Pregnancy, NSFW image Options

[Shalom]

I was looking up the meaning of "Gravida 2, Para 1" on the internet yesterday. Wikipedia's article on Pregnancy came up, and I found the answer there almost immediately.

But to get there, I had to scroll down the first screen and view a NSFW photo of a naked pregnant woman. I was at "W". Fortunately nobody saw it, but I felt uncomfortable.

It's not as if I were searching for information about a sexually explicit subject (the classic example is "autofellatio"). We're talking about a very common, ordinary phenomenon. For crying out loud, Wikipedian nerds, can you have the decency to show a pregnant woman with her clothes on?

[Theanima]

How exactly would cartoon drawings make any difference? They'd still show the same thing, but not as accurately as a photograph.

And besides, I'm tired of all these people who insist breasts are sexual organs. They're for babies for goodness sake. Their sexual connotation is as much the same as, say, feet (which many are turned on by, just like breasts).

If you in your workplace are required to look up terms related to pregnancy, it should be no surprise to the employer that you might come across a naked lady at some point.

[Milton Roe]

And besides, I'm tired of all these people who insist breasts are sexual organs. They're for babies for goodness sake. Their sexual connotation is as much the same as, say, feet (which many are turned on by, just like breasts).

Well, here we disagree. Breasts in a non-pregnant woman ARE sexual organs. Some women have no more breasts when they aren't nursing than a dog or cat has. But these women are able to provide just as much milk when needed (this has actually been studied). That means that a breast for a woman who is not nursing, or preparing to, is NOT for babies. It's not needed.

So whence all that extra fatty tissue, which clearly isn't functional, occuring in some women with large breasts, who aren't pregnant or nursing? Well, they're secondary sexual characteristics, as, ermm, "advertised."

As is that glorious hair of a woman, which is of better quality usually than a man's. A fact recognized by some Muslim cultures, who require that it be covered up.

These things are mild stimulants, and are soon ignorable if you see them enough, like woman's bare ankles. But I'm pretty sure that nature hardwires some things to be more intrinsically stimulating visually than others. That female figure, for example. All the secondary characteristics that appear at puberty.