If the guy you’re with thinks you need different breasts, maybe you just need a different guy.
This is for the lesser-endowed ladies of the world: the women who were dealt too lightly by Nature, who wondered at some point or another if they should correct the injustice through the skills of a plastic surgeon, or at least invest in an arsenal of pushup bras.
Despite the typical male preoccupation with breast size, there are some of us who wouldn’t want you any other way, who see sublime perfection where others see absence.
Maybe we’re just not as vocal as some.
We’re not the guys working construction who whistle chauvinistically from across the street three stories above you as you walk to work.
We’re not the ones throwing themselves at you at the frat party. Or your friend’s wedding, countless drinks in.
Maybe we’re the ones quietly taking you in from five tables away. Listening to your voice. Your perspective. Your sense of humor. The witty way you referenced an F. Scott Fitzgerald line in the middle of ordering your drink.
And yes, don’t worry, we snuck a good, long look at your body.
But maybe it’s not a giant rack we’re looking for.
Maybe we happen to love the sleek lines of your silhouette, the elegant simplicity of your form.
Maybe there’s something fearless and yet vulnerable about your petite frame that draws us.
Maybe we’re actually turned off by someone who’s used to transfixing men with her obvious, womanly attributes.
Some of us grew up as athletes, amongst thin, athletic, small-breasted women and grew to like different physical traits than most guys. Like the tight calves of a runner. Or the strong thighs of a skier. Or the muscular stomach of a volleyball player. Maybe we know that having an athletic woman at your side means being more likely to live an adventurous and daring life. (Not just in the outdoors, but in the bedroom, too…)
Guys like me, like the fact that you’re used to having to win people over with your mind and personality, not what was peeking through your blouse.
For me, an A-cup puts you on the A-list, every time.
Some of us have learned from experience that small-breasted women often have larger minds. Or better moves on the dance floor. Or more optimistic attitudes when the chips are down. Because you’ve been overlooked by luck before. And it didn’t get the better of you then, either.
Hell, some of us are just ass-men.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve got nothing against large-breasted women. Many of them are good friends—or even exes. And yes, many have just as sharp a mind, as buoyant a spirit, or witty a retort as you.
But there’s something about you A-girls that I just can’t shake.
Maybe you’re just a bit lighter—at how you handle life. Maybe the thing you think you’re lacking has given you so much more. And you’re better able to move around the obstacles of life a lot quicker without it.
Whatever it is, I, for one, am under your spell. I swoon when you walk into the room. I want your first dance, your next kiss, your every smile.
You have more admirers than you know.
If the guy you’re with thinks you need different breasts, maybe you just need a different guy.
—Photo avaviel/Flickr
About Mark Radcliffe
Some time ago this website published an article entitled “Could I Fall in Love With the Bus Driver?” where a female author mused on whether or not she would ever be able to love a man who was lacking in power and money.
I was shocked at the wild insensitivity the piece displayed. Surely the author must have realized that, in a culture where the worth of a man is tied to his power and wealth, this was an extremely offensive conversation to have openly. To say nothing of how oblivious the piece was to female privilege.
At the time, I wondered what the reaction would be if a man had written a piece entitled “Could I Fall in Love With a Small Breasted Woman?” Wouldn’t that inevitably result in shock and outrage?
I would like to thank those commenters who have responded exactly as I thought they would.
Don’t ever change.
hmm you really made a point there ! May be not…honestly i would find it very difficult to take my commitment to the full extent if the man is of not of a particular ‘stature’. But u have given me a very important point to think upon. yes it happens,we like someone and the moment we know that there is a large financial divide,we back off ! That’s not good too. As a woman i had always paid attention to one side of the story,thanks for introducing the other side to me.
How many women would like to date or marry someone working at McDonalds, or more specifically a lower paid job.
Here’s the thing…I have no problem with the part of this article that is about the man saying his preference is for small breasted women. We all have preferences. I, personally, fall for the Christina Hendricks body type every single time. It doesn’t make me a bad person. It doesn’t mean I’m objectifying or fetishizing the female body. It just means I’ve a preference for big curves. Similarly, I have a preference for women who are in academia. It doesn’t mean I am somehow fetishizing education…it’s just what I generally prefer.
The problem in this article is when Radcliffe takes those preferences and then draws sweepingly generalized conclusions. It’s when he assigns a social value to having large or small breasts. Similarly, the problem with someone not wanting to date someone who works at McDonalds, or whatever, is the way that people who have such jobs become less valued.
Yeah I couldn’t stand the associating body type to personality. I use to do this quite a bit, very beautiful women I felt would be bitches due to bullying I received so I would assume all were like that. Luckily I learned differently and know now that looks isn’t really related to personality at all. If I had kept assuming that of beautiful women I would have lost out on some very important friendships!
I think the social values have already been ascribed to all of these bodies, and Radcliffe is incorporating those into his admiration. Why we like what we like is both outside the political, and driven by those same forces. The body isn’t without a cultural context.
Yes the social values have already been ascribed to different body types…the problem is he is perpetuating them. By perpetuating the stereotypes associated with both large breasted and small breasted women, this article is just as bad as one written by someone who was praising women for having big breasts. It is just stereotypes and a reinforcement of false body type = personality type generalisations.
Again, my problem isn’t that he explains his preferences. Heck, if he were to analyse his preferences and question whether his love of small breasted women was because of the cultural narrative surrounding both large and small breasted women, as well as the cultural expectations for what straight guys will enjoy, then I’d also have no problem. But no, he’s not examining his own cultural bias…he’s just blindly following it or blindly rebelling against it.
It’s like, okay…one of the most frustrating things with heteronormativity is when people don’t even realize they’re doing it. When someone says something like: “I support gay people, I don’t get why anyone else cares what someone does in their sex lives.” It’s an attempt at being supportive, but it falls so short of the mark because it fails to recognize that sexual orientation affects more than just someone’s sex life. It actually ends up reinforcing the stereotype that gay people only care about sex.
This article is similar, not the same, but similar. The attempt was to be supportive by saying that “hey small breasted women, you’re pretty too.” But instead it just ended up reinforcing all of these problematic stereotypes about women and men.
@ HeatherN
” I, personally, fall for the Christina Hendricks body type every single time”
So do I, but I think that has to do with the porn influence to some extent.
Right well this is a bit off topic…but for me it has to do with the Firefly influence. Christina Hendricks in a peasant blouse with minimal make-up on was just amazing. I was hooked after that.
Did someone mention Christina Hendricks and Firefly?
=D
I’m turned on by people who are turned on by Firefly . . . . .
Sorry, I have an LTR with my girlfriend.
But I can recommend some other menses (or womenses?) who like Firefly.
We should all be so lucky as to love Firefly! Speaking of Joss, just saw Cabin in the Woods!
@ Julie Gillis
What did you think of it?
Loved it. Very smart, scary in a fun way, plenty of Joss’s POV.
Wait, we’re all talking about Firefly and Christina Hendricks and I was left out of the conversation!? I knew I liked you three a lot, Julie, Heather and Zek!
@HeatherN
Speaking of Firefly, Summer Glau is a cutie too even though she has a somewhat different body type. She has a dancer’s body.
Is there anyone in that cast that isn’t swoon worthy on some level? Wash!!!!! Sigh…….
Pretty much no. While I prefer the cast of Angel (and yes I said the cast of Angel not just a few of them) there’s nothing wrong with Firefly’s cast.
I liked everyone on Angel BUT Angel!
-
Kaylee. why has no one mentioned Kaylee?
I love Kaylee! She’s physically my archetype, though I’m probably much more like a combination of Book and Zoe in terms of personality.
Also? Sidenote: but the fact that firefly was cancelled after a season, but Jersey Shore has been on for.. well… too long anyway, is what’s wrong with this country.
Right? Couldn’t agree with you more.
(Is completely fine with just talking about Firefly now, we’ll get back to the breasts thing later.)
Although none of the characters match me physically my personality is pretty much Mal and Wash (mostly Wash). But lately I’ve been getting a little Book in me (not the religion, just the calm nature).
See one of us should write an article on Topless Firefly (all cast members) and then we’d really have something!!!
Kaylee and her character are hot hot hot, who wouldn’t want a beautiful woman who is a mechanic, intelligent and just downright awesome. And I am saying that without knowing at all what her breast size is, I don’t recall seeing her cleavage even in the show. It may have happened but it didn’t stick into memory, her eyes, voice, and some mannerisms did though!
She’s a total doll.
@ Julie Gillis
“See one of us should write an article on Topless Firefly (all cast members) and then we’d really have something!!!”
If anyone does this, Inara does a nude scene in Homeland. I just got through episode one. It’s about 1/3 in.
I had the WORST crush on Wash, Julie!!
Always love the funny guy. Loved Alan Tudyk in A Knight’s Tale, too.
Omg!!!!!
I can’t believe what I started! This is AWESOME! Okay to those of you with a Wash crush…did you see Dollhouse and if you did, were you not just totally surprised?!
Alan Tudyk is the main reason I got into Suburgatory. Even though he is a bit orange on that show.
I would watch it for the great story lines and character development, but Nathan Fillion does great work in Castle. In one episode, Castle comes as Mal for Holloween.
I saw that. That was fun stuff.
Mike L
I’m not so sure if its so much about privilege as much as s practicality. I’ll be honest and admit I wouldn’t date a guy with some kind of financial stability, not necessarily rich with a lot of power.
No, it’s privilege. Thinking that you have a right to someone’s money without ever making any of your own is probably the single biggest female privilege there is. If you want money, make your own money. That’s all there is to it.
And please, spare the ‘but men make more!’ speech. Making 78% of what a male Goldman banker makes is still making more money than you’ll ever practically ‘need’.
“Thinking that you have a right to someone’s money without ever making any of your own is probably the single biggest female privilege there is.”
If our society monetized traditional female roles, then I’d agree with you. However, it doesn’t. The assumption that your husband’s money is also your money comes from the fact that, traditionally, women weren’t able to make their own money. Now, yes, women have jobs too. However, it’s still true that today a woman who wants to be a full time mother will still end up making no money…thus she’s left requiring that her partner makes enough money for her too. And our society is still set up in such a way that a family works best with on stay-at-home parent (who will not be making money) and one bread winning parent.
Privilege is also in finding excuse why things are different when they apply to you. The human mind is very good at rationalizing things away.
“Privilege is also in finding excuse why things are different when they apply to you.”
Except that I’m a single lesbian who’s always been financially independent. So it doesn’t apply to me.
A lesbian is still a woman. You were still socialized as a women. It does indeed apply to you.
Thank you for proving my point.
I read your comment as implying it applied to me personally…as if I were trying to rationalize it because I was married and expected to own my husband’s money.
So what were you actually trying to say, then?
Personally I’m not comfortable supporting my partner regardless of gender. Chances are I will make more than my partner because of the job I’m in. And I don’t expect my partner to give me money. However, I do expect my partner to be able to support themselves independently. That means if we moved in together I would expect that they are able to pay their share of the bills. I have supported more than one partner financially (paying for all the dates, paying for various things of theirs, paying all the household expenses etc.) and I’m just not into doing that again. I’ve even had men openly admit to thinking we’d have a great relationship because I made money and they didn’t make a lot. While I would date someone not making as much as much me they must be able to fully support themselves and not be looking at me like a walking ATM that will give them money. So I can empathize with men who have this issue. But it’s certainly not a gender neutral issue in this economy. I’m also seeing many men insist on women being gainfully employed as well and judging based on that alone.
Right, I wasn’t saying I don’t understand men having a problem with being expected to support their partners financially. I was just saying that it wasn’t an example of female privilege.
Kat: “not be looking at me like a walking ATM that will give them money.”
I completely agree with you.
for them. For them, “being a man” includes the will to pay for the woman.
And yet, many women believe they are entitled to what you just wrote, to a man who’s a “walking ATM”
I don’t know if this is privilege… but sure as hell, it’s a double standard.
HeatherN,
You are demonstrating the blindness (voluntary?) that is necessary to even believe that “privilege” exists in the first place.
Supposedly, men have privilege because they historically got to “choose their role” in society. But this is false: men had to be wage earners. Men who did not earn a wage could not marry, end of story.
Women supposedly lacked “privilege” because they were expected to carry out “non-monetized” roles.
But you have to make pretend that men never wanted to caregivers, and that no woman ever enjoyed financial security, in order for the theory of privilege to work the way its supposed to. This is a considerable amount of societal control that is being completely ignored.
It’s especially ironic because the first idea in the theory of privilege is that it’s “invisible” to the person who holds it, and here come the women claiming that traditional female privilege doesn’t exist…
Mate, I didn’t use the term “male privilege” to describe the division of labour between wage earners and non-monetized housekeeping. I was simply saying it isn’t female privilege.
HeatherN,
You responded to the comment “No, it’s privilege.” With a statement that began with “I’d believe you if…”
It’s hard for me to draw other conclusions…
I will clarify. If it were true that women had been able to make their own money and yet were still expecting to be owners of their husbands’ money, then that would be female privilege. If the converse were true, men had been able to chose their jobs to suit their whims and women were the only ones stuck in their gender role, then that’d have been male privilege. The reality, however, is that the traditional male and female roles (with regards to the division of labour within a household) restricted both men and women.
Thankfully Heather (unlike a lot of feminists) doesn’t take the situation you describe here and call it male privielge.
The expectations that men are the ones that go out and work and women are the ones that stay in the home and work each have their ups and downs.
But Mike I do feel what you’re saying about we’re supposed to believe that in those expectations men got all the ups and women got all the downs.
“Men who did not earn a wage could not marry, end of story.”
Oh, wow…this is not true at all. Both men and women historically have had to marry according to their “station”. A poor/wageless man would of course marry; he would marry a poor woman. But he definitely could marry.
Jill,
Reread the portion you quoted. It has nothing to do with what your comment addressed.
I think a man who cannot earn ANY MONEY at all would find it very hard to marry anyone — poor and destitute alike. Marriage costs money, because you have to PAY to have to recognized as valid.
Just saying.
“Supposedly, men have privilege because they historically got to “choose their role” in society. But this is false: men had to be wage earners. Men who did not earn a wage could not marry, end of story.”
That is the passage I’m referring to, and it’s not true at all. Poor men could, and did indeed, marry. And they still do.
Jill,
Okay, let me put it more bluntly. Poor men can marry. Broke men cannot.
In olden days and today, you need money to get your marriage recognized. Back then it was to the church (or in my ancestor’s case, the synagogue). Today you gotta pay the state.
Again, you’re trying to fit one argument onto a completely different topic. Square peg, round hole, y’know? Nobody denies men have some privilege, even poor men have some privilege. (Marginal privilege.) Even/especially poor men in olden days.
But a broke man still can’t get married. And that’s been true for centuries.
So, sorry, but in this case of a very specific single instance… you are wrong.
I would concede if you could find me ONE PERSON who is desperate to marry but just flat can’t come up with the $30 city hall fee to do so, or what have you.
I’m not arguing about privilege, I’m stating that men (or people, for that matter) of any financial situation can and do get married and always have.
The person who posted the statement I responded to is incorrect.
Jill,
I can drive to Golden Gate Park in San Francisco and find you two dozen such homeless couples who cannot afford to eat everyday, let alone pay 30 bucks to get married at city hall. And historically, in nearly every single society, even non-western societies that define wealth differently, you needed to “pay” to get married. If you had ZERO monies, you could not get married.
Seriously, why is this so difficult for you to grasp? Real talk: I feel like I’m saying “tomato” and you’re hearing “dracula”. More importantly, why are so committed to denying being wrong regarding something so inconsequential? It’s not like you’re suddenly wrong about everything in life just because you’re wrong about broke men not being able to get married.
“I feel like I’m saying “tomato” and you’re hearing “dracula”.”
Real talk: for real laughed out loud. I get that feeling too.
I suspect I’m referring more to the original commentator’s intent regarding privilege and historical roles; like somehow men can’t get married if they’re broke but women can? It seems like you’re referring to broke PEOPLE but the original comment was about broke MEN. Broke people have obstacles to many things, but those obstacles are equal for men and women. The original comment suggested that obstacle was only in place if the broke person was male (and referred to broke men not being able to get married in what we can refer to as “olden times”, which is flat out not true).
I think the issue is that we flat out don’t agree. I don’t believe that $15 is that big of an obstacle to getting married and I don’t think there’s a single person out there who just CAN’T come up with $15 if it came to that. And I would, in fact, classify such a person as “broke”. You seem to be saying that broke = no access to any money, no street pennies, no quarters found on the sidewalk, no handouts, no nothing.
But you know, we’re conversing on a point that really isn’t that important to the discussion. In conclusion: Dracula!
Yep. My great and great great grandparents were married. And quite poor. One set lived in dugouts in Missouri in the 1870′s or so. Poor. Dirt poor, actually, and no pun intended. Married.
The argument that some destitute men managed to marry carries no merit. We can point to women who wielded political power in the middle ages (Elizabeth I), women who managed to pursue their chosen careers well before birth control (Marie Curie), and women for whom there is clearly no “glass ceiling” (Meg Whitman comes to mind).
This does not mean that middle age power structures were not patriarchal, nor traditional female roles rigid, nor does it disprove the glass ceiling.
You have to look at trends, not at individuals. But most of the commenters here (and I’m looking specifically at Julie Gillis) should already know this because it’s the exact arguments that are used to support the theory of privilege (a group can be privileged even if individual members are not).
In older pseudo-feudal systems women could GAIN status through marriage. This implies that men were required to marry “within their station” but the same was not the case for women. The legal structure that enforced this was simple: if women could not own property or inherit, then a man could not gain control over property through marriage. Thus a woman could go “up” in the world by marrying a man with a lot of property, but the latter wasn’t true.
This is demonstrated through demographic studies as well as through art. Look at any novel by Dreiser (or Maugham for that matter) and you’ll see this exact situation playing out.
This was also confirmed decades ago by sociologists, like Aulette, and Rubin before her, who noted that in lower class families the “blame” for class standing always falls squarely on the man: even into the 1990s.
But hey, don’t take the word of demographers, artists, or sociologists, just look at individuals you may know and make pretend that they’re representative…
ooh, I’m being looked at!
Actually, in many patriarchal cultures (England and India come to mind), women could only make a good marriage if they had a sufficient dowry. There were even charities set up in England that provided dowries to poor girls who were otherwise unmarriageable.
In feudal England, younger sons could not inherit anything. Under the system of primogeniture, only the oldest son had a right to inherit. Younger sons of aristocratic families had only a few options: join the military for life, join the clergy, or marry a woman with money.
Sarah,
You are describing a single period in British history, but the story is far more broad than that.
According to Hajnal’s work, in 1900, in Belgium, 85% of men in the 20-24 age cohort were single. For the 25-29 cohort, 50% were single. The comparable numbers for women were 71% and 41%. The men would not “catch up” until they were approximately 45, and even then ~16-17% of both genders remained unmarried.
The “catch up” was identified as older men who scrimped and saved and were then able to attract younger women.
The relevant numbers for England in 1900 were 83% and 47% for men in the younger cohorts, compared with 73% and 42% for women. The pattern largely held.
However, Wrigley and Schofeld, in their reconstruction of British demographics going back to the 1600s, did not find that this was always the case. They discovered that prior to the 1750s, the demographics do not match the marriage trend that was observed later.
They theorize that this had to do with the Industrial Revolution, which occurred at around this time in England (it would not spread to continental Europe or the US until the 1800s), which dramatically changed earning patterns. As men were able to earn more, their ability to earn became an ever larger part of their identity, leading to where we are today.
No, it’s practicality. For one thing, if I’m going to be with a man, I will want to have kids. It’s much easier to be reproductively successful if the man has is financially stable. Not too mention some guys will simply disappear if they feel they can’t financially take care of a family.
I’ve seen first hand what happens when women dont take into account if a man is financially stable-overworked, very stressed women.
I actually make pretty good money, but i expect any man I date to be financially stable.
I personally wont date a guy who isn’t financially stable.
I’ve dealt with men who were quite wealthy, and mostly they dont care if the woman is making money. Once again it’s practicality. These men dont need another $1M, they are more interested in someone who will hold down the fortress and someone who is generally agreeable.
Remember this next time someone points out the gender gap is about choices, not discrimination. Because right here you are acknowledging a man MUST make money while a women doesn’t, though can. This results in far more pressure for men to make more money vs women, and the end results is men DO make more money
Mark Neil:
ITA with you believe or not! I think the gender gap thing is way overblown. The extra 23 cents or whatever the man makes probably goes to someone with a vagina anyway. Plus, I could sit here and write a book about why women earn less.
Practicality. It’s practicality if a man chooses a beautiful woman as it’s a good indication usually of good genes, a woman who isn’t overweight, no disabilities, good skin, hair, etc. Is it practical to allow the mother to work after childbirth? Maybe it’s more practical to have her home for the first year since she has the feeding mechanism built in.
Practicality you exclude quite a lot of low income men I presume, but we can also exclude quite a lot of people from our dating pool for legitimate concerns such as health, vitality, lifestyle, etc.
Please note that someone’s chosen career path says a lot more about them than do physical attributes that are beyond their control.
Like how much money their parents had? Or what language was spoken in their home growing up? Or how successful the public school they were assigned to was? Or how many parents were in your home? Or what kind of culture you were raised in?
Because you’ve got about as much control over those as you do about your appearance…
You always have the choice to change your circumstances, choose a particular career or path, etc. to the best of your ability. Life ain’t 100% fair and not everyone can have it all handed to them. But everyone has choices about what to do with their life, for the most part.
Jill,
Respectfully, your comments seem contradictory. You’re willing to admit that life “ain’t 100% fair” and that implicitly some people have a much harder time than others with respect to their career paths and goals in life.
Yet you also try and draw a magical line between career path and physical attributes. I would submit that if “life ain’t fair” and some people have an impossibly hard time pursuing their chosen careers due to the circumstances of their birth, then the end result is ultimately the same as if they had been born with different physical attributes: in both cases their happiness is threatened by something beyond their control.
I appreciate nice tits
i dont understand can someone like or even love a woman for the pure physical reasons ! why cant men look beyond the physicality of a woman and see how much space he has in her heart,how much she thinks of him all the time and how much he means to her. A woman is always ready to accept the man as he is and a man would just look for nice bosom or well shaped asses or long hair ! ufff i am tired of al this now.
@Dr Mandeep: “why cant men look beyond the physicality of a woman”
Wait, don’t women do the same…?
How many women have you ever heard saying to a guy “You’re ugly like hell, but I like you anyway!”…?
Most people choose partners basing on (at least partially) attraction: it’s not PC, it’s not egalitarian, but it’s how we works.
Personally, I never gave much importance to looks. But I have my tastes and preferences, and I reject being blamed because of those.
@Dr Mandeep: “A woman is always ready to accept the man as he is”
You must be living on another planet.
Haven’t you noticed the “hot woman married to schlubby, unattractive guy” standard that is commonly seen on TV and in movies? It’s never the other way around.
Haven’t you noticed the “hot woman married to schlubby, unattractive guy” standard that is commonly seen on TV and in movies? It’s never the other way around.
But how often does it actually happen or at least does it happen as much as we see it in movies and tv?
Also doesn’t help that there a lot of guys who are not as bad off as those protrayals on tv that have nowhere near the success of those characters.
I don’t know how often it happens in real life; probably, as you say, not nearly as often as on TV. It’s just that on TV it’s acceptable to see, whereas you rarely (never?) see an overweight, homely woman with a fit, hot husband on TV. Or maybe these days you do, I don’t actually have a TV.
Pretty sure I’ve seen the “homely” wife with the hot husband in some movies, comedy ones. Can’t recall the titles though. Seen it plenty in real life though, along with the reverse. Usually in these cases it’s after marriage one of them gains weight and the other may have been lucky to not gain as much or remain the same, maybe even lose weight.
Speaking as an overweight male who was once obese I can say it’s pretty damn tough for some overweight men to get attention from the opposite sex from what I noticed at least amongst friends, that included both sex only and relationship stuff. I noticed the overweight women seemed to get partners easier than the men, though possibly the overweight men were just more shy and didn’t ask out others much where the women didn’t have to do the asking out and chasing. All anecdotal evidence however and I may have read the situations wrong so take with a grain of salt!
There seems to be a major fatphobia in culture atm which reduces the attractiveness of nearly all overweight people it seems, especially with the percetions of them being lazy, slobbish, gluttonous, etc. When you reach the obese stage however the attractive drops dramatically I think.
@ Jill, Head GearGal
In Married With Children, the nerdy Marci married the handsome Jefferson.
I only barely remember that series, but wasn’t the joke that he was a complete himbo? Not that she was homely, just that he was dumb? I can’t really remember.
There were two Marcis. The prudish Marci married to Steve and the insatiable Marci married to Jefferson. Al always made fun of Marci’s looks. I feel bad for bringing this up, because it was in relation to the topic on this thread. I heard that her character was changed when Amanda Bearse came out as a lesbian. They made her horny for men and so Jefferson had to be a good looking guy. I heard that it was to try and hide the fact she came out. Yes, Jefferson was an idiot.
“why cant men look beyond the physicality of a woman and see how much space he has in her heart”
I always find it odd when women complain about men’s standards. We aren’t the picky ones. You are. Most of us don’t have a line of women we are choosing between.
In all fairness, most of them don’t have lines waiting to date them, either.
I think we men should be careful to include all women when we talk about women, and not just the 8′s, 9′s and 10′s.
I agree here. It’s easy to assume that all women have lines of men just waiting for them. Not true. The super beautiful ones? Sure. But if you’re a woman who isn’t super beautiful and is lazy enough to go to the store in just her sweat pants, no make up, and a messy ponytail – ain’t nobody gonna be asking her out.
I’m a waitress, and I consider myself to be fairly pretty. But any compliments or comments I have received from customers have been from women. The only time a man has made any sort of indication of interest was the time an old man in his 80′s pinched my butt. Otherwise, most men just aren’t that responsive.
@Steph: “But any compliments or comments I have received from customers have been from women”
It’s mainly because most men are scared of the reaction. They likely think you are pretty, but they do not dare saying it.
Lots of women complain about men commenting on their appearance. We don’t want to look creepy, so we – mostly – shut up.
I’ve found plenty of women to be attractive, but I don’t tell them. Especially strangers after reading how unwelcome compliments can bother some women, I don’t want to risk making them feel uncomfy. Totally what Valter says, we don’t want to look creepy.
@Steph: “go to the store in just her sweat pants, no make up, and a messy ponytail – ain’t nobody gonna be asking her out.”
Personally, I love ponytails, I prefer women with no make up, and sweatpants are no problem.
Please do not think all men have the same tastes and attitudes.
Haha all right Valter, I won’t. I suppose I fall into the trap of believing the cultural standard is universal and very rigid. That’s my fault.
it’s the UGG boots with mini skirts that turn me off . . . .
Soullite, thanks for what you said. I think too often a lot of guys will only pay attention or care about the experience of really really attractive women and not consider what happens in a regular girl’s life.
@ Dr Mandeep
Physical looks are important. The problem arises when someone places too much importance on them and it overrides everything else, unless you’re just hooking up and then it is probably the only thing that is important.
For me, looks are important, but they become less important as I start to realize some of the things you mentioned. I also believe that men and women can be just friends. There are women I’m friends with that I’d like to sleep with, but I know they wouldn’t want to sleep with me. They’re wonderful women so I’ll abstain. I also have a female friend that I’m not physically attracted to, but she has made positive comments about my body and has recently expressed sorrow over not having had a relationship with a man before. If all she wanted is a sexual experience, I care enough for her to give her one, but I don’t want her falling in love with me.
To be fair, some women are similarly shallow – sometimes it’s just the human condition.
I do get annoyed at the constant barrage of dudes who say things like “I just don’t like short hair on women” and “not too many muscles, I might as well date my best friend” or similar. When I had short hair, guys used to compliment me by saying “I usually hate short hair on women but on you it looks great.” Um, okay…wow, I’m so stoked that I’ve managed to overcome your ridiculous hair bias, dude.
My personal biggest peeve are the guys who say “I want a girl who can go out and get dirty but then clean up and look like a supermodel at a nice dinner.” Sheesh! How about one single attribute that isn’t utterly shallow?
I was stunned when I met women who would never consider dating a guy shorter than a particular height, or something like that. Weird.
Still, not all men are like that and not all women either.
“A woman is always ready to accept the man as he is ”
I’m sorry, but if this were even remotely true, there wouldn’t be this rash of “what’s wrong with men, and why won’t they date me?” articles.
Muah ~ Thank you! You made me smile
Feministe had a really good post about why articles like this don’t help, in fact it is titled: “Why “I prefer small boobs” isn’t helping”
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2012/04/09/why-i-prefer-small-boobs-isnt-helping/
It’s pretty clear that Radcliffe is talking about a personal preference. The poetic language is nice, especially if you feel the same. However there are few times where your personal preferences are relevant to another person, or where it could be conceivably appropriate to tell them to another person. I suppose any athletic types with A-cups now know Radcliffe is available to them…
However in the context of helping women there are much better things to say. For example you could talk about the diversity of body type preferences in general. Your preference could serve as an example, but Radcliffe should have mentioned somewhere that other men like different bodies in general, and that any woman could find a man who specifically wants men who look like her. Which I’m pretty sure is what he is trying to saw, but he got lost waxing poetic about the pretty girls.
But even better would be what the Feministe article said. A woman’s beauty shouldn’t really matter! Seriously how many places can one imagine where there is a practical benefit to being hot, pretty, or beautiful. Maybe initial attraction for sex and/or romance, becoming a model of course, or an actor to a lesser degree. Of course it can make a small difference in many other encounters, but realistically it’s only a small bonus.
No one says a hot friend isn’t a good friend; unless the job description includes giving straight men boners there is no point in giving a hot chick hiring preference; even a beautiful one night stand better also be horny and good in bed. Meanwhile there are plenty of women who get judged in that way.
@QuantumInc: “A woman’s beauty shouldn’t really matter!”
So it should a man’s looks… or his money… or clothes…
but they do!
People have tastes, people have needs, people have preferences, and they choose partners basing on those.
Maybe isn’t PC, but it how life works.
I like what I like (and so do you), and no “should” will ever change that.
Regardless, you’re going to find that person physically attractive, especially if their personality is so darn attractive, so yeah, physical attributes inevitably play a part.
“A woman’s beauty shouldn’t really matter! Seriously how many places can one imagine where there is a practical benefit to being hot, pretty, or beautiful. Maybe initial attraction for sex and/or romance, becoming a model of course, or an actor to a lesser degree. Of course it can make a small difference in many other encounters, but realistically it’s only a small bonus.”
Just to clarify, would you agree a persons physical appearance matters to a certain degree in dating, romance, attraction, even falling in love? I agree that it shouldn’t matter say for a CEO, and other areas where beauty isn’t actually needed.
My biggest beef with this piece is the patronising tone. “…overlooked by luck”? Thanks for condescending to us enough to say, “Maybe the thing you think you’re lacking has given you so much more.” Some of us actually PREFER our small breasts; we are not just ‘making do’ with our horrible luck.
Worst compliment, ever. No thanks.
Agreed wholeheartedly.
Yeah, I hate to say this because I think Mark’s heart was in the right place but I also feel a bit patrionized too like the other ladies above me mentioned. LIke having smaller breasts means I’m missing something so it’s built my character stronger? I don’t know about that. I know women with larger breasts with great character and haven’t had easy lives either. And I personally think women of all sizes can be very beautiful. From Christina Hendrick and Jennifer Love Hewitt types to Kate Hudson and Gwen Paltrow.
Look, I appreciate a positive nodd to women with smaller breasts because our culture is obessed with “bigger is better”. And women are given the message too much about their bodies and sizes way too much from society AND men that contribute to those messages. So many women get surgery to become something other then they are. But I’m a little at odds with the more specific comments made in the article.
Mark, I know your heart was in the right place and it’s greatly appreciated. But there are some good points made by the commentors about some of the stereotypes your post alluded to.
Exactly. Being a ballet dancer is much easier with small breasts than with large breasts, so I’m quote thankful for my chest size and do not want any bigger.
Looks like the author , while trying to praise one type of woman (Physically so) managed to piss off not only every other type of woman, but also the type he was trying to praise! Don’t worry Mark, it’s something all us guys do from time to time( and yet women still wonder why we don’t verbalize more!) I think it probably was someone who did like you who probably coined the pharse “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Actually, I’ve never had a particular body ‘Type’. I’ve enjoyed looking and admired the Female body in all it’s variations all my life.Even when I think of my Wife it’s hard to remember all those years ago. When I see a picture it all comes back(yeah! she’s a looker!) The thing about her I remember with no problem is the way she made me feel right from the first time I met her. I was totally disarmed by her and while I’m notgoing to say I knew she was the girl I would marry (the furust thing from my mind at the time) lI knew I wanted to be with her,couldn’t get enough of that. I guess the reason that’s so easy to remember is that’s still the way it is today. So Mark, anyway, do yourself a favor and edit out everything except the last line of your article. That says it all
Great comment, bobbt. Good intentions….but wow…offensive and annoying either way.
Why keep narrowing or moving around what’s considered attractive when we just expand it and have more fun that way. This article is a very typical statement. Everyone else likes big tits. Well I like small tits! Thin women are what’s up. Well thick women are the REAL women! This hair color or race is getting all of the attention right now. Well I like the other hair color or race! Cheerleaders are supposed to be the shit. NO IT’S NERDS NOW! And then circle back around. Seriously? Are men just more into very specific and detailed prefences, whether they be considered conventionally attractive or not…or am I just an odd woman who loves male bodies and personalities in all of their forms (but appreciates and adores my own man the most of course
)? I’m not a ‘type’ person either, so maybe that’s why it doesn’t make too much sense to me.
For some reason, this seems appropriate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFjrbmj0CUc
(With pan flute to boot in case there are any guinea pigs on the prowl.) (And yes, there should be a man version of this song.)
“Are men just more into very specific and detailed prefences, whether they be considered conventionally attractive or not…or am I just an odd woman who loves male bodies and personalities in all of their forms (but appreciates and adores my own man the most of course
)? I’m not a ‘type’ person either, so maybe that’s why it doesn’t make too much sense to me. ”
Trust me, there are women who’s definition of beauty is quite narrow as well. I think it varies person to person, some have higher importance on looks, others higher importance on personality, some need both quite high. There’s nothing wrong with having a narrow attraction range for individuals, my range isn’t very broad but I do need to be physically attracted to date someone. I’ve tried without it and it’s been a miserable failure, no point denying my desires.
I don’t think having a broad range or a narrow range is better or worse, I do think in society we all need to be aware that attraction varies person to person and there shouldn’t be just 1 type that is thought of as sexy.
I can go into specifics about what I like, for me physical attraction is a very strong force but it’s also far easier to discuss what I like physically vs what I like in a personality. I can say I like a nice sweet woman but those are subjective and what I consider sweet could be diff to others. I will say though there is just some mystical thing inside that awakens around certain people, a crush is born and I have no idea how it happens, I can’t say what triggers it, I can’t say only people with a certain bodytype trigger it, but it happens randomly. I think this is important to know because someone may totally drool over the bikini model but might fall madly in love with a woman who society may not think is as hot. Looks matter to a certain point for some people but they’re just a part of an extremely complex human mind attraction.
Bobbt, you have to look at pictures to realize your wife is attractive? Why can’t you do that just by looking at her? Perhaps I misundesrtood.
I think he means his wife was quite beautiful when she was young but he forgot the looks side of things and remembers how he felt when they first met.
Because she isn’t beautiful now? Women are only as good as their youth? I mean, I know we all get older but having to look at pictures of your mate when they were young to think of them attractive is a bit sad to hear as a woman. It just kind of renforces for me that men only really like women when they are young and that they can’t enjoy women’s looks as they get older.
Look, regardless of whether it’s cultural or biological (or both, as I suspect), we find younger bodies more attractive. This is true for men and women. Someone can appreciate the beauty of an older woman while still admitting that when that woman was younger the appreciation was more sexual.
Also, Bobbt didn’t say that he didn’t like his wife anymore, or that he didn’t appreciate her. He didn’t say that he couldn’t stand the sight of her or anything. All he said was that when he looks at pictures of his wife when she was young, he’s reminded of how he felt when he first saw her. He is reminded of how beautiful she was (but there was no implication that he doesn’t think she’s beautiful now).
Society certainly finds younger bodies more attractive. But who said society gets it right? Society is often twisted in it’s expectations of roles for many diverse groups of people.
HeatherN, your assumption that “we find younger bodies more attractive”, as a collective group of people seems to be a rather large assumption of lumping people into a group with, dare I say, “generalizations”. Something you are ususally against in most topics.
I find that I am not simply more attracted to someone because they have a younger body, but because of whatever chemistry there is between us. I am also not always attracted to 6 foot tall men, men with huge shoulders and 6-pack abs. My attraction to men seems to come more from another source then outright signals of physical beauty. Maybe we will get to a point when we will have more freedom to explore men and women from a more open minded standpoint then just the same old arguements revovling about “biology”. I sure hope so.
What I can agree with is that younger is more youthful. But I can not agree that younger is simply more attractive for the fact that it’s younger. And I actually think this is more of a reflection of society then biology. Life is meant to be a journey, sexuality included in that. We were not designed to remain 20 forever. Perhaps we weren’t even designed to remain attracted to 20 year olds forever as we age. I don’t know. But I do know our fear of aging makes us put a halt on a lot of naturally progressing “biologies”.
I thought the comment odd. Kind of a backhanded compliment. Much like article is.
I didn’t say it was biology, actually. I said I think it’s probably a combination of biology and culture. And as a culture we do have a narrative that suggests young bodies are more attractive…it’s not a generalization so much as an observation. I’m not saying all men actually think this way, or that all women think this way…I’m saying that’s the way it works, in our culture, at this moment. I also didn’t say it was a good, or bad, thing…I was just saying that is how it works, at the moment in western society. Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough in my short comment, and I apologize for that.
Also, Erin, I’m not asking you to think that younger is more attractive…I was just saying that Bobbt finding his wife more sexually attractive wasn’t a personal failing of his, so much as keeping in line with social (and perhaps also biological) trends. Also, I was pointing out that Bobbt wasn’t saying he didn’t find his wife attractive now…just that seeing old pictures reminded him of how he felt when he first saw her.
Like, okay, you say you’re attracted to someone because of the chemistry between you and not because of their body. Fair enough…but with time the chemistry changes. People’s emotions in a relationship don’t stay the same. So 20 years down the road, after being married to the same person, if you saw an old photo and felt nostalgic about the chemistry you had when you first met, that’d be fine. You wouldn’t be saying that you’re unhappy with the emotional relationship you’ve got now…you’d just be fondly remembering how it was in the beginning.
Being someone who has been partnered now for 19 years, I can say that when I look at pics of us, him, 18 years ago I also feel a memory/nostalgia hit for “how we were” in terms of innocence, looks, the beginning of our relationship etc.
I don’t value him less now that he’s older (certainly see my post on aging and bodies at GMP here), but I do understand looking back and being like…aw…look at us!
” It just kind of renforces for me that men only really like women when they are young and that they can’t enjoy women’s looks as they get older.”
Seems a rather hostile generalization to make at all/most men because one man is saying he can get caught up in nostalgia.
Otherwise, I think Heather covered the rest of what needed to be said
No hostility Mark. Just reflecting my own thoughts. While it makes me a little sad sometimes to deal with male expectations of female worth, I’m not hostile about it.
Odd, aren’t you giving heather a hard time for doing just the same thing about youth?
And whether you yourself are hostile towards men, the generalization, whether you intended it or not, can very much be. To assert that men only really like young women, simply because of the comment of a single, solitary man reminiscing about his wife while looking at a picture of her in her youth IS a hostile generalization.
And just for the record, lots of people make generalizations, even offensive ones, but that really isn’t an issue for me until I see people complaining about the use of generalizations, while making them themselves. I originally picked out your generalization, not because it was a generalization, but because it was based on a single persons action, and an action that truly wasn’t offensive. But you have since complained about Heathers generalizations, despite you having made one before she even got involved. Keep that in mind going forward.
Erin, you got all of that from his comment? I have a feeling he may have meant she IS beautiful, even now, but that the thing he remembers most isn’t her beauty. Doesn’t have to mean she was hotter when younger. So instead of thinking back and remembering her as just being beautiful, he remembers other traits more. Make sense?
Talking about physical traits doesn’t mean men don’t appreciate the personality traits, can we stop flogging that old dead horse please. Women are not more pure in what they like about their partners yet I see this lil meme trying to pop it’s ugly head up.
Erin, Now if we do like more youthful looks, it doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy aged beauty. It’s not black and white only 18-25 is hot, and 40 is ugly or something. Ashley Judd I find to be quite hot at her current age, even Helen Mirren in a bikini at the age of 65 was it? I thought she was still a stunner. But is it really some men alone pushing the youth = beauty stuff? Some of the women’s magazines push that perfect skin youthful look so much along with their other body image bullshit that I think they’re hazardous to some or even many women’s self-esteem. Having a discussion with friends the other day on editing photos, one told of his partner wanting quite a lot of retouching yet we felt she didn’t need it at all, she’s already beautiful without needing it. I feel quite a few women are actually ignoring what quite a few men want, focusing on some narrow view of beauty that certain media or certain parts of society say is hot. So I find it hard to believe men simply want younger women as a whole, no doubt some do but not all. But if these women in particular aren’t willing to listen to men in regards to their beauty and just disregard what some like in favour of what others like, then who really is to blame?
And NO I am not trying to derail, I’m trying to illustrate the effect that some women will ignore what some men like, there are plenty of men who will be happy with how their woman looks yet she wants more more more (I’m sure the flipside will probably be some women happy with their men, yet those men want more more more in regards to muscles for instance). EVERYONE needs to start listening to each other and quit basing their idea of perfect on magazines that undergo retouching, media that is quite limited in diversity and really pay attention to what their local men n women desire. No point assuming all men want thin young women when you have a guy saying he loves older women regadless of body type for instance.
Wait a second there Erin! I meant NO SUCH THING! If anything, looking at pictures of us togeather then and now, I realize why people think she’s years younger than me (even though we’re the same age) She’s definately aged better than me! What I’m saying is that even as we mature(well, she’s matured,I’ve gotten old) she still attracts me physically. I’ve told her many times “You know how much I love you, well i’ve always lusted after you as well!” Look, all I’m getting at is that while our looks change over the years, the way she makes me feel hasn’t changed one bit. Someone asked me recently”Why do you think your wife married you?” I told him I’m still trying to figure out why she agreed to go out on a date with me, but I’m sure grateful she did!
“Some of us have learned from experience that small-breasted women often have larger minds”
Wow, that’s pretty sexist. Even insulting.
“If the guy you’re with thinks you need different breasts, maybe you just need a different guy.”
Perfect!
This sentence is the best of the whole article. It’s not about big or small being worse ot better… it’s about finding someone who appreciates you just as you are.
Mark, I appreciated your intentions, but this article came out as icky. Your appreciation of small-breasted women is commendable, but comparing people is always going to feel awkward and subjective.
If you just had expressed your appreciation for A-type women, without comparison, judgment or blaming anybody else, it would have been way smoother.
I don’t see how it’s commendable.
Either he likes smaller breasted women (or doesn’t care, and is going after a feature independent of breast size), in which case his pursuit of them is literally no different than the pursuit of a larger-breasted woman, or he’s going after after a woman who lacks a psychical trait that’s important to him, and he’s allowing social judgments to lead him to making a choice that’s wrong for him.
While I don’t think body type is linked to personality, small breasted women conjure pleasant visions of Diana the Archer in mythology. Nice!
This is now reminding me of thost “When did this (pictures of very skinny women)…become hotter than this (pictures of not skinny women)”. The problem isn’t that one is hotter than the other. The problem is we are stuck in a system that pits us against each other thinking that one is hotter than the other. Different people have different tastes so why does there have to be some single universal definition of what is “hot”.
I think the author’s heart was in the right place by trying to add his personal opinion to the mix in a statement that “we don’t all think the same!” (which bears repeating I say) but may have gone too far in seeming to hold his tastes up as “the taste” in women.
I’m 100% with Danny on this. Both the author’s intentions, and the original meme of “When did this ____ become hotter than this _____?”
As a skinny girl, who was once VERY skinny, the idea that I’m not some certain guy’s “type” never bothered me. But the idea that our culture, as a whole, is willing to say, “your type isn’t hot” to anyone is annoying and offensive.
I think the main thing we need to look at in Mark’s piece here is this line:
The reason this stands out is that he’s clearly saying why he likes this type of woman. He’s not saying she’s better. He’s saying she’s simply what he likes. Because of his history as an athlete.
I think the thing that is hanging people up in this piece is that he’s not speaking simply about himself. But that doesn’t mean he’s talking about all men feeling this way. He’s talking about himself and guys like him. Just because he’s not saying, “Maybe it’s just me, but I like small tits” doesn’t mean he’s saying that this is the ONE way to be or that ALL men feel this way.
I could write an article about how I like guys with dark hair and light eyes. And I really do. I always have. I’ve never dated a blond guy. Would people be upset with me over that? I can even tell you WHY I feel this way… In fact we did this in our blog a few days ago…
She Said He Said: “Once You Go White?”
And while it may be best not to have a “type” – it’s sort of natural and human. Just don’t try telling the world that your type is better than other types.
Well and I’ve no problem with someone having a type. I think part of the problem is, yes, the way he’s failed to specify that he’s just talking about his type. But also part of the problem is the way he’s implied that women with larger breasts are somehow used to using them to get things from men. He’s not just specifying his type; he’s conflating physical attributes with personality characteristics.
That’s what bugged me too. As a naturally large breasted women, I don’t exactly appreciate the idea that my large breasts are my only asset and I’ve never had to develop intelligence or a personality because guys are entranced by my magic tits.
DING DING DING! I agree. I’m also a naturally large breasted woman, and I was bothered by that too. I don’t skate by through life because my tits are a magical ticket to Everything I Ever Wanted Ever and I Never Had To Work For It. I had to develop a personality too.
@ Sarah
“guys are entranced by my magic tits”
Oh, that was mean. Am I the only guy on this thread who just developed an instant curiosity? Damn, must look for pictures of Christina Hendricks.
“I think the author’s heart was in the right place by trying to add his personal opinion to the mix in a statement that “we don’t all think the same!” (which bears repeating I say) but may have gone too far in seeming to hold his tastes up as “the taste” in women.”
No – I don’t think so.
One’s intent is best viewed by one’s actions.
And the actions here – this article which purports to be from a “good” guy but is really merely objectifying women.
Worse, because its couched as praise.
Someone already mentioned its akin to “but I DO like black people – no really, I’m saying I LIKE THEM!”
(And speaking of prior comments… where did they do? Most seem to have been removed….)
The problems begin with the title and end with the last line (which has no bearing on the rest of the piece…)
In Praise of Small Breasted Woman is the same as an article titled:
Why there’s nothing wrong with Gays/Blacks/Others
I can’t fathom how GMP published this.
If you scroll down to the bottom of the comments, you’ll see a bit in blue that says “Older Comments.” You gotta click on that to go back…there’s only so much on a page.
No – I don’t think so.
One’s intent is best viewed by one’s actions.
And the actions here – this article which purports to be from a “good” guy but is really merely objectifying women.
Worse, because its couched as praise.
But even “best viewed” is not the same as “what their intentions were”.
Which is rather than making a declaration I said, “I think”.
I agree, what is “hot” is subjective to each individual person (male and female), yet we are constantly being told what we should be thinking is hot. And contrary to popular belief, it is not just men doing this. Last time I was on a feminist site (Jezebel, I think) discussing body image types, I admitted I had a preference for smaller breast and petite frames. I was then told I must be a paedophile. It seemed that if my preferences didn’t fall into what men are expected to think of as beauty, I must be some kind of sexual deviant and into small children. This attitude reinforced, more than any TV add, that as a man, I am supposed to like big breasts more than any other type. Thankfully, I don’t take much stock in such expectations, and continue to have a preference for smaller breasts.
Mark, I’m really glad you shared that experience. Because as a smaller breasted women, and when discussing different issues on sexuality and the body online, I have had other women and some men tell me that the only reason a man could like me was if he was a pedophile because I looked like a little girl because I have smaller breasts. I thank God he made me like me and made men out there to be attracted to me..Grown men..to my grown, albeit more petite, body.
This bothers me a lot. I know how patronizing it is to be told that the fact that I think smaller women are attractive indicates that I must want to have sex with children. But I can’t imagine how patronizing it is to be a smaller woman and being told that guys are only into you because theyw ant to have sex with children.
So let me say I am glad you brought this up (and my apologies to anyone that brought it up before, its just that this is where I first saw it in this thread).
Same thing with pubic hair. A guy preferring a woman who shaves her pubic area is not an automatic indication that he’s a child rapist (and funny enough I’ve never heard anyone, man or woman, say that a woman that prefers guys to be shaved, face or pubic, is a child rapist).
“Same thing with pubic hair. A guy preferring a woman who shaves her pubic area is not an automatic indication that he’s a child rapist (and funny enough I’ve never heard anyone, man or woman, say that a woman that prefers guys to be shaved, face or pubic, is a child rapist).”
Yeah that boils my blood, it couldn’t possibly do with the fact that some people like the “clean shaven” look, the smooth look, prefer to see skin instead of hair in some places. I wonder how many of the women that say that to men, also like men with shaven faces (zomg shaven face looks like a body, thus it must mean they like little boys!!11!)
@ Erin
“I have had other women and some men tell me that the only reason a man could like me was if he was a pedophile”
Don’t pay attention to them. Those people are assholes. I’ve known women, who were gorgeous by societies’ standards and the only reason I would want them is if I hadn’t met them yet. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of those guys were interested and wanted to hurt your self esteem so you’d go out with them. Some of those women probably couldn’t remember the last time they were petite.
If you’re interested in a guy, one good way to show it is with a smile. I find it difficult to look away from a woman with an engaging smile. Also, don’t feel bad if he doesn’t respond. A lot of guys are clueless about women, myself included.
” I wouldn’t be surprised if some of those guys were interested and wanted to hurt your self esteem so you’d go out with them.”
Why is that even a thing? Who wants to be with someone who’s going to make her feel like shit about herself? I’ve been there, and it sucks and makes for a not very fun, stressful relationship.
@ Aya
“Who wants to be with someone who’s going to make her feel like shit about herself?”
Nobody does. It’s usually immature guys with low self esteem that try to sabotage a woman’s self esteem because they think it will give them a chance. I’ve seen it before. I even did it once when I was 10. A teacher recognized it and told me that she knew I was interested in this girl because I went out of my way to be mean to her and she was the prettiest girl in the class. My teacher told me that if I liked her, I should be nice to her. That was one thing I learned. The other thing was when she threw a box of chocolates another guy gave her into the street. I learned that the prettiest girl isn’t always the most attractive.
I just wanted to let Erin know that some of these people that are putting her down might be attracted to or jealous of her.
Well, I am not sure that’s the case John. But I appreciate the positive advice. I have never had anyone in real life say that to me. Just among discussion online. I think people like to think their body type is best. So I think when women said that to me, they really believed their body type better. And I think the men that said it was born out of a backlash of fear.
I don’t think liking shaved private parts is because you like little kids either. I do think shaved private parts was made popular by expectations fostered in porn though.
Danny said: “This bothers me a lot. I know how patronizing it is to be told that the fact that I think smaller women are attractive indicates that I must want to have sex with children. But I can’t imagine how patronizing it is to be a smaller woman and being told that guys are only into you because theyw ant to have sex with children.”
Yeah it really boiled my blood the first time someone said that to me. But I know God wouldn’t have made me this way and not made healthy men that could like my body type.
All body types can be beautiful. I totally get why soemone is attracted to a more curvy woman. But I also get why someone is attracted to petite women too. Luckily for me!
I absolutely hate when people assume that of you, I usually keep my preference a secret because I don’t want some idiot to think I like kids. I like petite WOMEN with smaller breasts the most, but they never bother to think that I also love mature minds, intelligence, etc along with it. When I see petite women I see adults NOT KIDS, because they ARE adults. It’s disrespectful to me, it’s very disrespectful to petite women to be told they are kids and it pisses me off.
@Erin
“I have had other women and some men tell me that the only reason a man could like me was if he was a pedophile”
That is horrible horrible horrible, those people should be ashamed of themselves. A person’s body-size doesn’t dictate their personality, nor their age. A woman is still a woman, regardless if she’s a cupped and 100lbs or triple M cup, 200lbs+, whatever.
There are plenty of people that LOVE petite bodies, and plenty that love all kinds of bodies. It varies wildly. It pisses me off bigtime when others try to enforce their personal tastes on others or act like only 1 bodytype, attribute, etc is attractive.
So… I guess that whole feminist concept of ‘deal breakers’ goes right out the window when a man decides to judge a woman’s dating viability on a metric that makes feminists uncomfortable? I mean, this is a community (not here; I wasn’t here at the time, but the feminist blogosphere) went to on and on about the right of a woman to judge men based on a hobby they had 10 years ago. Now they think they have the right to tell men that we can’t judge a woman’s attractiveness based on her appearance?
Here’s an idea: Everyone has the right to choose their dates and mates by whatever metric(s) they desire, and everyone else has the right to judge them for it. After-all, that’s pretty much what happens anyway.
To those who appreciate the piece, glad I could throw a little sunshine your way. May you receive much more of it.
To those I may have offended, let’s see if can assuage.
Despite the fact that the essay’s title points to breast size, my underlying point is that, for me (and many other guys), in a sense, it’s not about your breasts. It’s about the characteristics and attributes that I’ve found myself attracted to, and that, yes, I have over time come to see a loose association between them and women who happen to have small breasts. Are there exceptions to that generalization? Of course. This is not a Doctoral thesis in anthropology, but a playful tribute to a group of women that has perhaps not been privy to as much admiration as others. But beyond that, yes, I do now have that physical preference, but I genuinely think it’s because of the personality and character traits I have come to associate with that body type, through dozens of years of life experiences, and dates, and relationships, and observations.
Part of my motivation to write this came from the fact that I have known a lot of women over the years who’ve felt like second class citizens due to how much more attention their large-breasted friends have gotten over the years. Many of them were mocked tirelessly as they grew up—by women, too. And others still have so genuinely disliked their own lesser-endowed bodies (perhaps due to said societal preferences), that they became less confident as a result. Some have even gone ahead and surgical enhancements. And some of those have done so and regretted it profoundly. This has saddened me immensely, so I’m attempting to give a little adoration where adoration is due, and say simply:
Skip the boob jobs, ladies. Some of us love you just the way you are.
And while some will claim this is still just objectification of a different sort, I believe it’s a little more complicated than that: my attraction to small-breasted women is ultimately an attraction to their humanity, personality and own unique energy. Not simply flesh.
And yes, this is just my preference. To each his (or her) own…
I was giving you the benefit if the doubt for meaning well, but now you are actually defending the premise that small-breasted women have superior personalities and intellect. Wow.
Sign,
Big-Breasted Dumb Lazy Manipulative Woman
Mark,
I understand the points you raise, and I apologize for the responses you are receiving.
The extreme irony is that in every single piece on male privilege ever, the number one argument is always that privilege is “invisible” to the people who hold it.
It’s therefore no surprise that female commenters are coming out of the woodwork to deny their own privilege.
I guess there’s nothing for it.
What privilege?
Asks the female commenter ironically?
Not ironically. You have the privilege of never knowing what it’s like to be a woman with small or large breasts and to have that be such a fixation by such a large part of society, just as I have the privilege of never knowing what it’s like to be insecure about penis size.
I’m serious…this isn’t a gendered privilege, because the issue of breast size only affects one gender. It’d be like me saying that somehow penis size is an example of male privilege.
Actually some men develop large breasts, gynecomastia, and it does cause an issue for them. That is a size problem in reverse.
Okay, but again that doesn’t make this an issue in which female privilege applies.
@ HeatherN
Don’t think there is privilege. Probably should have put FYI on the post. The closest thing I could come up with is that for women breasts are sometimes a financial commodity. At the risk of reigniting the Firefly thing, topless guys could be seen in mainstream magazines and TV. Granted it’s easier to see topless women for free now, but women can still financially benefit from it a lot easier than men.
Men have the freedom to walk around topless, while women would get arrested in many areas. So there is that. I can’t really come up with privilege and suspect that the accusation has to do with being upset over having to pay to see women’s breasts.
I have to agree with heather on this one. Heather is pretty good about acknowledging both genders have privilege, but her question here is “what privilege is being discussed here”? How is privilege relevant to liking small breasts?
Mark, I usually love your writing. I almost always agree with you and the points you make. But this article was just bad. And your comment did nothing to help – it proves the point of what some of the commenters were making. You have tied personal characteristics to physical attributes. I would have rather you just talked about the flesh. To say that small breasted women are somehow more real or smarter or more interesting than large breasted (or mid breasted) is just plain stupid. Your preference for a specific body type is fine, I think small breasted women should have more admiration – but not because their small boobs imbue them with an imagined superior intellect. Cup size does not have an inverse relationship with intellect or personality or humanity. Any correlation is perceived.
I’m medium breasted, so I’m a half wit with some so-so redeeming characteristics. Who wants some?
So Mark – the audacity small breasts…you didn’t really think you could pull this off, did you?
Pull off what, exactly?
Talking about small-breasted women in a culture that typically only worships the Pamela Andersons of the world?
Or saying that I find these women beautiful? And for characteristics beyond just their physicality?
Something else?
You are doing exactly the same thing that mainstream culture does, but reversing it. You are also making ridiculous value judgments about women’s personal qualities based solely on breast size.
I also think the greater point still remains hidden. It being that the large breast is seen as unearned – unlike characteristics one has to develop to overcome these unearned assets others may have, that you do not.
I would think it similar to the praise small dick men receive for having to go the extra mile and be sensitive to make up the inches. We’ve had “in praise of small penises” articles on here as well, and I bet the sentiments were similarly divided. I do have to admit that I’ve known unearned big dick men that have indeed overlooked other areas of personal development. Unfortunately, my sample size is too small to draw any good conclusions.
@ elissa
” I would think it similar to the praise small dick men receive for having to go the extra mile and be sensitive to make up the inches.”
The general sense that I get from women is that large penises are great for looking at or touching, but they don’t seem to provide any extra satisfaction during sex. When size was an issue, I heard that it was width that made the most difference. I suppose a larger width would rub against the clitoris more. Men usually think of length when thinking about their size. Is it really width that makes the difference?
Do you know how hard it is to go the extra mile 6 or so inches at a time?
It seems like there are a lot of assumptions being made in this article and comments. Primarily, the assumption that having large breasts is wonderful and having small breasts is a terrible affliction. I dunno, when Iwas younger, I always wanted to be small, graceful, petite, and have small breasts. Instead I’m a tall busty “farm girl” sort of girl. I was teased a lot about my breasts when I started developing — in 4th grade! By age 13, I wore a C-cup bra and I was often hit on by adult men who thought I was 17 or 18. This was confusing, and scary. I wore baggy shirts for years. I was deeply embarrassed by the attention that my breasts generated. It was not the right kind of attention. It involved catcalls and being leered at by strangers and having my friends’ dads act all weird when I came over. I was nerdy and awkward and I did not know that I could use my sex appeal to get anything. I really didn’t. I wanted to be taken seriously. I was friends with geeky guys, many of whom developed crushes on me, but they were too terrified of me to do anything about it. I stopped going to school dances; no one wanted to dance with me, ever. When I reached my 20′s, I had difficulty finding quality guys to date; mostly, the guys who asked me out we’re obnoxious type A personalities. I always felt fat, even when I wasn’t fat. I could go on but I won’t. My point is that everyone thinks someone else has it easier. It isn’t necessarily true.
I dont know if Mark is making the “assumption that having large breasts is wonderful and having small breasts is a terrible affliction.” I think he is just commenting on that mainstream societal assumption. But he does go on to connect small breasts with positive personality traits, and even suggests that the small breasts lead to women of a higher caliber. (Not to worry, I don’t agree at all.) What about the proverbial big breasted girl who develops a stunning intellect and astounding moral qualities to overcome men’s obsession with her breasts? Of course this example also attributes personal development with breast size. Why is it that we just cant get over breasts?? Why oh why? Try as I might, I know that I struggle.
Along those same lines of personality qualities being attributed to breasts, Mark also describes types of men who like types of breasts!!!
‘”We’re not the guys working construction who whistle chauvinistically from across the street three stories above you as you walk to work.
Why is that exactly? I think what Mark is getting at is that since small breasts are not mainstream hot, guys who work in construction (obviously because they work in as masculine a field as construction they are grunts who lack refinement in their preference of breast size– alas, they are not breast connoisseurs) are not attracted to them.
So in the end, Mark is maybe saying that the small breasted woman is a specialized niche taste, that only the refined gentleman will appreciate. She has higher qualities that also spring forth as a result of her modest form. Much like a wine can be appraised by its qualities, so too can a drinker be judged by his choice of beverage.
Of course, where he draws fire is from pinning it all on the breasts. And I cant fault the man for that. Since we’re discussing breasts, and since we love them so much, we like to think that we can judge the rest of the woman from the breasts. Or perhaps we just impose in our minds the qualities of our ideal partner upon the form of our favorite type of breast.
I sympathize with your experience, and especially agree with the insight at the end that everyone thinks someone else has it easier, which isn’t true. I don’t think you had it easy, or that you’re exaggerating what the experience of being large-breasted from a young age has been like for you.
I have no interest in challenging your feelings, because they’re your feelings, but in the interest of opening your mind to some of the hardness on the other side, try looking at some of what you said and imagining you’re a man, or more specifically a young geeky man interested in a girl like you, but afraid of hurting or making you feel uncomfortable *because* of the respect and compassion he has for women. Consider this section, and especially the connection between parts I’ve bolded for emphasis:
The guys who are too terrified to do anything about it are likely the ones who are terrified *because* they don’t want you to perceive them as those creeps who give the wrong kind of attention. I’m sure I’m oversimplifying the actual experience, but just reading your brief description, it sounds like you were creeped out by anyone who asked you out or showed attraction, and frustrated by anyone who didn’t. That doesn’t exactly leave much room in the middle for a respectful guy who appreciates both your body and mind to connect with you, especially if you weren’t willing to breach the usual gender roles by initiating romantic relationships instead of waiting for the guys you actually liked to make the first move.
Your comment is a convenient example of the point I’m trying to make, but I don’t mean it as direct criticism or analysis of you. It happens to capture what seems like a common problem to me, which is men being paralyzed into not making a move because they take the “don’t be a creep” message to heart, which is what women swear up and down they want, admire, and desire in a man, but then characterize such men as cowards when they don’t make a move. Or worse – bitter, entitled men who think the women are supposed to initiate relationships with them occasionally just because they’re Nice Guys. It’s a no-win situation.
Agreed with this. I don’t know about the choice of word “terrified” but I can relate to not making a move for fear of being too creepy. I find its a tough call.
She might have labelled me a friend, and I wouldn’t want to move in on her when that judgements been made. Or maybe I’ve been labelled that because when I think I’m making a move, I’m just being friendly.
Also, in order for a guy like me to have dating success, I have to approach multiple women, I have to be mentally gunning for it. BUT I don’t want to appear to be a hound.
Talk about a dilemma!
@Marcus, you make good points, so maybe I can elaborate a bit. I was speaking of my experience as an awkward teenager, when like a lot of teenagers I was confused about my sexuality and my relationship with the opposite sex. In part because I was a tall busty girl who stood out, I had the strange experience of attracting unwanted attention (e.g. from older men) and also feeling totally ignored by the boys who were my peers. In fact, I now realize that many of those boys were attracted to me, but they were afraid to do anything about it. The dances where no one asked me to dance? Maybe I wasn’t repulsive , maybe they were scared. I’ve looked at pictures of myself as a teen, with the wisdom of middle age, and I don’t see what I used to see. I see a curvy young woman who had absolutely no clue what was going on and no one to help me cope (my mother did nothing to mentor me thru this stage in my life but that’s another story in itself) I feel only compassion now for the boys who didnt approach me in H.S. and I wish I could have done something to help them see me as a real person who was also awkward and scared, and not just as this overwhelming female presence. I didn’t think they were cowards. I thought they didn’t like me. And the ones who had crushes that J was aware of — at that age, it was hard for me to conceive of asking a guy on a date. It simply wasn’t presented as an option any place I looked for guidance.
Meanwhile I did not have the skills to use my “assets” as an advantage in any way; I was not in a popular crowd and was considered a giant dork. Which is why the assumption that women with large breasts learn to manipulate men annoys me. Having large breasts is not an automatic ticket to popularity or social success.
Also, maybe “terrified” was too strong a word for what my guy friends experienced — I don’t really know what they felt , but I was trying to describe my feelings of being simultaneously attractive to men yet somehow scaring them off at that age.
Nervous as hell is what I feel around women, especially beautiful women. It’s getting easier but back in high-school that fear was even worse, women can be scary to some men n vice versa I’m sure. It’s damn close to being terrified in some respects, can’t think straight, nervous as hell, unsure of what to do, afraid to be rejected, embarassed, etc. It can be a very real fear, I found it easier being around crocodiles that could kill me, snakes etc.
Could we please cut Mark some slack please…?
I got it…Thank you, Mark!
Keep writing more essays!
Reposted to add a a self intro!
Hi, I’m Johnny. I’m a first time visitor of this site, and this is my first comment. I thoroughly enjoyed reading the essay, and enjoyed the comments even more. I hope that someone replies to this comment, preferably to respond to its content, but if not at least to welcome me to the community!
I dont know if Mark is making the “assumption that having large breasts is wonderful and having small breasts is a terrible affliction.” (quoting Sarah above) I think he is just commenting on that mainstream societal assumption. But he does go on to connect small breasts with positive personality traits, and even suggests that the small breasts lead to women of a higher caliber. (Not to worry, I don’t agree at all.) What about the proverbial big breasted girl who develops a stunning intellect and astounding moral qualities to overcome men’s obsession with her breasts? Of course this example also attributes personal development with breast size. Why is it that we just cant get over breasts?? Why oh why? Try as I might, I know that I struggle.
Along those same lines of personality qualities being attributed to breasts, Mark also describes types of men who like types of breasts!!!
‘”We’re not the guys working construction who whistle chauvinistically from across the street three stories above you as you walk to work.
Why is that exactly? I think what Mark is getting at is that since small breasts are not mainstream hot, guys who work in construction (obviously because they work in as masculine a field as construction they are grunts who lack refinement in their preference of breast size– alas, they are not breast connoisseurs) are not attracted to them.
So in the end, Mark is maybe saying that the small breasted woman is a specialized niche taste, that only the refined gentleman will appreciate. She has higher qualities that also spring forth as a result of her modest form. Much like a wine can be appraised by its qualities, so too can a drinker be judged by his choice of beverage.
Of course, where he draws fire is from pinning it all on the breasts. And I cant fault the man for that. Since we’re discussing breasts, and since we love them so much, we like to think that we can judge the rest of the woman from the breasts. Or perhaps we just impose in our minds the qualities of our ideal partner upon the form of our favorite type of breast.
It seems to be that you think all small-breasted women are just…small. Words like ‘athletic’ and ‘petite’. What about women with the traditional pear shape?
And don’t play up the stereotype of large breasts = tiny brains. It’s just stupid.
Just as some men like women with small breasts, some women like men with small brains and even tinier penises. So you’re in luck, Mark.
No way does a woman want a small penis. Speak for yourself!!
Some women do have smaller vaginas, and then they would prefer a smaller penis. Some women might prefer the aesthetics of a smaller penis.
That and I bet that for some women regardless of vagina size their “spot” that a small penis hits just right while a larger penis misses entierly.
I hated having larger breasts whaen I was younger – the obsession with breasts was a horrible focus at a time when I was awkward, feeling self concious, and with a massive lack of confidence. The baggy clothes, wondering if someone is talking to me for me or my breasts – thank god for hitting 30!
@Emma: “thank god for hitting 30!”
Well, what happened then?
Did they become a valuable and pleasurable asset?
I mean, when I was a teenager I was really embarrassed by having a big penis. It showed through garments, and some schoolmate poked fun at me. Awkward!!!
Then, when becoming an adult, i became glad about my “little” buddy the way it is.
Perspective and context are everything… and, most of the times, anything has pros and cons.
Let’s also recognize the many men who may not have a particular preference or who may think of large, small, or average-sized breasts as beautiful in different ways. Or, beautiful in the same ways, for that matter. Small breasts may not be a particular turn-on nor distinct turn-off, just one of many sizes.
There is the saying “more than a mouthful is a waste.”