|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: What is the ideal size for areola? | |||
| None, breasts should not have nipples either. |
   
|
2 | 10.53% |
| None, it detracts from the composition by trivializing the nipple. |
  
|
1 | 5.26% |
| A dime, some embellishment is good |
  
|
1 | 5.26% |
| A quarter, they are and should be seen as their own feature, but remain subordinate |
  
|
5 | 26.32% |
| A fifty cent piece, the golden mean, yadda yadda yadda |
  
|
3 | 15.79% |
| A coaster, they are the subject, the rest is background or embellishment |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| A dessert plate, I don't care much for backgrounds |
|
0 | 0% |
| Moar, there is something wrong with me. |
|
0 | 0% |
| What's an areola? |
|
1 | 5.26% |
| Like bush, the towers are the limit |
|
6 | 31.58% |
| Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
09-12-2016, 12:48 PM
|
|||
|
Areola: The Breast Forgotten Feature
Lost in greater breast discourse to infinitely more important topics of form and mass, this all too often forgotten feature, I contend, is pivotal in general breast valuation.
It saddens me that excessive size of this blessed crossroads of the mammary significantly dampens the appeal of any pair of breasts. This is at least true for me, I suspect it a universal truth, though it may simply be a case of normalcy bias and those with or surrounded by massive areola may find them appealing. As a general rule, I have settled that any adult hand, regardless of sex, is sufficiently large that aesthetically acceptable areola should not seep from beneath the edges of one's palm. Beyond this most general of rules however, I have failed, quite utterly, to identify ideal ratios or properly pleasing ranges either for nipple-areola or areola-breast. Admittedly I have not given this the thought it deserves though the general idea weighs heavily on my mind whenever I am accosted by supersized areola on an otherwise pleasing pair of breasts. What are your thoughts?
__________________
<Millenial Snowfkake Utopia>
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#2
09-12-2016, 01:11 PM
|
|||
|
Such critical thoughts about another's body indicates an inability to be mindfully present.
Regardless of size, shape, density, or configuration you should rejoice whenever you have one in hand. If something doesn't do it for you, that's fine; simply move on. Such pro and con woolgathering serves little purpose. But I'm being to harsh, also. I have to admit that collaboratively exploring your tastes is one of many paths to self-awareness. Please forgive me. Your original question is impossible for me to answer because I'm omnimammarian. Oh well. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#3
09-12-2016, 05:08 PM
|
|||
|
I AINT datin a bitch with whack Aerolas
I ALSO dumped my last girlfriend because she had low hemoglobins I aint trying to date bitches with whack aerolas or low hemos | ||
|
|
|||
|
#5
09-12-2016, 06:01 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
To the topic at hand though, I am intrigued. Which of the following would you say played prominently in your desire to vote the way you were unable? [ ] Our Lord Below, Bristlebane [ ] General Deviance [ ] Texture [ ] Pity [ ] Abnormally large hands [ ] Pokeball Fetish [ ] Special Deviance [ ] Assumed static areola-breast ratio (I.e. bigger a = bigger b) [ ] Normalcy bias [ ] Other
__________________
<Millenial Snowfkake Utopia>
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#7
09-12-2016, 06:30 PM
|
|||
|
Currently I am dating a set of breasts which please me greatly. They are ample and yet not too large. They are pert. The nippers are responsive to my tongue and the Areolas are of perfect size of stroking circuitously.
They are some of my favorite breasts. Thanks | ||
|
|
|||
|
#8
09-13-2016, 12:31 AM
|
|||
|
what option there for who am i to judge... or to my way of thinking; this one that one light one brown one (etc...).. hmm maybe the bush but... bush was a patzy ... but then again... bush... hmmm... ill take all of the above for dot dot dot
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#10
09-13-2016, 01:10 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
|
|
Linear Mode
