Thank God that someone is finally doing this essential research. But what about legs? In a recent survey 10% of men preferred the right leg and 10% preferred the left leg. But most men preferred something in between.
Very funny. Essential research? No. But racial realist views are still taboo, so expanding the preponderance of the evidence can be beneficial to advancing these views. When I was in high school, the black kids would sometimes ask me in a slightly disparaging tone, “Why white girls ain’t got no ass?”.
> We might also wonder why the old books from the 1800s had a relatively higher rate of mentioning these topics than modern books pre-1980.
(1) Usage of ass to refer to the animal was much more prevalent in 19C I would guess.
(2) Probably greater share of technical books across time.
(3) Hypothetical: Victorian prudery, 18C was more "freewheeling".
> ... as the big spike in "ass" in American English books dates back only to the 1990s, not to the 1960s cultural revolution.
Another hypothesis I have had for some time is that the growing interest in butts relative to boobs in the past couple of decades also has to do with many women starting to go to the gym and work out, which AFAIK was a marginal phenomenon a generation ago and earlier. Although the average female ass has gotten much fatter during this period, the top butts today are toned bubble butts that look much better than the top butts in 1974, whereas no such improvement could happen with boobs. This made butts relatively more attractive all else equal.
Emil, I believe I am going to solve the evolutionary mystery of human female permanently protruding breasts. As we all know, women developed wider hips for a wider birth canal as human heads increased in size. In turn, men who felt attraction to the resulting roundness of the hips, would more likely reproduce. This attraction to roundness was so important that women also became round in other areas, like the chest.
You know, the preference of rappers and their relatives for large buttocks has been well documented (Mix-a-Lot et al. 1992), but I'm wondering if there there's a large source of information on Asians' proclivities. Gee, if only we had an area of popular culture with substantial East Asian influence... ;)
it is worth understanding here that the sexual revolution was not a quick event of the 1960s. Public sentiment changed gradually and the revolution finally ended just around the 1990s.
My theory is that the increased interest in buttocks results from the increased frequency of breast augmentation. Straight men (and some women) are trying to answer the question, "Is she really hot, or is she fake?" Large breasts have become suspect; buttocks may appear a more reliable guide.
I'd never seen the acronym, but I've read the term without knowing exactly what result the procedure effects. (Please leave me ignorant.) Perplexity tells me that in the US it's become more common as breast augmentation has become less common, so if my theory holds, we may see a reversal in which searches on breasts increase as searches on buttocks decrease.
It's equivalent to breast (I don't have data). It's all about bigger, doesn't matter where, but best if behind, boobs, and lips are as big as possible. Not sure how your theory holds up to that.
But how does this work with fat distribution? Let’s say that genetic group A of females tends to distribute more fat on breasts, and group B tends to distribute more far on butts. If you’re a hetero male who happens to live near group A, it would seem unlikely to become interested in butts. But that’s just due to breast/bitt availability
Regarding the books, though - it may just be euphemism treadmill (e.g. breast vs. chest vs. boobs vs. boulders, ass vs. butt vs. derriere...). The word set given is obviously insufficient to test this (and "chest" provides the additional homonymy problem).
Article needs to include more photos
which type? :-)
Thank God that someone is finally doing this essential research. But what about legs? In a recent survey 10% of men preferred the right leg and 10% preferred the left leg. But most men preferred something in between.
Very funny. Essential research? No. But racial realist views are still taboo, so expanding the preponderance of the evidence can be beneficial to advancing these views. When I was in high school, the black kids would sometimes ask me in a slightly disparaging tone, “Why white girls ain’t got no ass?”.
Yes, "tote that barge, lift that bale" and shift that Overton window.
I guess I'll try to start liking breasts more so that I can become smarter.
This settled the boobs VS ass debate
but the Ginger-Maryanne debate rages on…
> We might also wonder why the old books from the 1800s had a relatively higher rate of mentioning these topics than modern books pre-1980.
(1) Usage of ass to refer to the animal was much more prevalent in 19C I would guess.
(2) Probably greater share of technical books across time.
(3) Hypothetical: Victorian prudery, 18C was more "freewheeling".
> ... as the big spike in "ass" in American English books dates back only to the 1990s, not to the 1960s cultural revolution.
Another hypothesis I have had for some time is that the growing interest in butts relative to boobs in the past couple of decades also has to do with many women starting to go to the gym and work out, which AFAIK was a marginal phenomenon a generation ago and earlier. Although the average female ass has gotten much fatter during this period, the top butts today are toned bubble butts that look much better than the top butts in 1974, whereas no such improvement could happen with boobs. This made butts relatively more attractive all else equal.
Emil, I believe I am going to solve the evolutionary mystery of human female permanently protruding breasts. As we all know, women developed wider hips for a wider birth canal as human heads increased in size. In turn, men who felt attraction to the resulting roundness of the hips, would more likely reproduce. This attraction to roundness was so important that women also became round in other areas, like the chest.
Breasts>buttocks
There seems to be a stronger correlation between attraction to fat outside of breasts and buttocks and IQ or slower life history across countries.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=bbw,big%20ass
You know, the preference of rappers and their relatives for large buttocks has been well documented (Mix-a-Lot et al. 1992), but I'm wondering if there there's a large source of information on Asians' proclivities. Gee, if only we had an area of popular culture with substantial East Asian influence... ;)
https://tropedia.fandom.com/wiki/Breasts_in_Anime_and_Manga
Desmond Morris floated the theory that big breasts evolved to simiulated buttocks to encourage sex after man (woman) started walking upright.
it is worth understanding here that the sexual revolution was not a quick event of the 1960s. Public sentiment changed gradually and the revolution finally ended just around the 1990s.
Do you have a list of the slang words used for every country? I'm particularly interested in Bolivia, which looks like an outlier.
We only used the English and Spanish terms, shown in the excerpt.
My theory is that the increased interest in buttocks results from the increased frequency of breast augmentation. Straight men (and some women) are trying to answer the question, "Is she really hot, or is she fake?" Large breasts have become suspect; buttocks may appear a more reliable guide.
But have you heard of BBL?
I'd never seen the acronym, but I've read the term without knowing exactly what result the procedure effects. (Please leave me ignorant.) Perplexity tells me that in the US it's become more common as breast augmentation has become less common, so if my theory holds, we may see a reversal in which searches on breasts increase as searches on buttocks decrease.
It's equivalent to breast (I don't have data). It's all about bigger, doesn't matter where, but best if behind, boobs, and lips are as big as possible. Not sure how your theory holds up to that.
But how does this work with fat distribution? Let’s say that genetic group A of females tends to distribute more fat on breasts, and group B tends to distribute more far on butts. If you’re a hetero male who happens to live near group A, it would seem unlikely to become interested in butts. But that’s just due to breast/bitt availability
Regarding the books, though - it may just be euphemism treadmill (e.g. breast vs. chest vs. boobs vs. boulders, ass vs. butt vs. derriere...). The word set given is obviously insufficient to test this (and "chest" provides the additional homonymy problem).
Science.