Caution!
Foreword here just to remind
Valentines and Love may find
less evocative their elation
from reading this titillation:
Always thought that they are there
on men as well, what do I care?
To pass, (confess my hesitation,)
judgment on a male persuasion,
utilitarian, more my take
of healthy use as they lactate.
Otherwise, it's such a waste
when hungry baby roots for taste,
and finds a bottle there instead.
Is that what planted in his head
aesthetic wonder, or just fate
why men so overcompensate?
Terry aka DeeCrepit
Author notes
A while ago, in the AP forum, probably the longest thread ever concerned as its topic, breasts, namely women's.
A contest entry
- Contest #28 FOR HUGH WYLES FAVORITES ONLY! by huguenauties.
3500 points, ended February 16, 2008, 16 entries
Honorable mention
• next poem in this contest, remove from contest
Social comment on motivations?
Comments
1 - 11 of 11
-
Dear Terry,
I think both male and female alike
look at breasts and subconsciously see
what was once a source of food
(if one was a lucky baby).
Enjoyed your well-structured poem!
GOOD LUCK in the contest!
<3 Maureen
-
-
Thank you Maureen!
Lucky babies-- All four of my babies were lucky... they all got juice and water from a bottle, but had to wait until they learned how to use a cup, for commercial milk. Frankly, with four little ones, it was the only excuse I had to sit down and rest!
Terry
-
-
unlikely. human breasts are too pronounced, they are less functional as a result: which is why most bottle nipples are based on a chimp's. much more appropriate for an ape's mouth. zoologist desmond morris has some interesting thoughts on just how inadequate women's breasts are for feeding (even going so far as to call them a health hazard). he 'refuses to believe they are oversized milk bags'. most likely the breasts were evolved via sexual selection, with women with slightly larger ones being preferred earlier on and passing those genes to their daughters, who probably had slightly larger breasts than their competitors, and so on, until 'no breasts' was weeded out.
with that out of the way, this was nice write. your command of english is good and it's nice to see someone using a rhyme scheme that isn't monosyllabic.
well done
-
-
Thank you Suetonius
Right and proper, a genuine genetically oriented contribution to a serious (mock serious anyway,) topic.
I had not considered evolutionary selection, but it does make sense.
I must take issue with the first suggestion of their inadequacy as a source of milk however. I knew a mother of twins who needed no supplementary "formula" -- She just alternated right side or left, to avoid getting unbalanced. Back in the 1950's when my own four were born, everyone I knew successfully breast-fed. Subsequently, it was found that cancer is more common among mothers who did not... hence the reference to "call them a health hazard."
Updating the facts.
Terry
-
-
It's not the milk, but the shape which makes them a health hazard. You risk smothering the baby, and the nipple does not extend as far as it could (or does in the flat chested chimp). There is no evidence to suggest natural selection would ever favour the growing of breasts to this end. Therefore, we are forced to the conclusion that sexual selection is responsible.
-
-
-
Believe me, as a massage therapist, some men DO have breasts. They gross me out! Ich! Some men like boobs, and some like butts! We should make a standard for all men! LOL
Shana
-
Dear Terry (CRONE),
I’ve hunted North, South, East and West
in lifelong, never-ending quest
pursued with neither pause nor rest
but keen and unrelenting zest
to find the perfect female breast.
I’ve proved and to the world have shown
that knockers, naturally grown
without the aid of silicone,
are to be prized for their own sake
above the obviously fake.
If boobs are flat and small or fatter
(although I much prefer the latter),
their sizes do not really matter
provided they are both complete
with prominent and well-formed teat.
For men it is a lifelong pity
if they, while helpless, wet and shitty,
got less than their full share of titty
or, having seldom been breast-fed,
were given bottled milk instead.
Lord Nelson, Churchill and their ilk
were surely raised on mothers’ milk
and so their duty did not bilk,
while Hitler grew up mean enough,
being nurtured with that ersatz stuff.
Your reference to men's boobs, though pertinent, brings to mind the old saying: "As useless as tits on a bull".
Your poem as a whole indicates that you have a firm grasp of my favourite subject.
Good luck in the voting. Applause, love and hugs, (Hugh R.)
-
-
Shana,
Men's breats are a recent phenomenon. It wasn't until the factory farms started producing chickens chick-to-pot in eight weeks (augmented by hormones in their feed) that men who ate a lot of chicken sprouted breasts. It is especially sad to see even in pre-teen boys. Common now, I can remember before there were any.
Terry
-
-
Dear Terry,
As you know Joan and Daughter Sharon are sightseeing around Canterbury with Hugh. Heathcote and Hinemoa have taken off for a holiday down at Milford Sound so I am commenting on behalf of angelica and Hine and will post their votes for them in due cause.
We three enjoyed your poem very much.
It does make you wonder if men retain the memories of the time they spent on their Mothers breasts. Good luck in the contest.
Jeneelda
-
Witty, Terry! it seems that one can become fascinated with anything, but I agree, this? I have resisted mentioning the topic before! Your meter and rhyme are expert as usual, best of luck!
-
I love it! Easy to read with a smooth flow. It will be a sly reminder of what breasts are really designed for when the men read this! Lol
alby
Adding your comment:
1 - 11 of 11
