Since the inception of this column, I have tried to avoid this topic like the BIR because my yaya has dreaded it, my wife has forbidden it and my three female readers have had a temporary restraining order issued against it.
But alas, higher powers — more specifically DOMs in positions of power — have prevailed upon me. And so with much reluctance, I am here to talk about a topic that has distracted men for millions of years since they started standing upright.
Female breasts.
To all the thousands of men who have started reading this column when they chanced upon the word “breasts” (and who were also hoping for adequate visual support to accompany this column), you must first examine themselves (and not in a lascivious fashion) and ask: Just what arcane powers does this part of the female anatomy have over the male will that will cause them to stare inadvertently (and more often than not, advertently) at them without prior approval and risk debilitating bodily harm?
Close Ad X
My fellow ignorant male heathens, let us take a closer look at female breasts, but not in a way that will require the attention of the CBCP.
First, a biology lesson. According to the book The Naked Woman A Study of the Female Body (and no, the book was not published by FHM), the female breast acts as a sweat gland that produces “modified sweat” called milk. (What!? You mean I suckled on pawis!?) But aside from the modified sweat glands and ducts, the bulk of the female breast is primarily made up of fat tissue, which gives the breast its rounded shape. So the key differences between breast sizes? Just a lotta (or just a little) strategically placed fat.
And — if all those photos in men’s magazines are to believed — it appears that medical technology has progressed in such a manner that it not longer aids in the breasts’ primary purpose of mass sweat production to feed the world’s undernourished, but rather it has aided in mimicking fat cells to make breasts look more hemispherical to the point that the results sometimes defy the laws of physics (and several other laws). What higher purpose do these augmented breasts serve, other than as potential weapons of mass distraction for ignorant male heathens? Imagine all the silicone that could have been better deployed in computers to be donated to underprivileged schools? Not that the heathens are complaining, though.
We may all have been swayed by media’s visual glorification of what “ideal” breasts should resemble: large, perky, standing nearly upright and capable of developing independent thought (No Girlfriends Since Birth note: Where can I find this glorification?). But normal, non-media appendages can be big or small or sagging or even asymmetrical because breasts come in all kinds of sizes and shapes and fat content. In fact, having asymmetrical breasts is a very common phenomenon. (Note to NGSBs: You cannot confirm these findings by leafing through men’s magazines. All those photos represent augmented symmetrical reality).
It has been argued that if mass media didn’t glamorize these weapons of mass distraction, then the world would be a peaceful, less distracted and silicone-abundant place. But shockingly enough, it appears that men — including all the heathens, the No Girlfriends Since Birth (NGSBs), the Under de Sayass (USDs) and the DOMs (especially the DOMs) — have been biologically programmed to be distracted by female breasts, whether they like it or not (evolution has since hired some programmers to work on this glitch).
According to Why Men Don’t Listen and Women Can’t Read Maps, men are biologically hardwired to look at female shapes and curves because they serve as a sexual signaling system (NGSBs note: Where can you find the remote control for the system?). That being the case, the man is predisposed to stare at the most prominent signal on a woman’s body — her breasts. In fact, the Kinsey Institute discovered that 76 percent of men preferred to fulfill their, ubo ubo, biological programming with the lights turned on so that they can appreciate the benefits of a strong signal as compared to only 36 percent of women who want the lights on. (DOM note: Does Kinsey have the contact numbers of these women? The only women we know have signals that are out of the coverage area.)
There’s another theory as to why men stare at breasts. Ethologist and zoologist Desmond Morris explains that when men used to walk on all fours, it was the round fleshy, swelling buttocks of the female that served as sexual stimuli in attracting males who mounted their mates from the rear. However, when man began to walk up right on two legs (which was roughly a week ago), the “female of the species” needed to “successfully shift the interest of the male species to the front; so evolution would have to do something to make the frontal region more stimulating.” Thus, the frontal region evolved a pair of “mimic-buttocks” to enable females to continue transmitting these primeval sexual signals. Sa madaling salita, the female breasts are actually a second-rate copycat to the female butt (sabay sampal sa pwet).
But the more interesting factoid about cleavage — aside from its ability to cloud the minds of all men who have hair in their erogenous zones — is that in several tests wherein researchers showed men pictures of breast and butt cleavage, the men were unable to tell which cleavage belonged to what area. That is why they asked to re-take the test several hundred times.
And did you know that the breast has one more superpower that even my three female readers may be unaware of? Here’s another biology lesson: the nipples are surrounded by a brownish patch called the areola which contain small glands (NGSBs, please use your own visual support for this portion of the column. Imagination alone may not suffice). Since the glands of the areolar area are apocrine sweat glands (remember that breast milk is actually modified sweat? This idea alone has been instrumental to help me start weaning), that means the nipple zone of the area of the female breast may actually transmit scent signals called pheromones to the male nose.
Pheromones are small organic molecules that act as form of chemical communication which signals a female’s individual’s sexual receptivity and be a natural bonding pheromone that men require for their emotional stability with women. These nipple pheromones may also explain the irrational exuberance of men over female breasts (DOMs note: It is this exuberance which keeps us alive. Literally). However, my three female readers, if an NGSB or DOM dressed in a white coat invites you to participate in an areola-smelling experiment to detect the presence of pheromones, you are authorized to legally castrate him with a spoon because pheromones are odorless.
Speaking of castration, my three female reader have asked both the Departments of Health and Justice: Is there is a way to re-program men from paying irrational exuberance to their mimic buttocks aside from a lobotomy? According to Dr. Ava Cadell, one of Cosmopolitan magazine’s leading “clinical sexologists,” the re-programming of men should take place during their early childhood when they are subjected to daily kurot sa singit sessions by their yayas. Thus, if an untrained man encounters a woman with a sexual signaling system that is powerful enough to effect climate change, please do not blame him if he stares directly into her signals. Blame his yaya. And his lack of peripheral vision. And maybe his lack of common decency. But if the man avoids looking at her signals for fear that black and blue welts will spontaneously appear around his groin region, that means he is well-trained. It is either that or he has already been previously castrated.
