Body Parts And Other Partial Truths
September 2nd, 2007 at 07:58am Michael Conniff 2
I must say I have enjoyed the guessing game that ensued after my semi-annual blog about breasts. Needless to say, no man should ever put pen to paper when it comes to breasts, because (a) nothing he can say will ever do them justice; and (b) everything he says will be held against him unless, as a homosexual, he is noncombatant. That said, this post represents an update by a card-carrying heterosexual on the great Aspen breast story.
When I told the tale of subsidized implantation, there was much speculation about who and why, let alone when and how. (I ain't tellin' and you can't make me.) At the very least I have this important update: the young lady in question, rather than have her elderly boyfriend pay for the implantation of both her breasts, insisted on paying for one of them her ownself.
This development (sic) of course raises the question of which one is which. Were one to pay for one, instead of two, then one might get dibs on either one rather than none at all. Was it the Amazons who lopped off their breast, the better to shoot an arrow straight and true? The same should hold here: depending on one's profession and right- or left-handedness, one should alway retain the right to partial breast ownership.
Of course, one can't also help but speculate about the psychology of partial ownership. Is this a way of asserting one's independence from Sugar Daddy? Is partial independence (one) all that much better than total dependence (two)? Are we to applaud such a gesture when it comes to a woman's body, or re-think "Our Bodies, Ourselves" to include a magnanimous gesture by a man who just can't wait to get his hands on them melons?
As for me, your friendly blogmeister, I am of two minds: I liked what I saw and I like what I see. So sue me. This new and improved notion of female perfection is now mass-produced based on Hugh Hefner's definition of pulchritude, and perhaps it's now coincidence that the most famous Playmate of them all, Barbi Benton, lives in the Roaring Fork Valley within the sound of this blog. Should a women be able to do whatever she wants with her body.
Absolutely! (With important exceptions for God and country.)
Should a man have to pay for it?
Look at it this way: men have always paid for it, one way or another.
Entry Filed under: Aspen, Colorado, Women, The West, Aspen Life Post, United Post
1 Comment Add your own
1. Kit O'Carra | September 2nd, 2007 at 10:37 am
"Was it the Amazons who lopped off their breast, the better to shoot an arrow straight and true? The same should hold here: depending on one's profession and right- or left-handedness, one should always retain the right to partial breast ownership."
You reminded me of an incident about thirty or forty-some years ago with a woman who was on the U.S. Shooting Team. This was back when women competed in the same events with men, before it was decided that they should compete in separate gender events. The woman in question was an Olympic rifle shooter. The rules stated that no competitor may use any form of artificial support in order to maintain their balance while holding the rifle, aiming and firing at the target. This woman did not break those rules. Being well-endowed, she found after countless hours of practice that if she strategically shoved one breast under her arm that supported the rifle, it provided a cushioned brace and no doubt, some support. The men complained an unfair advantage, while the woman maintained that there was "nothing artificial" about the support! Hence, a new ruling in the books of Olympic history.
As I was a six-year member of the USST women's pistol team from '86 through '92, I was torn between my beliefs in the claims against this former rifle shooter. Was she cheating by using her natural support? Probably. There has always been a barrier between rifle and pistol shooters, each believing their sport is more difficult than the other's. Rifle shooters get all tightened up in leather jackets, pants and gloves, in every attempt to keep their body from moving other than breathing. Pistol shooters show up to compete in shorts, t-shirts and a pair of flat soled shoes, letting it all hang out there with one arm extended holding the pistol. Even if I had been well-endowed during my competitive years, I know that slinging one to one side wouldn't have helped me a bit in supporting my arm or my stance. This woman who used her natural support may have caused great resentment of large breasts; at least in the Olympic shooting world for a short time.
If it's true what you ask about the Amazons, then I'm grateful that my talent was in pistol shooting and not archery. My question is this: will this young woman be expected to reciprocate by purchasing Cialis or Enzyte for her aging male companion in the years to follow, or will she leave him for a younger man and have to return the boob she didn't pay for?
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed