>Of course breasts are sexual!

The question is not "are breasts sexual?"  Clearly they are, *in some
cultures*.  And thighs are sexual in Mali, and the napes of necks are sexual
in Japan, and mutilated feet were sexual in China, and so on and so forth.

The question is "Is it a *biological function* of the breast to be sexual,
or a cultural overlay found only in a few cultures?"  And the answer is that
it is a cultural overlay, found only in a few cultures.  Most men in most
cultures in the world are not aroused by the sight of a woman's breasts.  In
most cultures, breasts are not touched during sexual activity.  Viewing the
breast as sexual is *learned*, which means it isn't automatic, and doesn't
have to happen.  That doesn't make it any less real.  If you teach men to
find breasts erotic, they will find them erotic.  If you teach them to find
other body parts erotic, they will find other body parts erotic.  If you
teach women to get sexual pleasure from their breasts, they will.  If you
teach them to get sexual pleasure from other body parts, they will get
sexual pleasure from other body parts.

>I can't find anything wrong
>with acknowledging the duality of female breasts.

The problem comes when the cultural definition of breasts as sexual results
in women not breastfeeding or not breastfeeding for very long, leading to
poorer health outcomes for them and poorer health and cognitive outcomes for
their children.  In the US, some women choose not to breastfeed because
their partners are not supportive, and don't want to share "their" breasts
with the baby.  Some women choose not to breastfeed because it is too
restrictive in a culture where they are told they can't/shouldn't nurse in
public, and/or can't nurse in front of the in-laws or their husband's
friends, etc.  I've known several women who breastfed at home but always
pumped to go out in public with their babies, and they found breastfeeding
to be too much of a hassle under these conditions, so they weaned rather
than stay at home.  And then of course, there are the cases where women are
accused of sexually abusing their children for breastfeeding them, because
"breast to mouth contact" is defined as inherently sexual.  And people worry
about nursing an older boy child because "What will happen when he gets to
be 3 or 4 or 5 years of age and suddenly *realizes* he is having sex with
his mother?"

For those having difficulty believing that learned cultural beliefs can lead
to physiological responses (such as sexual arousal from breast play),
consider food.  We learn from our culture what things are "food" -- what
things are edible -- and what things are not food.  This is usually very
subtle, and is learned/internalized at a very early age, so that most 3 year
old American children think that eating insects is "gross and disgusting."
People in different cultures are taught to view some things as yummy foods
and others as "non-foods" and disgusting when proposed for eating.  We learn
these lessons very early, very well and very deeply, and even though we know
they are completely cultural, it doesn't mean we can overcome them easily.

My father grew up on a farm in Pennsylvania, and used to relish such meals
as fried eggs and calf brains, calf fries (testicles), and goat's kidneys.
Oh my . . . even just typing those words makes me feel sick to my stomach.

In Mali, my toddler daughter ate fried termites with gusto.  I could never
bring myself to eat a termite, even though I tried on a number of occasions,
and other friends of ours living in Cameroon learned to eat termites as
adults.

In Cameroon, I ate a lovely meal of yams and sauce with meat in it.  Several
visiting Americans were there and partook of the meal.  After we had eaten,
the hosts mentioned that the meat in the sauce was bush rat (BIG rats).  I
was OK with that, having eaten squirrel and muskrat before, but two of the
other Americans, both male, immediately ran off into the bush and vomited up
their meal.  They were sick for hours.

My vegetarian Hindu neighbor gets queasy and upset when she smells meat
cooking, like from a neighborhood barbeque, while others, including me, say
"Hey, that smells great!"  It makes us feel hungry and start to salivate,
while she is going inside to get away from the smell.

It is quite possible for learned cultural beliefs to result in physiological
responses from the body.  I am not saying that men in the US do not get
sexually aroused by women's breasts -- they do!  I am not saying that women
in the US do not get sexual pleasure from their breasts -- they do!  All I
am saying is that this is the result of cultural conditioning, it is not a
biological feature of humans as a species.

I understand that people don't want to give up their sexual pleasure.  But
at what price do we define our breasts this way?  And is that price worth it?

Katherine A. Dettwyler, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Anthropology and Nutrition
Texas A&M University

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html