"I can see where the importance of breasts as a sexual organ can be
culturally influenced but for an individual who enjoys the breast as an
erogenous zone (regardless of the origin of that enjoyment) then why
wouldn't sensations to this area have orgasmic potential?"

My 2 cents:
My breasts were NOT erogenous zones for me until *after* I had babies. I
remember being very surprised with my firstborn by the sensual (I really like
that word for this!) sensations I had. And, like someone else shared, I was
wishing for my husband to come home, and in fact I even called him a few
times and hinted so!

Being the thinker that I am <g>, I pondered why this sensation took place
with my babies in a non-sensual environment.  I concluded, in my limited
knowledge, that the breasts are indeed part of the reproductive system; that
reproduction includes pleasurable feelings so that we'll *want* to do that
which perpetuates our species, and therefore that it wasn't unreasonable that
things having to do with breasts be pleasurable also to ensure continuation
of the breastfeeding and therefore the survival of human babies.  Why not?

I most often think of oxytocin as the "muscle" hormone, the one that causes
contractions, which I relate to discomfort. However, Dr. Marshall Klauss made
some interesting statements about oxytocin in his ILCA '95 talk and how it
affected the mothering behavior of laboratory rats. Surely all these tidbits
are related!

I don't know enough detail about orgasms and oxytocin, but if someone can
answer the question of the relationship between the two and how the body does
have an orgasm, perhaps we'll understand this all a little better.

-Lisa