Breast Gaze Theory

A necklace is like a traffic sign, an arrow that leads your eye and says “go
ahead, look at my tits”. If you’re a man, and you are both heterosexual, there
is a small amount of time allotted whenever you meet to openly look at her
breasts. If you exceed that time limit you are making her uncomfortable and
being “creepy”. But when two women see each other they’re like dogs sniffing-
out everywhere they’ve been (shopping) and everything they’ve done
(relationship status) lately, to the point where they almost stick their heads
up each other’s skirts.

This issue of who can look at a woman’s breasts and who has to make eye-
contact every moment is a fundamental cultural crossroad, where all the issues
that confront 21st century civilization are consolidated and compressed into
into one viewpoint angle being less than 45 degrees, if you posit the man is
standing on the left and the woman on the right, facing each other, and the
man’s height being equal-to or greater-than the woman’s height.

Let’s say xt is the time limit. △D is the distance between the two. △H is the
difference in height and △C is the distance from her eyes to her breasts – all
constantly changing as people move about, one stands while the other sits,

xt increases with △D. The further away the man and woman are the more freedom
he has to look at her breasts – especially if he is wearing sunglasses or a
cap with a bill. The rate at which xt increases and decreases with distance is
modified by the size of the woman’s breasts: with larger breasts the distance
at which xt starts to decrease is greater. And if jewelry like a necklace, or
exposed cleavage is present xt is unstable as it is more difficult for the
heterosexual male to not expend time on short glances and the always popular
shift-in-your-seat-and-look-down-for-a-second maneuver that is never fooling

xt also gets a bonus as △H increases, i.e. the height of the male increases or
the height of the female decreases from “standard” for whatever reason;
perhaps one is standing on a ladder. If a man’s eyes are level with a woman’s
breasts then there is no valid way to calculate xt. Pretty-much if you limit
yourself to rotating your head around the vertical axis it’s open season, and
any attempt to measure the current value of xt is doomed to failure in this
situation if the woman is not paying attention, say she is examining a book on
a high shelf: if the man is holding the ladder then and the woman is
distracted xt can theoretically become negative.

The best way to analyze the situation is to imagine a triangle composed of a
line from his eyes to her eyes – this is called standard gaze-lock and is the
reference from which almost all elements of breast/gaze theory are derived.
The length of the Line Of Sight or LOS =△D, because it is measured as a line
from the man’s eyes to the woman’s eyes. So this line, M↦F, provides part of
the information we need, and the line from F↦B, with length △C is the second
side of our triangle. And the line from the man’s eyes to the woman’s breasts,
or M↦B, is the third side.

Now there is an ever-varying line, that is described as M↦xF: the point M is
fixed at the man’s eyes, while xF varies as a series along the line F↦B. If xF
drifts down below the chin then we start to burn our current allotment of t.
You gain time as long as xF is above the chin, but the amount of time it takes
to accumulate a useful amount varies with the woman according to her interest
in the man. So xt accumulates while xF is less than the point along F↦B that
is closest to the woman’s chin.

However – all of this is skewed by the presence of jewelry. Women arent just
screwing around when it comes to their jewelry, and it makes-up at least an
equal-sized chunk of her personal fashion statement as her shoes do. If the
woman wears a particularly large necklace, say shaped like an upside-down
triangle and ranged across her upper chest and sternum below the collar bone,
all calculations involving xt get a random modifier that is expressed as a
positive percentage gain. This value pMod is determined by some sort of
socio-psycho-bio-egoism that cannot be quantified with accuracy – it’s like
the Heisenberg deal where if you want to know how big it is you can’t know how
fast it’s moving, or whatever. Anyway, I just use three 10-sided die to get
the three digits of the modifier because that’s as good as anything else.

These measurements are not confined to the necklace. Things in women’s ears
are also a marker for the gaze, but staring at them is only embarrassing if you
do it in a constant, obsessive way I have discovered. If another heterosexual
woman obsessively stares at your expensive earrings she’s probably thinking
about stealing them. Some staring people may be concerned for the state of the
earlobes, especially if the earrings are large. Or they might be imagining the
damage that crazy staring bitch might do if she makes a grab for them.

Other piercings, of the eye-ear-nose-and-lip variety, affect all other gaze
calculations, especially for breast gaze and ass gaze. The more tattoos and
piercings the woman has the more xt “points” are gained over time, perhaps so
many in so short a time that xt, the time a man has to look at a woman’s
breasts, can become essentially infinite even when line M↦F is very short.

And of course the relative social classes, economic classes, or if one of the
two is a prostitute will really skew xt calculation. If the woman stacks-up
class and/or authority points xt can be very, very short in duration and long
on replenishment. If the man is the class master then xt might just be

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES should you treat pMod as a multiplier or a divisor! Any
result would not only be nonsense but you run the risk of depleting your
available replenishing xt to the point where you may never get to look at a
woman’s breasts again, no matter who is paying the bills. Also do not assume
you are free to simply stare at a lesbians breasts – just because you both
know you’re never going there doesn’t mean staring is any less difficult to
calculate. As always sexual orientation doesn’t really enter into things – you
might be a gay man mentally criticizing a woman’s choice of top and shoes. If
you are please obey the laws of gazing just like the rest of us try to –
there’s only so much universal xt out there at any given point in time, and we
don’t want to waste it. Or you might be a gay woman who doesn’t give a rat’s
ass what pathetic heterosexual behavior you engage in as long as you don’t
stand in her way and as long as she gets paid the same amount as a man in the
same job. Your hormonal reactions are mostly just ludicrous. Look all you want
dumb ass. You can see how the variables modifying xt can swing radically just
with a turn of the head while standing in line at a check stand.

Because the time intervals xt represents are generally quite small, measured
in tenths or even hundredths of a second. Straight men are conditioned by
thousands of years of evolution and behavioral conditioning to scan the area
about them and in such fractions of a second assess the relative breast-to-
waist-to-hip ratios of all the females within view, sort them according to
various criteria, and store them for later review. And it seems every man has
a different idea of what these ratios should be and how they should
interrelate. Hey you’ve seen couples at Wal-Mart – you explain it.