I agree on the “perkiness and lift” = “youth”, something I’ve felt for some time.
I also agree with Morris (who, I agree, is frustrating – see my many posts on this) about breasts being a sexual signal, but you’ve not represnted it properly. Morris holds that round breasts = buttock mimic, which I entirely agree with (and as a similar case, I cite the gelada baboon, in which the chest also presents a rump echo, although it’s not at all like the hemispherical human shape, as no other ape has human buttocks). He also maintains that other rounded, soft female forms – knees, shoulders – also act as female sex signals.
And to which I’ll add that firm, perky, and somewhat large breasts also indicate that the wearer is not only young and female, but has been eating well and in good health. For a long time I didn’t understand cocks combs – those red things atop the heads of roosters – until I learned that they’re sensitive barometers of the bird’s health, and that hens prefer erect and brightly colored ones.
“Large” here is meant as a relative term. I don’t mean DDs or higher – I think primitive man got turned on by female breasts that were slightly larger than guys’ – eating well was a lot harder back then. I don’t know if more buxom women fared better or not. I suspect those “Venus” figures are largely the result of fantasy/wishful thinking/maybe magic, and don’t represent the bulk of prehistoric women’s figures, just like most women don’t look like Jessica Rabbit.
I can give you my answer right away: I don’t know. It’s just the way things are.
I have a hypothesis though – when I first started noticing girls, that’s what they looked like. As I grew older, my tastes in general changed. That one didn’t. I could, in theory, attribute it to one particular girl. I only spent a short time with her, but she made quite an impression. She managed to be both hot and cool at the same time. And she was wearing a flimsy T-shirt with no bra. To a 15-year-old boy, that’s pretty much a recipe for a lifetime of horniness. She was perfection! Maybe I’ve been comparing everyone to her ever since.
The problem, of course, is that this is not necessarily so - and the ladies for whom it is less likely to be necessarily so are those ladies who are more generously endowed. My breasts had a slight, but noticeable (at least to me) sag from the day they sprouted - at age 12. There’s only so much cloth and elastic and metal can do to stave gravity off of 25 or so pounds of flesh stacked in an awkward location.
Yeah, but it’s not true in all cases – it’s a probabilistic thing. Larger beasts will sag, but the smaller ones won’t. and most of the breasts aren’t going to be larger – especially with wild humans not eating as well as we are today. All of them, as they age, will sag more.
It’s okay, though. Guys – at least most guys, AFAIK, don’t insist on a total lack of sag (If they do, then they deserve the lack of sex). I note that the 25th anniversary Playboy Playmate – Candy Loving (they swear that’s her real name. Right) was young with definitely sag to her breasts.
While we’re on the topic of breast fantasies, I will never forget a high-school pool party that happened around 8 years ago. I’ll call this girl Ginger. Ginger was a young, blonde, British lass with an adorable face and a very tight body. Short but not too short, which I also like.
She was wearing this thin, taut, black bikini. Breasts around a nice C cup. Completely perky, with no sag. Wet. Nipple marks clearly showing. … oh Lordy. Let’s just say I couldn’t swim very well that day due to the drag in my pants.
Ever since that day, I subconsciously compare every pair of boobies to Ginger’s.
I’m thinking that sexual imprinting must take place around ages 13-18. And maybe it’s just one person that sets the pattern.
Oogy theory time: Men who like a specific type of breast, how do you mother and sisters rate? (Told you it was oogy.) I ask because my sister, as much as I DO NOT want to think of her in a sexual way, is endowed precisely as I think all women should be. What’s going on there?
A lotta times I see a huge pair of bigguns and I just want to reach out and grab them. I wouldn’t want them part of my daily life, or on the woman I love, now would I even want to be on a date with someone absolutely freakishly big…
…But I would love to have a license issued to me that enabled me to just feel all I want out of curiosity any breasteses that I wanted. Big = rare = hightened curiosity.
Now, to qualify my remarks: If I met and fell in love with someone and she happened to have enormous breasts, I wouldn’t discount her because she had bigguns.
But I’d have a hard time falling in love with someone that jacked her chest up by having six variious implant surgeries.
I don’t personally believe that any sort of “imprinting” is universal. I certainly don’t feel I’ve been imprinted with some sort of “breast image” that I always seek.
My mother doesn’t have particularly large breasts. One aunt did, but, with all due respect to her and my uncle, I never thought of her as sexy. I go by the Morris paradigm (much as the man annoys me), and don’t think there’s much in a Freudian way attached.
You’re probably right about that. There are probably many different ways and ages at which it happens. And my sister probably had very little to do with my own. It’s just seems to be an odd coincidence, being that I’m so far out on the bell curve.
A rose in full bloom is a sight to behold. It is a thing of sheer beauty.
Yes, we know that roses wither, dry up and fall apart. It’s a fact of life.
That does not mean we can’t enjoy their beauty while they’re fresh and that doesn’t mean we have to change our definition of what a beautiful rose is to take into account the inevitable decay.
I think some women don’t understand that for many men, a beautiful face, or a beautiful pair of breasts, is like a work of art. It is enjoyable to behold in and of itself, even if there is never a chance of meeting the woman who has that face or pair of breasts. When the proportions and the curves are right, it is like viewing a Monet, or a beautiful sunset: pure viewing pleasure.
The ones in the OP’s link are a total turn-off…but I have to wonder what the numbers are on it, just out of sheer curiosity.
The key is PROPORTION. Softnes and fluffiness are the attraction of big breats in general, but those qualities can be found in sizes as small as “B”. Any size is really OK, but once they are not in decent proportion to the rest of the figure, it’s too much.
Slight hijack, but I think this also speaks to the obsession for a “flat stomach”. A woman with a flat stomach is not apparently carrying a child, so she’s ready for a man to sow his seed. I used to be bothered that having a little belly was seen as “unsexy” but the more I think about it, it makes sense in a cave-man kind of way. A mature (older) lady such as me, with a little pillow tummy, is on her way out, so to speak, from having children. The woman with the flat tummy is still in child-bearing years. It makes sense for a man to be attracted to a woman who can bear children. I see a great parallel to the ‘perky boobs’ thing.
Bingo. The first naked boobies I touched as a young teenager were smallish, and I liked them because … hey, I was touching boobies! I didn’t date a whole lot in high school, and the girls I did date didn’t happen to have huge breasts, either. It wasn’t a conscious decision on my part, it just worked out that way.
I also have not dated a whole lot as an adult, and I’ve never been married. This, I suspect, is a big part of why the characteristics I find attractive haven’t changed a whole lot since I was a teenager. Had I gotten married young and remained married until now, I imagine that my taste would have changed to match whatever my wife looked like. And I suspect that, in my eyes, she wouldn’t have changed much at all, even though she would probably have gained weight and her breasts may have gotten bigger and “droopier” over time. But she would still look the same to me. After all, my 62-year-old mother looks exactly the same as she always has, as least to me.
Maybe not so much on the bingo. The first boobies I touched were big and droopy. And this on a 13 year old. (Before you think I’m a perv, I was 13 as well.) Even though I was thrilled to be feeling up my first babe, I was a little disappointed. So much for that theory.
To be serious, I prefer shape and “pertness”, same as many other respondents to this thread.
Some people have mentioned that the fascination with the extremely large bazookas is more Ripley’s than sexual. I can agree. We were having a blokey locker room conversation at work once about which women there we’d most like to see naked. The one I chose elicited many guffaws from the lads, but it wasn’t at all sexual. I seriously wanted to see those dirigibles. Pure sideshow alley stuff, and no more.
