Comment on I hope i don't get downvoted for this

Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  why breasts are considered sexual (they aren’t)

  Breasts and feet are both sensitive and responsive to touch. If you’ve ever Netflix-and-Chilled, a foot rub is a classic opening move. Meanwhile, teasing someone’s nipple is classic foreplay.

  source

  • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    You’re not picking up what I’m laying down.

    I’m not arguing that feet and breasts aren’t capable of proving sexual stimulation from a first person perspective. I’m saying at from a third person perspective, theres nothing about them which inherently arousing; that arousal stems from novelty.

    source

    • lowleekun@ani.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Just like mouth, ears and all kind of body parts are capable of providing sexual stimulation without being considered arousing in the sense we still view breasts/ass and such.

      source

      • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Precisely. It’s amazing how people have misinterpreted what I’ve been saying lol.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I’m saying that from a third person perspective, theres nothing about them which inherently arousing

      There seems to be ample evidence to the contrary. Whole pornographic industries exist to cater to people aroused by pictures of people in various states of undress.

      source

      • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        You’re still not getting it. The key word here is ‘inherently’.

        The sexual interest in people of different states of undress, or specific attire, is just another form of novelty, and influenced by culture.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• cattywampas@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Breasts are sexual. They’re secondary sex characteristics.

  source

  • taulover@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    …that’s not what secondary sex characteristic means. As the article you linked says, that just means physical characteristics unrelated to the reproductive system that differ between the sexes. Some of the other examples given include the Adam’s apple in men and longer arms relative to height in women. While some of these things can be sexually attractive or related to sexual attractiveness in some way, certainly we don’t societally put them in the same sexual category as women’s breasts.

    source

    • cattywampas@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Breasts are larger than they need to be, and they’re that size all the time. One hypothesis is that they’re used to signal sexual maturity and attract mates.

      But aside from that, breasts and nipples are definitely a bigger erogenous zone than most parts of the body, probably second only to genitals. And they’re directly involved in reproduction as you need them to feed babies.

      And most importantly, most societies view them as sexual even if some don’t. So what makes something sexual anyway? That’s a subjective thing, it works by consensus.

      source

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Not everyone’s nipples are sensitive FYI.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • blarghly@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Right. Breasts serve a function related to reproduction - feeding children. But breast size is largely decoupled from a given breast’s ability to feed children. So why do some women have needlessly big breasts? Because breasts are an example of human sexual dimorphism, and so emphasizing them increases sexual fitness since potential mates’ brains will think “boobs = female = horny. More boobs = more female = more horny.”

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Ooo baby look at that apple BOB–yeah drain that cup, waterboy

      source
  • coacoamelky@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    That’s interesting

    source
  • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Yes, but I’m talking about arousal. The distinction between the adjective and verb of ‘sex’ is important lol.

    source
  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    So is thick back hair

    source

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Hey, some people love body hair, so you’re not disproving much.

      source
• rbamgnxl5@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  This doesn’t work.

  If it were only about novelty, then why aren’t there more bellybutton fetishes?

  Being a fetish-having person, I can tell you there there is more than just an attraction to the object of your desire. It is a primal, deep, uncontrollable NEED to see or touch the object.

  I am not a foot fetishist, so I do not presume to know the intimate details of what they like, but I can promise you, it has nothing to do with novelty. Fetishes have so many variants also; there are foot fetishes, sock fetishes, feet squishing stuff, toenail paint things, some want a footjob, some want to lick them or suck on toes, some people like big feet, small feet, the list goes on and on.

  Maybe read just a tiny bit? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_fetishism#Cause

  source

  • A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Welll for one, giving your partner a foot massage usually ends up in them feeling better. Nobody does that with belly buttons.

    source
  • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    You’re conflating intensity with origin. Sure, the fetish feels like a deep, primal need now; but that doesn’t mean it started that way. Addiction feels like a need, too, but no one thinks the first cigarette was “primal.”

    Novelty doesn’t mean “casual curiosity.” It refers to the way our brains fixate on patterns of scarcity, secrecy, or taboo. Especially during formative sexual experiences. Feet are usually hidden and rarely touched; in most cultures, they’re also considered dirty or improper to eroticize. That makes them novel stimuli, and novelty is rocket fuel for sexual imprinting.

    The reason there aren’t more bellybutton fetishes? Simple: they’re not as hidden or taboo. You’ll see a bellybutton in every second Instagram post, and no one’s getting banned for it. Feet? Covered, ignored, often stigmatized, and that makes them psychologically ripe for fetishization.

    Also, you mention the diversity of foot-related fetishes like it disproves the point, but it confirms it. The foot becomes a canvas for a range of niche fixations, because it’s already been elevated to erotic status by the novelty of its cultural invisibility. From there, everything else: socks, polish, squishing and domination branches off.

    TL;DR: Just because your fetish feels deep doesn’t mean it wasn’t shaped by shallow cultural patterns. Read a bit deeper.

    source
• lena@gregtech.eu ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  psypost.org/new-research-challenges-idea-that-fem…

  source

  • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    “I want to stress this finding is not final”

    Relatively small sample size of one group of peoples.

    Meanwhile, we have numerous examples of cultures where tits hang loose on the daily, and aren’t seen as inherently arousing.

    But the implication that breasts signal cues about health is kinda a no brainer. It’s why obese people aren’t considered attractive (dont cross post this on tumblr).

    source

    • lena@gregtech.eu ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Meanwhile, we have numerous examples of cultures where tits hang loose on the daily, and aren’t seen as inherently arousing.

      Source? Not to say you’re lying, I’d just like to read more about it

      source

      • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        The Aka and Ngandu (Central African Republic)

        The Himba (Namibia)

        The Trobriand Islanders (Papua New Guinea)

        The Nuba (Sudan)

        source
    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It’s why obese people aren’t considered attractive

      If you look up the definition of what is considered “obese” for your height, I think you’d find this is largely false.

      source

      • blarghly@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        …what are you talking about?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Xanthrax@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  When I fuck people their feet are in my face.

  source

  • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I mean sure, you do you. If everyone wore gloves in a parallel timeline, you’d probably want chin scratches.

    source

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      nah, i have somewhat of a hand fetish and it has nothing to do with how hidden or not they are, i just think hands are inherently attractive if they look nice and feminine. Also big part of it is how sensitive the fingertips are, touching sensitive parts is just always gonna be nice.

      source

      • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Novelty doesn’t arise from scarcity alone. There are other reasons you might find hands attractive, though I’d wager the fact that that your attraction is limited by their femininity and appearance, is a form of novelty itself.

        source
    • Xanthrax@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I love head scratches! I’m also bald, so how could I not?

      source
• Carmakazi@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Nudists are weird people and I wouldn’t accept what they have to say about sexuality at face value.

  source

  • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Nudists think people who wear clothes and dont question whether their shame is vindicated are weird. I’m inclined to agree with them lol.

    source

    • lowleekun@ani.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Honestly visiting an onsen was somewhat of an eye opener. I felt pretty comfortable with my body when all these normal dudes were naked and nobody cared about each others bodys.

      source
    • Carmakazi@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I’m not surprised since your OP is boilerplate nudist justification and not really any exploration of paraphilia.

      I think there’s a mile in between puritanical shame and thinking the body isn’t and shouldn’t be considered sexual and is fit for public consumption. Why is it important to desexualize the human body? What’s the benefit?

      source

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Gives people the choice whether they want to be sexualized or no. Like you shouldn’t have to wear a giant form-disguising hoodie just to keep from being ogled.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I never implied the body shouldn’t be considered sexual, I was just explaining why certain body parts are.

        source
      • Vespair@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        My guy we are literally the only creature on the entire planet with a sense of shame who covers are body. If you don’t think there’s benefit to at least understanding why this enormous difference exists, I can’t even begin to fathom what your mind is like

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• renamon_silver@lemmy.wtf ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  What do tribal cultures regard as sexy?

  source

  • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    In many tribal societies, the erotic focus isn’t on specific body parts like breasts or feet; it’s on signs of fertility, health, and social status. things like wide hips, smooth skin, body paint, scarification, or even dance.

    source
• grrgyle@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Though it begs the question: if nudity became normalized, then what would be novel?

  Not an sexologist or even a sexy anthropologist, but my intuition is that aesthetic attraction would always be a factor (since it doesn’t rely on sexual attraction), and that acting in a sexually provocative would be the way to provoke the horny gaze.

  It might be nice to have less sexualization of people just be virtue of their existing in a sexualized body. That’s the dream, anyway.

  source

  • MotoAsh@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I would phrase that near-last sentiment, “…in a sexy body.” instead. No one should be oggled simply for being sexy, but if they are sexualizing themselves, (like dressing up for a night club) I’d argue that can indicate a desire to be oggled. They still should not be objectified, but when someone is trying to look sexy, I bet most people would be disappointed to get zero glances.

    source

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      We’re on thin ice here, because some people conflate dressing sexily with looking cool more than wanting to be desired sexually, but in general I agree with your edit.

      source

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        Yea, that’s why I said nightclub, where social interaction and maybe sexyness is generally a significant part.

        If someone simply looks sexy in their work uniform… yea, not the best time unless there are other clues. lol

        source
• Valmond@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Dressed people ofc!

  source
• iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  It raises or prompts that question.

  source

  • Zozano@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I beg your pardon?

    source