Wednesday, 10 November 2010

Chapter Six - The Evolution Of Large Breasts

[The famous Venus of Willendorf dated between 20,000 to 30,000 years ago.  It is the most well known female carving from the Stone Age.  She is an obese woman, and a carving like this found in a Stone Age excavations is a problem for Scientists.  The reason is that Stone Age people were suppose to be nomadic hunter/gathers and so would always be on the move.  So how did a large obese woman like this, walk along with the rest of the tribe?  Was she so important that men carry her in some form of sedan chair?  Another theory I have on this is that if we take the Aquatic Ape Theory into account, she could be a diver and her extra fat would keep warm in the water.  As I explain in my book, Mermaids, Witches and Amazons.]

Desmond Morris claimed in his book, The Naked Ape that women developed breasts because it made them sexually attractive to men. So the larger the breasts the more likely she would breed. The problem with this theory is that it assumes that men were the dominant sex during the Stone Age and so it was men who chose their sexual partners. But this may not be true; we cannot assume that early man was a brute who dominated women through violence and rape.  Yet at the same time it has to be admitted that in our present patriarchal age women with large breasts are more attracted to men.  But whether this means women with large breasts are more likely to breed that women with smaller breasts is a debatable point in our modern world.  Though this could be true in the hundreds of years ago, when rich and powerful men could choose wives, concubines mistress with large breasts and because they were under the protection of powerful and wealthy men their daughters were more likely to survive, than normal girl children.  Which might suggest that extra large breasts on women, only came an evolutionary advantage, in our present patriarchal age.
So could this also point to their also being patriarchal ages in the Stone-Age when women also developed large breast during those times?  When again alpha males chose big breasted women and protected them and their children?  This might be true but male and female sexual behaviour does point to patriarchy not being very commonplace during the Stone Age, as previously discussed in previous chapters.
It is of interest that women are far more sensual than men in sex play.  For thousands of years men have dominated women and used them as sex-slaves.  Yet if a man goes to a very submissive prostitute and even though he can use her however he likes, for his own pleasure, in the end most men seem to be more concerned in ejaculating within a short period of time.  Than any sensual pleasure she can give him.  Many prostitutes take pride in being able to make a man orgasm within a few minutes or less.
Yet it has been shown in recent times when the roles are reverse and a woman can buy sex from men, they have a very different attitude.  A woman can enjoy hours of sensual and sexual play and massage.  While although men can enjoy sex play and being massaged they soon get tied of this.  This has been discovered in massage parlors where men soon get aroused when being massaged by a young woman he quickly wants to ejaculate.  This might be because women have in the past, enjoyed men giving them sexual and sensual pleasure far longer than women doing the same for men.  So men are not used to receiving sensual and sexual pleasure from women and only want a quick orgasm.  While women in the past through many thousands of years of matriarchal rule, are used to men giving them unhurried sexual and sensual pleasure.
This then suggests that any patriarchal rule by men in evolutionary terms were fairly brief.  We know that in times of rapid climate change species of humans went extinct, like the Neanderthals, so that we are the only human species left.  And it seems that genetics have found bottlenecks in our evolution where it seems the human race was reduced to only one tribe.  As previous mentioned a Matriarchal tribe is far more likely to survive during times of extreme hardship.  Which suggests that men taking over in times during the Stone Age were detrimental to the survivability of humans. So that in times of rapid climate change, any patriarchal tribes that existed quickly become extinct and only Matriarchal tribes survived.
Another problem with the idea that large breast point to patriarchy, is that patriarchy does seem to be hostile to women’s breasts.  Men are able to walk down the street bare chest but if a woman were to do the same, she would be arrested.  It is still not acceptable for women to breast feed in public even though it is recognized today that, “breast is best” for children.
Back in the 20th century male doctors became so hostile to breast feeding that they made the incredible claim that cow’s milk was better for children than human milk!  In the 1950s and 60s in the West many women were strongly discouraged from breast feeding their babies.  Fortunately in the 1960s the Women’s Liberation Movement got started and feminist scientists and doctors managed to use proper science to demonstrate the obvious fact that human milk was far better for children than cow milk.

A picture of a large breast woman, Rasa Von Werder. 

 The problem might be that breast are not only about sexual attraction but symbolizes motherhood.  After all, in the Stone Age a baby will be breast-fed for the first few years of its life.  So men’s fixation on women’s breasts may be more about him wanting a mother figure than a sexual attraction.  Many women have noted that many men never seem to grow up and treat their wives as if they were their mothers. 
So large breast also has a very strong motherly image and as it is mothers who care for children the first few years of their lives, so they could also symbolize the power and influence of the mother.  As the old saying goes, “the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world”.  This is clearly not true, as we can see all around the world, men hold nearly all positions of power.  Yet instinctively we feel that this saying should be true, as it is the mother who has greater influence over a child as it grows up than the father does.
The reason why mothers do not rule the world as suggested by this saying, is that patriarchal rulers have overcome the powerful influence of the mother by brainwashing mothers so they will teach their children patriarchal propaganda.  The irony is that some of the strongest supporters of patriarchy over the last few thousand years, have been women.  But this is only because patriarchy, knowing the strong influence mothers have over their children have focus their attention on brainwashing mothers, to believe in patriarchal doctrine.
So if large breasts are a powerful mother symbol to men.  Then it might symbolize a strong desire to experience a powerful mother who once had real power to, “rule the world”.  Men living in a patriarchal world may be instinctively missing this powerful mother who has the power to nurture and care for them, in the way a true mother can.
So perhaps the evolution of large breasts in women, in patriarchal times may not be about men getting women’s bottoms mixed up with their breasts, but could be their desire to be cared for by a powerful mother once again.


  1. It has been a good many years since I read Morris' "Naked Ape" (I read it shortly after it was first published), but if memory serves Morris' premise was that larger, more rounded breasts (as compared to other primates) developed due to human males for some reason desiring coitus in a face-to-face position as opposed to rear entry. According to Morris the rounded breasts would resemble buttocks. Similarly, red lips would correspond to the red color of the labia when the female is aroused.

    To my mind this implies nothing about either patriarchy OR matriarchy but merely the mechanics of sexual attraction. Females who were more attractive would be more likely to breed and thus produce progeny.

    I believe that sculptures such as the "Venus of Willendorf" are were fertility idols and thus represented an exaggeration of the external traits indicative of female fertility and fruitfullness. Overly large breasts would be indicative of abundant milk supply (even though we know now that there is no correlation between breast size and lactation quantity). Over all plumpness would be indicative of fertility since women whose body fat content is too low become infertile. A woman needs a certain amount of body fat to be able to carry a baby to term.

    I seriously doubt anybody in a nomadic culture ever became obese. Obesity implies a level of wealth that nomadic cultures do not enjoy.

    I do not agree that desire for large breasts is entirely a product of patriarchical systems. It seems to me to be a recent phenomenon. If you use art as an indicator of standards of beauty, you have to come to the conclusion that large breasts were not considered a component of classical beauty. Whether it be "Venus de Milo" or Goya's "Naked Maja", classical beauty was not about breast size. Breasts were important but only in concert with other traits - sufficient body fat, wide hips - indicative of overall fitness to conceive and carry a baby to term.

    I believe our modern breast size fetish is a result of being weaned too soon. I strongly suspect that if some enterprising anthropologist were ti study the issue across multiple cultures today, they would find a correlation between the age at which males are weaned from the breast (or prevalence of bottle feeding) and cultural norms regarding breast size. In that regard it would reflect a desire for a degree of "mothering".

    I do not understand why relationships between the sexes must always be a battle. Why can it not be a partnership? Each has strengths. Each has weaknesses. In my experience those strengths and weaknesses are (or can be) complimentary.

    1. Thank you for your well reasoned response to this um....interesting blog pot. I would also like to point out that the preferance for breasts that are full (not nessesarily gigantic) rather than small or barely present has mainly to do with the preferance for fit mates. Women with larger brest have more room to hold milk and therefore an easier time in establishing and maintaining milk supply, a distinct advantage in the pre-formula-fed history of humanity where infants and young children's survival was dependent on mother's milk. Secondly full breast, just like full hips and low abdominal fat content (equaling an hourglass figure) are all indiators of proper levels of female hormones necessary for fertility and maintaining pregnancy, Lastly the expession of female beauty in historical artwork has nearly always shown women with sufficient breast tissue to be considered full breasted, not gigantic, but clearly venus de milo is a far cry from "flat chested" or "small breasted" and certainly exhibits an evolutionary ideal feminine form. As far as the Venus of Willendorf, as the previous poster said, this is most likely an exaggeration of the aspects of femininity that are preferred meant to represent fertility. As far as modern American culture's preference for extremely large breasts (which is not actually as present outside of porn) , It seems to me to be more of a venus of Willendorf type situation, a preference for exaggerated femininity in response (backlash) to cultural shift moving away from women as nurturing, fertile and motherly figure and towards women living lives as separated from their evolutionary purpose ( choosing non-motherly/ nurturing life roles in society). Lastly culture does effect evolution and vice versa (example as obesity increases in the USA the cultural perception of what weight range is attractive in a mate is shifting to include the large portion of the population that is obese and significantly overweight, this of course influences of gene pool by making obesity in later generation more likely through increased perceived fitness of obese mates. However evolution always shines through, making brief trends (like the ruebenesque portrayal of beauty) eventually revert to what is best for continued humanity. In the example of obesity in America, as it becomes more common and the obese individuals increasingly viewed as fit mates, trends of infertility emerge. In this particular case as we recently have discovered (or remembered), obesity makes fertility and healthy pregnancy less likely. A whole host of fertility related health issues are tied to obesity, PCOS, hormone imbalances, gestational diabetes, health issues for infants that are born too large, and excessive weight gain during pregnancy (more likely for those who are already overweight or obese) cause a host of issues from health problems later in life, to difficulty with breastfeeding. All these issues are of course creating social pressure for those who intend to become mothers to loose weight first and take other measures to increase fertility and decrease risks. So our perception of what is considered a "fit mate" will again revert closer to what evolution intended despite a brief exaggeration in one direction or another due to cultural shifts. I think that the same will be true of exaggerated breast size in culture, though this has no negative pressure to recede (as obesity does) may be here to stay for quite a while, and if it does revert it will likely be due to social pressure rather evolutionary pressure and will only revert as far as returning to a preference for full breasts, rather than a current preference for exaggerated breasts. That's my two sense! (please forgive any keyboard is on the fritz)