Boobs. No contest there. After a woman’s face, I’m naturally drawn to their boobs. I think my eyes and boobs have opposite polarities so they’re just drawn to one another.
(Think I could get away with that as an excuse? …nah, probably not.)
I’m more or less in this boat. I don’t really focus on one to the exclusion of the other. I maybe get a more visceral and sex/lust inspired reaction to boobs (and butts), but the right pair of legs is really something and can inspire similar levels of attraction. I find that I can find pretty much any part of a woman attractive, it just depends on the woman. One thing is that because breasts, ass and legs are all to one extent or another things that you are “supposed” to be attracted to, I think that my attention gets channeled in that direction but that doesn’t necessarily reflect the full spectrum of my attraction.
Legs.
Then wings.
Boobs.
Legs if great feet are included in the package, by a landslide if a great ass is part of it too.
There’s just something about Boobs. I love boobs.
But I’m truly a succer for a pretty face.
I’ve found that a woman can have a nice, perky, attractive set of boobs even if she’s otherwise unattractive physically. Also, boobs are easier to admire than legs if both are covered in clothes, so I see great boobs more frequently than great legs.
However, if a woman has nice legs and dresses to show them off, it seems that she’s usually generally attractive in other ways as well. So if the legs catch my eye, I usually enjoy the entire package, whereas I can enjoy a nice set of boobs by themselves.
What would I rather see? Naked boobies, but that doesn’t happen that often. Except at home.
All the parts of a woman below the knee – calves, shins, ankles, and feet – can make or break a woman’s looks for me. Definitely prefer legs.
Gams. Stems. Pins. Legs!!
BOOBS! I have legs.
bOObs are more eye-catching. I love bOObs. But if I have to select between a lady with great bOObs and bad legs and a lady with no bOObs and great legs, I’ll take the legs. They always seem to be associated with a great overall figure, and that’s the key.
I’m afraid I don’t see any great sexual attraction from legs at all. There is no question that my attention would be riveted by her breasts.
If you were to ask me to choose between boobs and ass, that would be a lot harder. But her legs have as much appeal to me as her mesenteric vein.
Great legs must end in a great ass else they are not great legs.
I don’t think I’ve ever had an inkling of erotic thought enticed by a pair of legs, no matter how immaculate. In fact, I’m married to a woman with a beautiful face, sweet breasts and ass, and short, thick, hairy legs (this time of year). I don’t think her having perfect legs would change my objective, detached, sexually analytic view of her at all. I don’t get legs.
I’m an ass man, FWIW.
Depends what’s showing skin- that’s what will catch my eye- otherwise, it would have to be in spandex for me to notice. People in full cloth, it’s the face…
I like a slim figure so I don’t know how to respond. To me legs are legs so I suppose breasts but I certainly don’t like the Playboy concept of women.
Boobs
Such promises cannot be honored. Cthlulu and I BOTH cannot conquer the Earth. If Cthlulu is victorious over me, he shall obviously be obliged to eat me first from simple practicality.
For the record I like women. I can always find something on most of them that will hold my attention, but for the purposes of this poll I’m a boob guy, big time.
ETA - as I suspect most guys are. That’s why topless clubs are a bigger deal than some club where all the women wore shorts or something.
A great pair is a great pair no matter if it is legs or boobs. I truly love both. Since I have to chose one over the other I guess I am a leg man.