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

It's a direct quote from my link

SORry meant to copy:

An erogenous zone (from Greek ἔρως, érōs "love" and English -genous "producing" from Greek -γενής, -genḗs "born") is an area of the human body that has heightened sensitivity, the stimulation of which may generate a sexual response, such as relaxation, the production of sexual fantasies, sexual arousal and orgasm.

Are mens' nipples/moobs sexual? Not being a bloke and have no idea.

Yes, the neck and breasts are both erogenous zones for many people.

I thought it was known that biologically breasts are involved in sexual pleasure.

m.medicalxpress.com/news/2011-08-nipples-area-brain-genitals.htmlI

lifehacker.com/the-things-nobody-tells-you-about-breastfeeding-1567118655

I don't really understand your point Sylvia- necks aren't really relevant because you don't use your neck to breastfeed, which is what the post is about.
It's like me saying "why do you think necks are sexual? They're only there to hold your head up. You only think they're sexual because you've been watching too many cheesy films."

But I wouldn't say that, because all of our body parts have multiple purposes

Some people find feet or inanimate objects sexual. Some people are completely asexual.

What you find sexual is down to personal preference.

m.medicalxpress.com/news/2011-08-nipples-area-brain-genitals.html

Working link

What you find sexual is down to personal preference

It is but there is also biology on the side of what the OP is saying.

I'm not aware I have made a post about breastfeeding.

I'm not claiming that breasts are not sexual.

I'm saying that they are sexual, but so are necks and lips. There isn't a reason to single breasts out as more sexual on the basis of arousal, because women don't experience them as a more arousing body part.

@Oblada They became sexual because they are used to feed babies - I couldn't disagree more! I got great sexual pleasure from my breasts long long before b/f ever came into the equation.

Breasts are very often involved in women's sexual pleasure, causing intense arousal / orgasm. They of course have a feeding function as well, but suggesting that there is nothing sexual about them just seems ludicrous to me. They're not 'just another body part' (imo).

I don't understand your comment. There isn't a reason to single breasts out as more sexual on the basis of arousal, because women don't experience them as a more arousing body part

Ok it is Huff post but still

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/1871581

Nipple stimulation activates the same region of the brain as clitoral, vaginal and cervical stimulation. Here’s the science behind that claim from the Journal of Sexual Medicine, Volume 8, 2011:

I don't have any sexual feeling in my breasts whatsoever. It feels exactly like the skin on my tummy or back for example. Even if I grab them quite hard (tmi) it doesn't hurt at all. Feels just like a lump of flesh. I understand that for some women they are very erogenous, but not for everyone.

Everyone's personal feelings about their body is different, but I don't consider them as private as the genitals- more along the lines of the upper thigh (which most people don't see and can be considered a "sexual" area, but at the same time many women are comfortable to show in a swimming costume). If I was on a beach where many women were topless, I would go topless too and feel perfectly comfortable. In contrast, even if I was on a nudist beach I would not be fully naked in public because for me, the genital area is too private.

I posted a link earlier to wikipedia that shows the results of a study showing that breasts and nipples are the fifth and sixth most arousing body part for women on average.

Therefore they are not particularly arousing compared to neck and lips. They are in fact less arousing. They are still a sexual body part.

That does not contradict your study, Lass.

The primary role of nipples and, as far as I can tell, the only role of mammary glands is to feed. Breast tissue is a much harder one to call. It doesn't actually have any feeding function at all, so certainly that couldn't be its primary function. I remain to be convinced that it evolved for sexual purposes either though. Seems circular.

Breasts are very often involved in women's sexual pleasure, causing intense arousal / orgasm. They of course have a feeding function as well, but suggesting that there is nothing sexual about them just seems ludicrous to me. They're not 'just another body part' (imo)

I agree with you OP. I think there is a resistance to this idea on MN because the prevailing idea is breasts are for feeding; breastfeeding is good; Page 3 and it's ilk is bad so breasts being for sex is bad.

It is possible to orgasm just by nipple stimulation - plenty of women do and feel a neural connection.

I don't get this insistence that all women ought to associate their breasts with sex and get turned on by them. I've always been take it or leave it about having them played with (actually get far more turned on by a man kissing my neck and shoulders) and looking at this thread, I'm clearly not alone in that. So why the insistence on the part of some posters that I ought to feel they're a sexual part of my body? I get that some men are turned on by them, and it's nice feeling appreciated by one's partner, but that's about the extent of my sexual interest in my breasts.

Other than that - I feel fairly neutral towards them most of the time. Pretty pissed off with them when it turned out that I'm in the 3 or 4% of women who don't have enough milk ducts and underproduce milk. Turns out mine are neither use nor ornament! But most of the time they're just there.

(When it comes to men's anatomy, I'm another forearm woman!)

Also, I read your earlier link, Lass, and each body area looked at activated a different place within that brain region. So they're not identical experiences.

Which also makes sense - as many women can orgasm from clitoral stimulation, not as many from solely vaginal and fewer still from nipples.

I don't get this insistence that all women ought to associate their breasts with sex and get turned on by them

I don't think any posters are doing that . I don't get this insistence on denying the sexual aspect.

Which also makes sense - as many women can orgasm from clitoral stimulation, not as many from solely vaginal and fewer still from nipples

But women do still orgasm that way. I doubt anyone orgasms by having their neck stroked.

Prickly, yes, how people feel about something is going to be very personal.

The OP sets it up like a Gantt chart. 'Well, I only breastfed for x amount of time so they are only X important' kind of sentiment.

My breasts are primarily maternal to me even though my kids are grown up because I personally found breastfeeding to be an amazing emotional and physical experience with profound psychological resonance. They are as such very much a symbolic sign of maternal femininity to me.

I appreciate that for other people their breasts have a strong psychological sexual element, and for others they have some other meaning, or a mix of meanings.

And all that is alongside their innate erogenous properties!

And it is all fine. There isn't some right or wrong experience. There's just accepting that not everyone has the same experience.

I don't think you've been saying that, lass, but there's another poster upthread who's come pretty close to saying that. I don't see the problem with saying "for some women, they're sexual, for others, they're not". After all we know that the brain is incredibly plastic and develops and changes in response to stimuli - it's not improbable that for some women, the neural pathways which mean they associate breasts with sex are stronger than in others.

There are people who report having orgasms just from fantasising, without any sexual touch at all.

They are for both. That's why nipples are an erogenous zone.

it's not improbable that for some women, the neural pathways which mean they associate breasts with sex are stronger than in others

That is fair comment. Sylvia however seems unwilling to accept there even are actual neural pathways between nipples and clitoris/genitals.