To think of course women's breasts are sexual

[WhitePhantom]

Many many times I've seen people on here getting very indignant about people suggesting that women's breasts are sexual - "they're primarily for feeding babies", "they're purely functional", "they're no different to men's breasts", "women should be free to go topless just as much as men", etc.

I completely disagree! Women's breasts are a source of sexual pleasure from puberty till... I don't know, death?! I b/f all three of mine, which was a total time of 2 years, but for the other 30-odd years their only role has been sexual pleasure, for me and/or for whatever partner I've been with.

Am I completely deluded??

---

If you've found this page in your search of nipple toys and clamps that have been recommended by fellow Mumsnet users, you might find our guide to the best nipple toys useful. Hope this helps! MNHQ

I think ultimately they are both.

Both as in for feeding/functional AND sexual

I think the issue is with people who think breast are solely for sexual pleasure when their primary function is to feed babies. The sexual pleasure is just a bonus!

Both. Sexual during sex. And purely functional when being used for breastfeeding. Just like a person is sexual at certain times but not while doing the accounts in work at their computer.

Who's sexual pleasure though? Not mine. I quite like the look of them in a bra, but day to day I have to say I don't think about them much at all.

Agree they're both.

For the feeding years, feeding offspring probably trumps orgasms. But you're unlikely to be doing both at the same time so why not multitask?.

But for the remaining 60 years when you're not lactating, surely their function is fun. (for me primarily but also dh loves them)

I was under the impression that developed breasts in humans was a signifier of readiness to reproduce, therefore they actually are supposed to attract a mate.

I think sometimes people forget that we're still part of the animal kingdom and our sole purpose is to reproduce and die.

There's a cheerful thought for a Monday morning 😁

Breasts are sexualised in the west.

This is not the case everywhere in the world though, so it is largely a cultural phenomenon.

Are forearms sexual? Is skin sexual?

I really like dh's forearms, in the same way he likes my breasts. I would consider my skin in general as more sexual to me, than specifically my breasts.

For some people they are more sexual, but that's true of any part of the body. Penises are definitely both sexual and utilitarian. Skin and forearms and breasts? I'd err towards utilitarian being the primary purpose for the body owner.

If they're sexual because the opposite sex is attracted to them, then that's also true of many body parts.

Meh.

They're dual purpose like many other parts of the body. Their primary biological function is to feed babies, but obviously they are often used sexually when not feeding. The issue is that in our culture breasts are highly sexualised and a lot of people find it hard to see them in any other way.

SleepFreeZone really? Mine are very... sensitive, and play a big part in my enjoyment of sex (and my partner's to a lesser extent). Obviously no two women are the same, but I don't think it's unusual for breasts to be part of the 'pleasurable' part of a female's body?

They are both though, feeding and pleasure. However, when they are evidently being used for the former, they are categorically not sexual, that is a fact some choose to forget sadly.

Nope they're not particularly sensitive. I am still breast feeding my 19 month old so I guess I might have switched off from them. My ex loved them so they were a sense of pleasure to him, my DP isn't a boob man really so isn't hugely fussed.

Not actually sexualised everywhere. Arguably all parts of the body are sexual. It's this wierd page 3 culture makes them such a high focus thing here. Where I grew up boobs are pretty matter of fact snd functional. Plenty of other parts of my body feel more erotic then breasts.

But male nipples can be quite sexual too yet it's quite acceptable for men to go topless. So why can't women go topless?

I don't think they're necessarily any more pleasurable than other body parts, although this obviously depends upon the individual. I definitely have more sensation in places like my forearms and neck, my breasts don't really do anything for me sexually at all.

They're both!

Just a sex itself is both sexy and about the couple and potentially procreative.

God didnae make it straightforward, did He.

Sleep and Fruu, see I'm the opposite. For me they're intensely pleasurable, pretty much more than anywhere else. To me their primary role is sexual, with a very minor (but important, of course!) part-time role of feeding.

Mine are neither functional or sexual. In fact I have to be careful I don't pin them down when tying my belt.

I might use them as a scarf this winter.

I would argue that there function is purely for feeding babies. If that was true they would look like the breasts on other primates. Evolution has changed them to be sexualised in humans.

Depends
I used to work with a man from Africa ( can't remember which country) who told me that in his culture breasts were purely functional but buttocks were very sexy!!

PS I wasn't all that bothered about them sexually when I was younger. I certainly didn't feel any sexy sensations or emotions when feeding my children with them several years ago.

Nowadays though DH only needs to go near with his lips and its like a bomb goes off. In fact I almost enjoy that more than attention in other private areas!

So it all changes massively over time too.

Don't find them interesting sexually at all - to me they are just lumps of fat on my chest. DH seems to like them though.