Small chest so she won't spend too much energy in breastmilk production, large buttocks so she can store as many extra calories as needed.Does this phenotype point to survived famines somewhere in the ancestry?
>>18001429My dick points to her ass actually.
>>18001429>Small chest so she won't spend too much energy in breastmilk productionnot how that works large tits produce less milkto answer your question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steatopygia
>>18001429>Small chest so she won't spend too much energy in breastmilk productiontits change size to feed the babby
>>18001429its because its objectively the most attractive across human historycope and sneed if you disagree, most men in history would plow a woman with that physique if given the choice otherwise it wouldn't be so common
>>18002065>large tits produce less milkThe hell?
>>18002065>large tits produce less milkmy life is a lie
>>18002132>attractiveness >objectiveThe only objectively attractive trait is facial symmetry, and height in males. Everything else is infinitely subjective
>>18003015nice cope you ugly freak
>>18003015men like big tits and asscope roastie
>>18003055>>18003158So much hate on this board
>>18002132I’d agree, there’s still cultures today and historically where women work and go about their daily lives exposing their breasts and the men are about as sexually attracted to them as we are to a woman’s plush lips; that is to say, not so much even though it exists. But everywhere you go, covering their crotch is the norm for women, and displaying it often through the back (as it’s easier to turn around and bend forward than to bend backwards) seems like the default way to seduce a man.
The whole idea that small chest = less energy wasted isn’t really accurate. Breast size variation is more about fat storage, hormones, and sexual selection than famine survival.
