's an interesting choice of analogy. AFAIK, nobody has identified a reason why such a big eyecatching tail would be advantageous for the peacock or his descendants, except in that peahens find it attractive. It's cumbersome and requires a lot of resources to grow. The generally accepted theory for why peacocks have such impressive tails depends on a positive feedback loop, and those don't require much at all to get them started.

So, assuming for the sake of argument that we can establish a male (human) preference for big breasts, how do we know it is about ability to nourish children etc. and not another Fisherian-runaway feedback loop? Humans are not the only species that depend on their breasts to feed their young, so if it's being driven primarily by nutritional potential, why don't other mammalian species have the same fixation?

(Leaving aside the many cultures which weren't nearly so obsessed with titties as their present-day descendants are.)

 

[TheRedChamber]

So, assuming for the sake of argument that we can establish a male (human) preference for big breasts, how do we know it is about ability to nourish children etc. and not another Fisherian-runaway feedback loop? Humans are not the only species that depend on their breasts to feed their young, so if it's being driven primarily by nutritional potential, why don't other mammalian species have the same fixation?

Well is there even a link between breast size and amount of milk produced. As noted most mammals don't have prominent breast prior to child-birth and manage to feed their young just fine. Doesn't the milk producing tissue grow around the 'extra' stuff when needed (genuine question?)
Edit: Probably expressing this badly. There's obviously some inactive mechanisms already in place but 'extra padding around'

(Leaving aside the many cultures which weren't nearly so obsessed with titties as their present-day descendants are.)

Again, going to need to ask for more details here. Sure there a puritanical culture that leads to breasts being hidden that makes them taboo and then that leads to obsession and fetishization. But are there any places where men just don't like breasts.

 

[NoTalentHack]

Assuming that breasts evolved to attract male attention (and that’s a BIG assumption), I think it’s entirely possible that it’s not sexual, per se, but comfort. Or, at least, that was the initial reason, and eventually male humans, as most humans do, got some wires crossed.

In most primates, as you said, breasts don’t stay swollen before/after the period when they’re nursing. What if the initial impulse wasn’t inherently sexual, but comforting? Like, a memory of nursing, and of a time when the male didn’t have to be out hunting/gathering and trying to survive? When someone would just take care of him and make sure his needs, both physical and emotional, were met? Even today, when men talk of women, especially wives and long term girlfriends, it’s about how they make us feel safe and loved, as much if not more as anything else.

 

[Bisexguy70]

Em
Being a 52 bi male i can tell you my standards drop for attractiveness.
Are they breathing:
Heartbeat:

I never gave it much thought what im checking out in a public place but im drawn more to woman first. I dont “check out” guys most times unless they appear as more feminine. But hair is my goto first. I scan the whole body and look at the complete package. Then i focus on the chest. I love all shapes and sizes but smaller breasts get my blood flowing. Im so turned on by woman with smaller chests and i picture what the exquisite miniatures must look like. I focus on the exposed flesh of the cleavage and if i see if shes wearing a bra. Then i focus on the hair. I suppose i check out the legs and ass too

Once in college, i saw this person laying on their stomach in the courtyard relaxing in the warm sun. I checked out the ass first and liked the persons long flowing black hair. The legs though, were so hot!! Then i realized the person was a guy, i think deep down my bisexuality started then but at the time i was sick from the revelation it was a guy. But then realized i was turned on by his body so i accepted the fact i had an attraction.

I never really look at men in any way out in public except for guys who have very smooth skin and no facial hair. But im more interested looking at the nude male figure. If its a nude male body then I immediately check out his cock. How big, the shape, cut or uncut. I like a variety but bigger is more attractive. Smooth bodies send chills and i like smooth chests on a man. Sometimes i find myself looking at guys crotches and imagine what their packing.

Overall i think it varies, but now im going to have to pay attention and be more observant. 99% of the time if your a woman just know that if you see me, im probably undressing you with my eyes

 

[Cindy027]

Assuming that breasts evolved to attract male attention (and that’s a BIG assumption), I think it’s entirely possible that it’s not sexual, per se, but comfort. Or, at least, that was the initial reason, and eventually male humans, as most humans do, got some wires crossed.

We are the only mammals that develop breasts during puberty and keep them for life, so what you say can only be fact

 

[EmilyMiller]

I used to climb trad in the Peaks - Stanage etc. I've been to the Roaches gritstone and it was weird, though I managed an E3 using a couple of tiny pebbles. That was an outlier - I'm more a 6a max outside on trad, then 'lets go to the pub/ice cream van'.

We need a climbing sub-forum .

I struggled with grit - got on better with North Wales. I think you need to climb on Grit regularly to get it and I only went twice.

Stanage, Curbar and somewhere else, can’t recall. Mostly seconded - how girly, right? - and did some bouldering.

Also climed some easy routes as highballs. Long time ago now.

Em

EDIT: did a bit of limestone as well - Jolly Cum something, which I found highly amusing and deeply British

 

[Trionyx]

Leaving aside the many cultures which weren't nearly so obsessed with titties as their present-day descendants are.

Bingo. Well said. There are still cultures in which the males are far more attracted to buttocks than breasts.

 

[stickygirl]

Bingo. Well said. There are still cultures in which the males are far more attracted to buttocks than breasts.

Exactly. The Incas had a thing for big heads
https://collectionapi.metmuseum.org/api/collection/v1/iiif/313251/1717627/main-image

 

[HordHolm]

Exactly. The Incas had a thing for big heads
https://collectionapi.metmuseum.org/api/collection/v1/iiif/313251/1717627/main-image

And the Huns had a thing for elongated heads - they bound them in childhood to influence the shape of the growth.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Exactly. The Incas had a thing for big heads
https://collectionapi.metmuseum.org/api/collection/v1/iiif/313251/1717627/main-image

That just looks like a glorified dildo to me...

 

[Bramblethorn]

Well is there even a link between breast size and amount of milk produced. As noted most mammals don't have prominent breast prior to child-birth and manage to feed their young just fine. Doesn't the milk producing tissue grow around the 'extra' stuff when needed (genuine question?)
Edit: Probably expressing this badly. There's obviously some inactive mechanisms already in place but 'extra padding around'

Gonna throw that one to the biologists in the house.

Again, going to need to ask for more details here. Sure there a puritanical culture that leads to breasts being hidden that makes them taboo and then that leads to obsession and fetishization. But are there any places where men just don't like breasts.

An anthropologist could field this better than I can, but my understanding is that there have been quite a lot of cultures around the world where women routinely went topless without anybody thinking anything of it, until the missionaries showed up.

I gather Ford and Beach's 1951 "Patterns of sexual behaviour" has relevant research on this, based on a survey of about 190 cultures, though I haven't read it for myself.

 

[HordHolm]

Gonna throw that one to the biologists in the house.


An anthropologist could field this better than I can, but my understanding is that there have been quite a lot of cultures around the world where women routinely went topless without anybody thinking anything of it, until the missionaries showed up.

I gather Ford and Beach's 1951 "Patterns of sexual behaviour" has relevant research on this, based on a survey of about 190 cultures, though I haven't read it for myself.

It isn't static in the history of our (on Lit mostly) Anglo or European influenced culture, either. Even a relatively cursory investigation into the history of fashion around the Mediterranean and more Northerly climes shows a wide variety of attitudes to the exposure of or emphasis on breasts depending on time period, social status and nationality. For example, classical Greek societies could veer from fairly prudish (Athens, where women were basically shut away in the home, never to be seen) to outright exhibitionist (Sparta - where girls did naked gymnastic dancing) at one and the same time. More recently fashions such as the late 18th Century Imperial Style would use quite sheer materials on the bust (at least at Court), whilst a mere 50 years later the whole style had evolved into covering up as much as possible, with massive sleeves to draw the attention away from the fun bits.

 

[EmilyMiller]

View attachment 2234136

Gratuitous I know. Love Mina’a eyes. She has a toddler now and is still very beautiful (and climbing hard). Gives me hope.

Em

 

[EmilyMiller]

https://www.minalesliewujastyk.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/mina_qual3-small.jpg

 

[EmilyMiller]

https://www.thebmc.co.uk/Handlers/ArticleImageHandler.ashx?id=6942&index=0&w=605&h=434

 

[stickygirl]

It isn't static in the history of our (on Lit mostly) Anglo or European influenced culture, either. Even a relatively cursory investigation into the history of fashion around the Mediterranean and more Northerly climes shows a wide variety of attitudes to the exposure of or emphasis on breasts depending on time period, social status and nationality. For example, classical Greek societies could veer from fairly prudish (Athens, where women were basically shut away in the home, never to be seen) to outright exhibitionist (Sparta - where girls did naked gymnastic dancing) at one and the same time. More recently fashions such as the late 18th Century Imperial Style would use quite sheer materials on the bust (at least at Court), whilst a mere 50 years later the whole style had evolved into covering up as much as possible, with massive sleeves to draw the attention away from the fun bits.

Are men actually fixated on boobs - I mean in a sexual way? I'm just throwing the ida out there, but as larger ones are visible and men are less restrained about making comment, they feel permitted to ogle and make purile comments. Are they attracted by them or using them as a means of subjugation via ridicule?

 

[stickygirl]

https://www.minalesliewujastyk.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/mina_qual3-small.jpg

Too big Ems! Trim it down love, you're worse than Thor

 

[HordHolm]

Are men actually fixated on boobs - I mean in a sexual way? I'm just throwing the ida out there, but as larger ones are visible and men are less restrained about making comment, they feel permitted to ogle and make purile comments. Are they attracted by them or using them as a means of subjugation via ridicule?

Depends on the man, I suppose. There certainly are plenty of puerile guys out there who don't understand what a boundary is. For myself, yeah, I do like breasts, but I'm not into huge mega bouncy tits that look like they've been pumped up with a bicycle pump - I subscribe more to the 'more than a handful is wasted' school, but it is very subjective. As for using desire as a means of subjection via ridicule, I'd be lying if it doesn't go on, and some recent self-examination of my teenage self (decades ago now) tells me I may not always have been the nice guy I assumed myself to be.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Too big Ems! Trim it down love, you're worse than Thor

She was (and still is) a Goddes.

https://cdn.climbing.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/279903328_689003115484484_3888873331938743501_n.jpg?width=480