I can't help you on the attraction front - I can tell you that if you are performing AI you need to screw the inseminator in in an anticlockwise direction - the sow gets most irate if you try to go the wrong way
It's certainly a northerly city, but there are nice days in the summer when shorts and sandals can happen.
Berlin, which is of course full of domez, cuz domes are liek, the pinnacal of aesthetics n architecture. Like, NYC too, that's called the big apple cos all the buildings are like... apples with gentul curves.
At the heart of any good satire - such as the one you posted to start this thread - there is a core of truth worthy of discussion, else why bother with the time and wit needed to create that humorous paragraph?
"She stretched, her hands lifting with her arms, then sat up, her head lifting with her torso." No, right? The same with the breasts. Again, women don't have a constant awareness of "Woo! I still have breasts!" any more than "Woo! I still have a head!" If she's breastfeeding and moving causes a particular painful sensation, she might notice them, just as she might notice her head if she has a sinus headache that's made painful by movement. But normally, a woman's sensations and thoughts are not breast-centric.
lol, I personally don't get what is wrong with it. Not saying I love it, but the entire page except for your post(from my skim) seemed to be mocking it. I don't get why.
Yes but the breasts are the subject of the previous sentence (and they are presumably plot or character important) so she wakes to the warm sun slanting through the blinds and caressing her breasts then changes position moving them out of the suns gentle warming glow .. or whatever. Its inherently no different to a scene in my wip where an MC wakes up with a knife scar on his face throbbing with cold (he's sleeping on the ground) as he sits up the throbbing diminishes As I said earlier I'm not saying that every female character should be characterised by her boobs/looks/ass whatever, but there isn't anything inherently wrong with mentioning them in one who is I'd draw the line at breasting booblily down the stairs though
Are you under the impression that breasts throb when women are lying down and the throbbing diminishes when they sit up? ETA: What if your character's scar wasn't throbbing? Would he still be thinking about it as he sat up? Probably not, if he'd had it most of his life.
We're not going to reach an understanding here. I'm just going to say one last time that the breast-obsessed nature of that sample makes it pure parody, under pretty much any and all circumstances.
In a nutshell, because it's an obvious break of POV. If it weren't about bewbs, if these Intriguing Orbs of Delight weren't the object of the POV break, it would be something that stands out to us, clearly, obviously, like in Melville's Moby Dick, where Melville breaks from the 1st person POV for a paragraph and gives us the inner workings of another character's mind. Everyone knows of this little fudge on the part of Melville. It's a known known. We spot it. But the mesmerizing nature of the bewbs makes some writers blind to what they are doing, thus, parody.
Nope but in my rewrite of the original satire we open with the warmth of the sun carressing her breasts, so would she be that aware of them if it wasnt for the sun ? ... same thing
and i agree - no one in their right mind would write their character breasting boobily down the stairs, its clear satire. What i'm saying is that some mention of a woman's breasts isn't necessarily a bad thing if its germane to the plot or character
And here I come back again. I am a parody of myself. First, the whole thing was parody, not just the boobily part. Second, let's imagine that she's a hand model, making her living by being a beautiful canvas for rings and nail polish. Let's say that she woke up to sunlight on her hands. She STILL wouldn't make a note of the fact that, wow! Look at that! her hands move along with her arms! And her hands are something that she could have a clear view of, so an obsessive description of their appearance would at least not be a blatant POV break. In the case of the breasts, the character is wildly unlikely to be eagerly looking down and sideways to watch the movement of her breasts as she stretches. Sure, the hand model might examine her hands to see if that chapped spot had faded away after last night's application of ExpensiveLotion. But the breast obsession in the sample wasn't about any breast issue or concern. It wasn't about any sensation. It was about a visual admiration of breasts, from an angle that the character was not. It was about "Woman! Therefore, BREEEEEEEEASTS!" Maybe this disagreement is partly a POV issue. If the POV is Mary Ann, then a paragraph that says, "Mary Ann walked away, the back of her crystal-pleated skirt flirting flirtily." is not just silly, it's a POV violation, because Mary Ann can't see her own skirt. Similarly, the character in the sample can't easily do all that breast-obsessed ogling. The writer is going out of his way to emphasize something that the POV character is not only unlikely to be thinking about, but can't even see from the point of view from which it was described.
The heart of the original parody in the OP lies in understanding the bounds of POV and narrative intrusion. In the OP's paragraph, Cassandra, about whom the 3rd person narrator seems to be speaking, is not in fact the object of discussion. She is merely an adjunct, a needed life-support system for the breasts about which the narrator is actually concerned. The parody is made because of the commonality with which female physical attributes are made reference in much writing, outside of any real rational, reasonable reason to mention it. As you read the paragraph Cassandra shrinks away and becomes merely the hinge-point used by The Amazing Breasts to breast themselves boobily down the staircase. Narrative intrusion ensues.
How precisely it is a POV break and how that is negative in this context but possible positive in the other example. If I understood it correctly.
