|
She slept with Molière and la Rochefoucauld, among many others; upon her death, Ninon left a large sum of money to her attorney's son -- who became the writer Voltaire. I purely do admire all of that in a woman.
Dorothy Parker wrote a wonderful poem about her, "Ninon de Lenclos, on Her Last Birthday," an inspirational message to any woman feeling her age.
This comes up because my chum from the Big Easy reminds me that Ninon's sexual expertise proved so legendary that members of the aristocracy sent their daughters to her for tutelage. During the course of that instruction (and how one wishes those classes had been transcribed, in any form) she answered a student's question about the proper size of a woman's breast thus: "Large enough to fill the hand of an honest man."
Which somehow reminds me of Abe Lincoln's response when a reporter, in jest, asked him how long a man's legs should be: "Long enough to reach the ground," said the president who puts to shame all those who have held that office for the past four decades, and most of those who've governed us since his death.
This same chum recently wrote to me about breast-related cosmetic surgery, as follows: "I say, if a woman wants bigger teats let her have them any corrections from A- to B or C should be subsidized . . . They should pay their own way from C on. The really huge ones are so grotesque . . . "
My response:
. . . I disagree about government-sponsored or insurance-subsidized breast enhancement (or breast reduction). This is elective surgery, and neither small breasts nor big ones per se constitute a disfigurement or a psychological burden requiring alleviation at anyone else's expense. Put that money into research on breast cancer, and into complete insurance coverage for those life-saving but traumatic radiation and chemotherapies and surgeries, and into subsequent cosmetic surgery and psychological counseling for those women (and the men in their lives).
We should mourn the loss of a woman's breast, and help her recover from that in any way possible. We shouldn't encourage women to stuff them with foreign bodies or shrink them down for appearance's sake. They're not fashion accessories.
Being a small-breast fan myself, I don't understand the big-boobs thing at all, and especially not the humongous smother-me-in-breast-flesh extreme. I have seen XXX videos in which some of the women look as if they're carrying around a pair of basketballs on their chests -- can't bear to watch them, simply painful to contemplate, from any standpoint.
The subject came up at a dinner the other night with an old friend, his wife, and a female friend of theirs. I said, "I see ads for breast enlargement, and I see ads for breast reduction. Why don't these women just swap lovers?" All agreed on the sagacity -- not to mention the economy -- of this idea. Could be a government program. Or, if we want to keep government not only out of our bedrooms but also out of women's brassieres, possibly a profitable online matchmaking business here: "Rack Exchange. Men, swap your current girlfriend for one whose chest meets your requirements; women, turn in your current boyfriend for one who loves breasts like yours." Wanna partner up when our ships come in? . . .
I assume there are some women whose breasts grow to an uncomfortably large size, or whose life plans (as in the case of an athlete or ballerina) might have to change entirely due to large breasts. So, in such cases, I can see a realistic, practical motive for breast reduction that goes beyond appearance to the actual work one demands of one's body. Not only don't I get breast enlargement, but I confess myself even further perplexed by women who get implants not because their lovers or spouses want them to do so, but in anticipation of the desires of men they haven't even met yet. Seems like an announcement of their intention to attract obsessive men who, really, really, really care a lot about big breasts above all else.
What am I missing here? I know of no evidence to suggest that men fixated on big breasts make better lovers or husbands, better providers, better fathers; are better hung, taller, richer, more educated, more employable; represent a higher-quality gene pool; or, as a cohort, statistically manifest any particularly attractive quality significantly more frequently than men who like medium-sized tits, or small ones, or all of 'em across the board. What is it about them, then, that calls to women?
Chalk up another one on the Stuff I'll Never Understand About Women scoreboard.
|
