Are breasts sexually or not?

I asked for a last question about it to nurse in public and few answers, that were declared, that breasts were no sexual organs.

Would I say, that they don\'t serve any more explicitly sexual function, but they are brought sexually in connection... right? I think, finds which woman strangely w itürde, whether her/its/their husband wanted to see/touch/play/etc with her/its/their breasts during the sex?

In contrast, a forehead is not a sexual body part, and most women would find it extremely unpleasantly if men touched/played/etc with her/its/their forehead during the sex direct?

Is breast therefore sexually told or not?

through Bluebeard\'s wife

Best answer chosen by voters

Biologically there is not any difference between a woman\'s neck and her/its/their breasts, body parts are both, is erogenous, and sexual organs neither are. Brit is üste sexualized in American culture, so that they become sexy, but they still simply are no sex organs because they are sexy. It one pair of shapely legs or a nice one * * * sex organs, because they are sensual and sexy? Dort\'s nothing wrong with Brüste-Sein sexy still as necks or ears or Beine-Sein sexy, but there is some wrong one with company, that advices women against nursing, because shamefully vulgarly it, und/oder repulsively is held. A Baby\'s wellbeing, welfare, the health and the food should be, more important for a case than a puritanic-Spitzmaus moral Superiority inflicted, that complains, that they are offended by a child\'s sight, that is fed.

Her/its/their logic is similarly to the one, that is done by Islamists, that believes, that women should cover besides her/its/their face/eyes everywhere. Islamists thinks all a Frau\'s-Körper is sexy and trying and a sex organ. what is, and what is not sexy, is subjective culture to culture, but the fact is, thereß can be the single sex organs the penis and the vagina, not breasts, shoulders, ankles, knees, fingers, EACH body part of sexy slopes on culture, but one body-partly-in sexy doesn\'t-Marke this divides bodies biologically a sexual organ.

Jimbo produces a good argument, body parts are held sexy if they are covered more. That is why in some cultures bevölkern you walk around completely bare or almost bare, and nobody worries, and in other cultures, people are almost covered head in order to fit in and any abandonment of any body part, however at the eyes/face is looked, "sexy."

Only admit, that your sexualization of the breasts is conditioned by the society/culture into you, it became you lifted and belassen in it on that occasion. Hört on, to take the trouble, to exist, that breasts are sex organs and hold, that take the trouble to justify your puritanic-Ansichten to it, so that to nurse, because your opinion of that, what is sexy, no human biology will change. 100 percent 1 voices saves to it! ! RSS

Other Answers (20)

from Jimbo yes, but only, because they always are hidden and are not seen in public. I betted Frauen\'s-Beine been held sexually in the past, until they began, she/it more and more too enthüllen. ICH\'m, he/it wants to bet, thereß, if above women everywhere on the world without would be, she/it would not be held sexually after a while.

Hold her/it/them hidden, however, it brings me to wanting her/it/them = D.

through Brady haha. although she/it aren\'t viewed sexual organs, because they don\'t serve any direct purpose in sexual reproduction, serves a role in sexual Aktivit itäten. Brmaybe üste is a Drehung-auf to men, but you place auf\'t needs, that boobs give birth. Das\'s, why them are looked at no sexual organs.

from Scatta, it must be cultural, gaze on all trunks, that live in warm climates and that are not taken in into our culture, that hardly notices her/it/them? So, I guess, thereß she/it here sexual is, not so sexually in other cultures, him/it, s, the a brainwashing like all other subjects.

Brady, without breasts, there would not be any reproduction because people would be dead.

everyone, that claims, is from Miss Theo that breasts are not sexual, an idiot.

Only because babies live from breasts, you don\'t make her/it/them sexual not. Brsexual organs are üste, should nourish babies as very much as she/it there.

, In order to claim, that a breast be babies no sexual organ, because they are, to nourish there, like claiming, that a vagina is no sexual organ, because it is a baby to be born there.

Breasts then constantly are inflated men as a sexual demonstration smooths, if the woman is no lactating.

from Hoo Ha! They are good, they have a double function. Brustfütterung and signs of sexual fertility. AberAber während she/it biologically part of sexuality is, the taboo is what she/it takes to the fetishsized-Staat, that she/it are in western countries, that other countries land, becaue \'t breast abandonment of a big deal like America sees or so big from a deal.

And above on it, * * * also is sexual or as well like sexual, therefore, why is it not obscene for a woman to be, * * * bare in the television or even on a beach not nipples, if men\'s love * * * as much as * * * *? you knows T UND in ONE, and not only T. if the sexual argument, if it on televsion of the beach, then shouldn, f,ür obscenity is done, t * * * is more obscenely consderig, it is like sexual as well or if this can be shown, then why not bare * * * *? wo\'s the logic there if point this from? It seems everything like es\'s because of the shock value if you think würden, the sexual factor would be from more importance.

Blue Christian woman, yes boobs has double functions, but if so sexually you argument of the breasts the softness from the enjoyment to a woman, then, a woman\'s neck should be covered as women like her/its/their necks kissed as very much as her/its/their boobs. The nipples are also an erogenous-Zone für types, therefore why they on then covered aren\'t? Es\'s because of the taboo of the Brüste.

through proves you It Oder you lose It! They are not good * reproductive * organs, but guesses I, whether they are sexual, is frankly für interpretation. I think cultures like it in America, verst,ärken you the perception of the Brüste-Seins sexually, in that you treat her/it/them as a private part. But, I think another reason, why most Männer she/it sexually holds, is simple, because we have women breasts and men\'s Don, \'t.

through? Eritrean-Schönheit hier\'s a simple, sincere answer: yes.

through Winterruhm in only countries, where they were taught, that they are sexual.
Go, the women walk around with her/its/their breasts, exposed, nobody finds her/it/them sexually. Sie\'wieder only an ungeschützter body part, simply like none other.

In certain countries, a woman\'s ankle will send a man supposedly into an euporic-Episode of mischievous desire.

g through Wendy, that you are told sex, because we, as a culture, a fetish for her/it/them has. You/they are not NATÜRLICH sexually. OffensichtlichOffensichtlich, Br,üste, as secondary sex qualities, is attractively to the opposite sex... she/it gives efficiency, that signals a good buddy, to ground. but is shoulders and poor with it on a man, and from M,it is not required ännern to cover her/it/them because they are no SEX ORGANS, is not as well like breasts.

Example: Feet of 19. Century China. Fußbindung (the deformation of the female foot) was usual, and the feet were seen as very erotically. You/they were fetishized. We now look at one, you pay fetish", in order to be a little deviant, but at this time in China, it was a part of the culture, the norm. Only one Frau\'s-Ehemann was allowed, her/its/their Füße to see or to touch, and caressing of the "golden lotus blossom", as the deformed feet was called, was an essential role in this culture in sex, and quite considered to awaken.

Therefore yes, breasts are brought sexually in connection because our culture did her/it/them, with it. You/they are no sex organs.

from Maxi R of course
If you look at other primates, her/its/their breasts are flat.
Evolution made human breast the opposite sex bigger to atract.
It is true, that her/its/their primary role is infants to be nourished, but this is not her/its/their single role. Her/its/their sekundäre role is buddy to be accelerated.

Well I believe from Lux, that the arms of a type are sexy, but it doesn\'t make her/it/them sexual exclusively. The primäre purpose of the breasts is infants to be worked as a nurse, they are fun only by chance if she/it earned aren\'t with nourishing a baby.

breasts are through hope breasts. Malso breast tissues have änner.
Get over it, child.

through Nataly L Sure! Something can sexually extremelyählt becomes, even toes!

You/they say that the lips are the single unprotected sex organ."

So only because it is told "sexually, you don\'t think that you cannot expose it. We place auf\'t to carry wants, veils lol

my breasts are through mineral waters...

... and I am a type.

through * ~ * Princess * ~ * definitely, i thin tool horrifying for her/it/them, that were associated with babies,

from blue respectable Christian Yep. You/they have two functions. A function is the obvious: a baby\'s nursing. But they are sexual also in nature: they improve Vergnügen, let, only this says \'s. There is a physical connection between Brüsten and uterus, if you nurse your newborn, causes it uterus contractions, that hold the current of the blood open. ICH\'m quite sure, thereß same connection the one, that causes sexual enjoyment, is but me not on it quotes.

, In order to dispute, that one of both function is silly. You/they are only daf, to nourish ür babies, and they are not only for sex. You/they make both very healthy.

Source(s,:

I have \'em and I know what they do.

from Yakuza lady Yes,they are.And, whom they hold two functions, that you already know.

they are natural for am1432 sexual, but how many people see nurse a wife as a sex action?

You/they are sexual except if a baby is fortified at them, in the case, there, that they serve a natural and necessary purpose.

Everyone, that thinks, that a breast or a nipple are sexual, if a baby is involved, is more beautifully mindfucked to me = o /

through Sam Sure, but that is, to what some men don\'t seem to recognize, that a man\'s breast also is very sexual!

See the relationship to that, what is classified so sexually, and parts of the body, that should be played during the sex as well, not... I likes touch my neck, ears, stomach and many other parts for itself and played along during the sex... I guesses, that all body parts are sexual,:)

from Brina M depends from that, what you make with \'em.