Thread Closed
(11-20-2014, 03:30 AM)LiadansWhisper Wrote:(11-15-2014, 04:36 PM)Mae Wrote: I brought up Garuda because of an earlier statement of "If that were the case, female characters wouldn't have breasts at all.  Breasts exist solely for the purpose of producing milk for babies" that was echo'd a few times. We're a species that's hard-wired to equal breasts with femininity, regardless if something is a mammal or not.  I know Garuda's an asexual being, I was trying to point out the flawed logic of "breasts = mammal" in a fantasy setting, not trying to insinuate that Garuda -was- a mammal.
If Devs weren't appealing to our human-mammalian sensibilities first, Garuda's appearance would have been designed to be appealing to her Beastmen and that likely would've resulted in something MUCH more Ixal-like.
I think that trying to equate what are essentially living gods (more or less) to the mortals that populate the world is a bit off. Â Primals exist outside of the evolutionary question of why someone would have breasts because, well, they're not mortal and they don't - so far as we know - evolve (being coalesced aether and whatnot).
But when you combine the presence of both breasts and belly buttons, as well as the fact that we're never - not once - given any reason to believe that Hyur are anything more than Eorzea's version of "Human" (and since, according to the devs, all the other playable races are also the same species as the Hyur, making them all essentially "Eorzea's version of Human," too), there's no reason whatsoever to believe that Hyur would have breasts for any reason other than because they have mammary glands.
Which makes them mammals.
(11-15-2014, 04:49 PM)Ilwe Wrote:(11-15-2014, 04:36 PM)Mae Wrote: I brought up Garuda because of an earlier statement of "If that were the case, female characters wouldn't have breasts at all.  Breasts exist solely for the purpose of producing milk for babies" that was echo'd a few times. We're a species that's hard-wired to equal breasts with femininity, regardless if something is a mammal or not.  I know Garuda's an asexual being, I was trying to point out the flawed logic of "breasts = mammal" in a fantasy setting, not trying to insinuate that Garuda -was- a mammal.
And what about whales ? They are mammals and don't have breasts.. Unless..
WTF happened to the brain of those people ._. ???
Whales do not have breasts as we know them (though you could argue that neither do cows, dogs, or many other mammal species), but they do  have mammary glands, and they do nurse their young.
![[Image: 4679766-3x2-940x627.jpg]](http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/4679766-3x2-940x627.jpg)
Was joking, hence my message after which is right before yours
![[Image: Ilweransig_zps9ea63f49.png~original]](http://i1293.photobucket.com/albums/b581/Ylthin/Sprites/Topic/Ilweransig_zps9ea63f49.png~original)