A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
I mean... I think we can all agree that boobs are at least universally non-threatening, even without counting the symbolisms of nourishment, nurturance, life, fertility, etc. At least I don't think we're at the point where hiding machine guns or hellish snakes in boobs is viable. ... Right?
Galactose
To be fair, men got to name everything so what do you expect really. In my view it's Freudian.
It was either that or a name based on obscure details of skull morphology.
synapsids have a single temporal fenestra, an opening low in the skull roof behind each eye socket, leaving a bony arch beneath each; this accounts for the name "synapsid"
I'll take the boobs.
How could anyone downvote something so erudite and horny?
I accidentally downvoted myself.
Literally lol
Thanks
Boobworld, it's a world for you, but it's actually two!
We're the only(?) species that have evolved them to become more than their basic function. Other species use colors and other features for mating signals, humans use shapes. Definitely wired to be interested in them.
Hold up, are other hominids interested in boobs? Any other mammal? Any non mammals into boobs? How much tiddy science have we really done here? I need tiddy facts.
This might be pseudoscience I got taught 20 years ago, but I have been under the impression that human evolution of breasts as a secondary sexual characteristic has to do with the shift to becoming bipedal. Like a lot of animals, early hominids would see the rear end of a fellow hominid and know this as a trigger for copulation. But when homo erectus started standing upright, butts weren't so universally erotic anymore. They had a whole back and head above them now. Breasts didn't need to be very large to fill their function, but an increase in size gave them a curvy appearance similar to a set of butt cheeks. And early humans were like, yeah, I think that's right, and selected for increased (or at least variable) breast size.
Boobs don’t need to be large? Have you seen cow udders? Or a wet nurses tits? A lot of women cannot produce enough milk so they used to have a wet nurse, which is basically rent-a-tits.
I, too, watched the anime Prison School.
Haven't seen that, but now I want to.
It is batshit crazy.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5qLYAFdddPw&t=8s&pp=2AEIkAIB
The unhinged tone in the subbed version over the dubbed is what sells it for me.
I'm not aware of any other species sexually selecting for mammary size. Some birds do a puffy chest thing.
It might be a learned association rather than anything instinctive about tiddies. There's this one study where they gave rats a backpack fetish, but it has a sad ending because then they murdered all the rats. They did phrase the murder like they were doing a Satanic ritual though, and that kind of took some of the murdery edge off it for me.
I've been looking forward to like 20 years from now when all the incels will be into girls with too many fingers.
We need more data!
Tiddy loving might be a cultural thing. Human species that don't need clothes care little for the boobs. Though they live south, so either they are used to it or it might be Neanderthal(or other varieties) genes that some of us inherited. We certainly are boob fetishists among the mammals.
I finally understand why galactose (greek word for milk) is a component of lactose (latin word for milk). It's milk all the way down.
Aliens are gonna have a field day with their translators.
[off topic]
A while back I imagined a race of intelligent crocodiles that not only ate their own young, they'd cooktyhem and serve them to honored guests as a sign of respect.
Somebody please tell me that sol means titties somehow
I mean, point me to a milk producing animal of another class without stretching some definitions a bit.