• Im_old@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    6 days ago

    I had to scroll back in my saved posts to a million years ago to resurrect this.

    • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      That metaphor (breasts as fruit) transcends language though. Whatever you call fruits you’ll end up calling breasts. Here’s the song of Solomon which was semetic.

      I said, ‘I will go up to the palm tree; I will take hold of the boughs thereof.’ Now also thy breasts shall be as clusters of the vine, and the smell of thy nose like apples.

      Instead of viewing things like this etymologically, it’s better to see them as universal metaphors that transcend language and culture. Similar to light and darkness.

  • Majorllama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    If y’all could please direct me to the thighs and calves galaxies I’ll be on my way. I enjoy boobs as do most humans, but I am a legs man.

  • latenightnoir@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    6 days ago

    I mean… I think we can all agree that boobs are at least universally non-threatening, even without counting the symbolisms of nourishment, nurturance, life, fertility, etc. At least I don’t think we’re at the point where hiding machine guns or hellish snakes in boobs is viable. … Right?

  • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    5 days ago

    In German and Dutch it’s way worse: “Säugetier” and “zoogdier”. Both can roughly be translated to “sucking animals”. I was taught in school that it’s called that because babies suck on the mother’s breasts to be fed and this is a unique trait to mammals. So in conclusion, we all suck.

  • Rhaedas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 days ago

    We’re the only(?) species that have evolved them to become more than their basic function. Other species use colors and other features for mating signals, humans use shapes. Definitely wired to be interested in them.

    • the_weez@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 days ago

      Hold up, are other hominids interested in boobs? Any other mammal? Any non mammals into boobs? How much tiddy science have we really done here? I need tiddy facts.

      • Uli@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 days ago

        This might be pseudoscience I got taught 20 years ago, but I have been under the impression that human evolution of breasts as a secondary sexual characteristic has to do with the shift to becoming bipedal. Like a lot of animals, early hominids would see the rear end of a fellow hominid and know this as a trigger for copulation. But when homo erectus started standing upright, butts weren’t so universally erotic anymore. They had a whole back and head above them now. Breasts didn’t need to be very large to fill their function, but an increase in size gave them a curvy appearance similar to a set of butt cheeks. And early humans were like, yeah, I think that’s right, and selected for increased (or at least variable) breast size.

        • the_weez@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 days ago

          Listen, I’m not trying to refute anything here. I’m just saying that some extra tiddy experiments are probably required in order to fully understand this phenomena. I know that not everyone is cut out for this kind of thing, so I’m willing to take one for the team here. I just need a little funding and a steady supply of consenting tiddy owners.

      • stray@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 days ago

        I’m not aware of any other species sexually selecting for mammary size. Some birds do a puffy chest thing.

        It might be a learned association rather than anything instinctive about tiddies. There’s this one study where they gave rats a backpack fetish, but it has a sad ending because then they murdered all the rats. They did phrase the murder like they were doing a Satanic ritual though, and that kind of took some of the murdery edge off it for me.

        I’ve been looking forward to like 20 years from now when all the incels will be into girls with too many fingers.

      • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        Tiddy loving might be a cultural thing. Human species that don’t need clothes care little for the boobs. Though they live south, so either they are used to it or it might be Neanderthal(or other varieties) genes that some of us inherited. We certainly are boob fetishists among the mammals.

        • psud@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          22 hours ago

          There’s only one extant human species and we don’t know anything about soft tissue in extinct species of humans

  • NotLemming@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    To be fair, men got to name everything so what do you expect really. In my view it’s Freudian.

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 days ago

      [off topic]

      A while back I imagined a race of intelligent crocodiles that not only ate their own young, they’d cooktyhem and serve them to honored guests as a sign of respect.