Whether or not female breasts are "supposed" to be sexually attractive to males and/or sources of sexual pleasure for women is a fascinating subject. Given that their primary biological purpose is that of producing milk, it seems to me that bodily functions which ensure the continuation of the species would *need* to be pleasurable as an incentive! For example, we eat a variety of foods in pleasant surroundings for fun as well as for adequate nutrition. Why shouldn't breasts be a source of sexual delight to the mother (and the father!) as well as a source of food (and pleasure!) for the baby? I have always understood that the largest sexual organ is, in fact, the skin. While certain cultures and individuals may choose to designate  particular parts of the body as inherently sexual, the choice is very wide.
        On a personal note, although I have long recognised that in our culture breasts are considered to be secondary sexual characteristics, I only started to receive any sexual pleasure from mine since the birth of my first child. I wonder how unusual (or *normal*) this might be?


Norma Ritter, IBCLC, LLLL                        "If not now, when? If not us, who?"