a bit chauvanistic I know
2006-10-05 12:31:21 · 33 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
I doubt it, but if they did grow on women's backs they would be great to dance with.
2006-10-05 13:02:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wishful thinking...
Actually there is a line between the nipples and the groin where 'extra' breasts occur. Men also get extra nipples here. So I think the next step would be for a few breasts along that line. However If you compare humans to cats and cows, women are in the process of reducing the number of breasts they have.
Breasts all over would have evolutionary disadvantages and would probably never occur.
2006-10-05 12:36:14 · answer #2 · answered by Simon K 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hmm-m... Interesting question.
I don't think that will happen.
Evolution seems to work best when it solves a situation that prevented the prospering of a species, or when unused things became unnecessary.
Since the human race has moved from large families to small numbers of offspring, the number of breasts required to feed the offspring has lessened, rather than increased. As a result I would imagine that women will evolve into single breasted creatures with the breast located more centraly on their chest.
2006-10-05 12:39:38 · answer #3 · answered by zahbudar 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Probably not - creatures evolve to adapt to their surroundings in order to survive or make life easier. So unless humans begin to breed in litters and start giving birth to dectuplets (10 babies at a time) then no. If anything, the number of breasts will reduce to one as a lot of the time, people only have one child at a time.
2006-10-05 12:44:20 · answer #4 · answered by Rich 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably not. There was an ancient (Greek ?) statue made that way , which was supposed to represent bounteous good fortune (well, more fun than a cornucopia); but it doesn't look appealing, if you get my drift, on an everyday basis.
If you look at posters and cartoons, though, three seems a real possibility. I remember a "Mona Lisa" from National Lampoon that really seemed interesting. I think MAD magazine did this once also. ((You might want to be ambidextrous, and clever with your tongue too))
2006-10-05 12:46:03 · answer #5 · answered by fata minerva 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, women are taking control. Men will develop breasts and give birth and become the main providers of care. Now wouldn't that be interesting.
2006-10-05 12:44:45 · answer #6 · answered by Wendy M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why? Evolution dictated that women have two breasts, and that's how it'll stay unless women no longer breast feed...in which case, we'd evolve eventually into not having any.
Although men don't breast-feed yet still have nipples... :D
2006-10-05 12:42:05 · answer #7 · answered by IceDragon 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
CERTAINLY NOT. What would be the point of trying to feed the baby other than from the natural position. Don't be a chauvinistic 'sucker' - breasts are there for babes!
2006-10-05 12:45:23 · answer #8 · answered by Whistler R 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ummm..maybe if they start having a thousand kids and the body evolves to keep up with the feeding of the babies...
2006-10-05 12:39:34 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Come on, thing of something else.. it's not gonna be possible, unless some nerd like you tries to genetically modify females and tries to do such a stupid thing.
2006-10-05 12:39:54 · answer #10 · answered by Tech_Geek 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they evolve to have a litter of children maybe!
Dirty b
2006-10-05 12:40:32 · answer #11 · answered by Purple 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋