Usborne Puberty Book tells children that breasts exist to make milk and to make girls look grown up and attractive

I'm a feminist but I think the book is correct from what I've read. I'm not an expert in the field so may well be wrong but wasn't it to do with humans becoming bipedal? When the ancestors of humans walked on all fours female genitals were more obvious to men. When our species started walking upright this the case to a far lesser extent - you can't see anything like as much and what can be seen is not as "sexually tempting". Was this not the reason human females developed a secondary sexual characteristic, in the form of breasts, that our ape cousins/ancestors do not have?

I'm struggling to imagine a more damaging and revolting experience that a father telling his pubescent daughter that the purpose of her newly formed breasts is to arouse and attract males.

Little wonder record numbers of girls are desperate to transition to boys.

Maybe women have vaginas just because a man can put a cock in them?

Any hole will do to men like you.

Newdaddie are you for fucking real ?????

If my dd (or future dc) ask me why women have breasts (as opposed to just nipples like men) I will tell them the truth about sexual selection or to put it simply women have breasts because men like them.

Fuck off to the the far side of fuck with that fucking point of view.

Well quite.

Girls start puberty as young as eight.

Quite so, and also
Propagating the species aside, the purpose of a woman is not to be sexually objectified by men. It's dehumanising.

The book was talking about girls. 'to make girls look grown up and attractive' ... ugh.

Breasts are highly sexualised in Western society, but particularly in the UK. Overly so. More than necessary.

Do men get helplessly aroused when see a woman breast feed? No. Because of the context. Because of the cultural norms.

The objectification and sexualisation of women and young girls is epidemic.

Propagating the species aside, the purpose of a woman is not to be sexually objectified by men. It's dehumanising.

And whilst men might be attracted to breasts, encouraging young men and boys to only view women through the filter of sexual attraction is what has lead to this epidemic.

Fuelled by ever more degrading porn, that any youngster can access at the touch of a button.

Educating young people about erogenous zones is neutral and mutually respectful information.

Asserting that breasts are there for men is not.

@ErrolTheDragon and @SomeDyke that's is a fair argument but humans aren't the only biped mammals so humans are still an anomaly with breasts. The truth is more likely a mix of the two.

Blue eyes are an anomaly that is sexually selected for, but not physiologically advantageous which is arguably why breasts are more common than blue eyes.

And thanks SomeDyke for the academic journal link I'll refrain from posting a dozen contrary links from the first page of Google scholar because I'm sure everyone here is capable of using Google themselves.

Nipples are for breastfeeding. Men could breastfeed given the right hormones and conditions. (There hasn't been a need for men to breastfeed but we have actually retained the physiology through our evolution, but that is a whole another discussion). Other primates have nipples without 'breasts' (except when lactating, and only when actually lactating)

Breasts, and by breasts I mean the big (or small) round things behind the nipples are there on women because men like them. @BenLui

So no, @Kimlek I'm not taking the piss.

Errol has it.

It's a terrible way to put it regardless of truth. If you said "vaginas exist to have penises stuck in them", or "penises exist to be stuck in vaginas" then there's a sense in which those statements are correct. It's still not what you want to put in a book for primary children for a huge range of reasons.

Errol

But how is it that any size or shape of breast can be attractive? And certain cultures have quite definite ideas about how ones areola should look, whilst others don't.

There isn't a 'correct' type of breast in terms of feeding.

Sorry, hit post too early and have forgotten exactly what scathing comment I was going to add.

Isn't it more that women evolved breasts appropriate for a biped mammal to feed their young effectively, and men then evolved to find potentially successful mothers attractive? They've inverted cause and effect, surely?

' to make girls look grown up and attractive'

Breasts are the shape they are so that infants don't suffocate. Sexual selection doesn't make much sense when the whole population doesn't have big boobs.

Yes nipples are an erogenous zone. As they are on many men.

But telling girl children their breasts are there because of men is just more sexual objectification. Men might like them, but that's not their purpose.

Actually the shape of the female human breast seems to have a lot to do with the mechanics of sucking, and very little to do with daddy enjoying himself:
Bentley, Gillian R. (2001). "The Evolution of the Human Breast". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 32 (38): 30–50. doi:10.1002/ajpa.1033.

Anthropologically men do find breasts attractive.

That's not why the female of the human race developed breasts though.

Their purpose is for milk production.

The fact that they are pretty Is irrelevant to their purpose.

Women do have breasts to feed children. But, in caveman terms, the mate a man looks for is one to feed his babies so the breasts are attractive to him. (Ditto for the curvy hips). Not sure why we are denying basic evolutionary facts. My dc are both at that age (girl and boy) and I'm happy for both to read that.

Do your husbands never play with your breasts then?
Do you not enjoy it? Do they not enjoy it?
FFS tell your daughters the truth.
Stop making men out to be weird baddies all the time.

To be clear, their constant visibility is probably the result of sexual selection, obviously women would have to have breasts at some periods, because we're mammals.

But other primates feed their children and do not have permanently prominent breasts. It is unusual to humans and it is often speculated that the purpose is to be sexually attractive to males.

It's technically correct insofar as they're highly visible throughout the entire reproductive cycle and not just when needed so they're probably evolved as a form of sexual display. However, not all things that are biologically correct are appropriate for a book aimed at this age group, especially in this highly simplified form which sends a whole host of dodgy messages. It's also heteronormative as hell.

I think 'NewDaddie' was taking the piss. Surely!

I despair at how far we still have to go.

I will tell them the truth about sexual selection or to put it simply women have breasts because men like them.

Women do not have breasts because men like them. Do they have bums for the same reason? Or inner thighs? Or lips?

Dear God.

Women have breasts so they can feed children.

If you want to find out what women think of men in the UK who can't help but go OMG boobies, boobies, pop over to the thread about the topless sunbather.

And for the love of God, do not tell any daughter that the reason she has breasts is because of men.

Ffs.