Free market?

[Dr. Medulla]

No, I'm admitting that my own bias is towards a generic eye. It helps that eyes, other than to a specialist, don't come in as many shapes and sizes as boobs. I'm not a specialist, so there you go.

The more restricted variations among eyes (to a layman) does not improve your argument. Are boobs so multifarious to the layman that there is no common prototype?

We all know what breasts look like—the location and features (i.e., a nipple), that is. But is the default a young pert breast? How big can it be? How small? How much jiggling? Is the default Marilyn Monroe's boob or an average eighteen year old girl's? There are a fuck of a lot more variations to a boob than there is to an eye, and what you default to in your brain might not be the same as mine. Beyond iris colour, what other distinctions are there to an eyeball? I find the eye analogy less than apt because there's less variety (to the non-specialist).

[eumaas]

No, I'm admitting that my own bias is towards a generic eye. It helps that eyes, other than to a specialist, don't come in as many shapes and sizes as boobs. I'm not a specialist, so there you go.

The more restricted variations among eyes (to a layman) does not improve your argument. Are boobs so multifarious to the layman that there is no common prototype?

We all know what breasts look like—the location and features (i.e., a nipple), that is. But is the default a young pert breast? How big can it be? How small? How much jiggling? Is the default Marilyn Monroe's boob or an average eighteen year old girl's? There are a fuck of a lot more variations to a boob than there is to an eye, and what you default to in your brain might not be the same as mine. Beyond iris colour, what other distinctions are there to an eyeball? I find the eye analogy less than apt because there's less variety (to the non-specialist).

Backpedaling. You originally included saggy old tits as part of the prototype. Now you're talking about a restricted range.

[Dr. Medulla]

No, I'm admitting that my own bias is towards a generic eye. It helps that eyes, other than to a specialist, don't come in as many shapes and sizes as boobs. I'm not a specialist, so there you go.

The more restricted variations among eyes (to a layman) does not improve your argument. Are boobs so multifarious to the layman that there is no common prototype?

We all know what breasts look like—the location and features (i.e., a nipple), that is. But is the default a young pert breast? How big can it be? How small? How much jiggling? Is the default Marilyn Monroe's boob or an average eighteen year old girl's? There are a fuck of a lot more variations to a boob than there is to an eye, and what you default to in your brain might not be the same as mine. Beyond iris colour, what other distinctions are there to an eyeball? I find the eye analogy less than apt because there's less variety (to the non-specialist).

Backpedaling. You originally included saggy old tits as part of the prototype. Now you're talking about a restricted range.

Huh? I said previously that saggy old tits are what some people might think of when you say "boob." I didn't mean for MM or the 18 year old to be the full range of possibilities, just a couple examples. I'd be typing forever if you wanted me to give you an extensive list.

[eumaas]

No, I'm admitting that my own bias is towards a generic eye. It helps that eyes, other than to a specialist, don't come in as many shapes and sizes as boobs. I'm not a specialist, so there you go.

The more restricted variations among eyes (to a layman) does not improve your argument. Are boobs so multifarious to the layman that there is no common prototype?

We all know what breasts look like—the location and features (i.e., a nipple), that is. But is the default a young pert breast? How big can it be? How small? How much jiggling? Is the default Marilyn Monroe's boob or an average eighteen year old girl's? There are a fuck of a lot more variations to a boob than there is to an eye, and what you default to in your brain might not be the same as mine. Beyond iris colour, what other distinctions are there to an eyeball? I find the eye analogy less than apt because there's less variety (to the non-specialist).

Backpedaling. You originally included saggy old tits as part of the prototype. Now you're talking about a restricted range.

Huh? I said previously that saggy old tits are what some people might think of when you say "boob." I didn't mean for MM or the 18 year old to be the full range of possibilities, just a couple examples. I'd be typing forever if you wanted me to give you an extensive list.

That's the point. It's a restricted range for the common prototype. It's highly unlikely anyone would be thinking of tits outside of what is commonly attractive. It just doesn't happen. If I say "cute girl," it's more likely we'll think of something similar than dissimilar.

[Dr. Medulla]

The more restricted variations among eyes (to a layman) does not improve your argument. Are boobs so multifarious to the layman that there is no common prototype?

We all know what breasts look like—the location and features (i.e., a nipple), that is. But is the default a young pert breast? How big can it be? How small? How much jiggling? Is the default Marilyn Monroe's boob or an average eighteen year old girl's? There are a fuck of a lot more variations to a boob than there is to an eye, and what you default to in your brain might not be the same as mine. Beyond iris colour, what other distinctions are there to an eyeball? I find the eye analogy less than apt because there's less variety (to the non-specialist).

Backpedaling. You originally included saggy old tits as part of the prototype. Now you're talking about a restricted range.

Huh? I said previously that saggy old tits are what some people might think of when you say "boob." I didn't mean for MM or the 18 year old to be the full range of possibilities, just a couple examples. I'd be typing forever if you wanted me to give you an extensive list.

That's the point. It's a restricted range for the common prototype. It's highly unlikely anyone would be thinking of tits outside of what is commonly attractive. It just doesn't happen. If I say "cute girl," it's more likely we'll think of something similar than dissimilar.

On a topic like sexuality, I disagree. You say cute girl to Hoy, for example, and there's no way a redhead will pop in his head. To a racist, it'll be restricted to someone of his own race. So that's a chunk cut out right away. Does a cute girl have modest breasts or large ones? Does cute preclude one or the other? Is she necessarily slim or can she have some belly fat? Is a cute girl necessarily tall or short? I really disagree that you can restrict the range so much. If the Internet has demonstrated anything, it's that wide variety in sexuality is the norm, not something more restrictive. Presuming that there is a narrow band for such qualities is erroneous.

[eumaas]

Fine. Be Canadian. I'd rather hang with linguists anyways.

Also: get a job, faggot!

[Dr. Medulla]

Fine. Be Canadian. I'd rather hang with linguists anyways.

Also: get a job, faggot!

Curious what you regard as a Canadian prototype …

[eumaas]

Fine. Be Canadian. I'd rather hang with linguists anyways.

Also: get a job, faggot!

Curious what you regard as a Canadian prototype …

Pedantic epileptics in Saskatchewan.

[Dr. Medulla]

Fine. Be Canadian. I'd rather hang with linguists anyways.

Also: get a job, faggot!

Curious what you regard as a Canadian prototype …

Pedantic epileptics in Saskatchewan.

Pedantic?! Says the guy who takes exception to lay definitions of corporatism …

[eumaas]

Fine. Be Canadian. I'd rather hang with linguists anyways.

Also: get a job, faggot!

Curious what you regard as a Canadian prototype …

Pedantic epileptics in Saskatchewan.

Pedantic?! Says the guy who takes exception to lay definitions of corporatism …

Lakoff called. He's gonna kick you in the balls.

[Dr. Medulla]

Fine. Be Canadian. I'd rather hang with linguists anyways.

Also: get a job, faggot!

Curious what you regard as a Canadian prototype …

Pedantic epileptics in Saskatchewan.

Pedantic?! Says the guy who takes exception to lay definitions of corporatism …

Lakoff called. He's gonna kick you in the balls.

Just not in the boobs.

[eumaas]

Curious what you regard as a Canadian prototype …

Pedantic epileptics in Saskatchewan.

Pedantic?! Says the guy who takes exception to lay definitions of corporatism …

Lakoff called. He's gonna kick you in the balls.

Just not in the boobs.

Whatever you say, Mr. No Such Thing As Prototypes.

[dpwolf]

tits to an IMN radio listener:

[Dr. Medulla]

Pedantic epileptics in Saskatchewan.

Pedantic?! Says the guy who takes exception to lay definitions of corporatism …

Lakoff called. He's gonna kick you in the balls.

Just not in the boobs.

Whatever you say, Mr. No Such Thing As Prototypes.

I'm not being an absolutist. I'm suggesting that on some topics—and in this case sexuality—I'm quite dubious. Take photos of, say, twenty sets of notably different breasts (or butts or cute) and tell a person, which looks most like boobs (butt/cute) to you, I'm doubtful that there'll be a meaningful result.

[eumaas]

Pedantic?! Says the guy who takes exception to lay definitions of corporatism …

Lakoff called. He's gonna kick you in the balls.

Just not in the boobs.

Whatever you say, Mr. No Such Thing As Prototypes.

I'm not being an absolutist. I'm suggesting that on some topics—and in this case sexuality—I'm quite dubious. Take photos of, say, twenty sets of notably different breasts (or butts or cute) and tell a person, which looks most like boobs (butt/cute) to you, I'm doubtful that there'll be a meaningful result.

You're saying it's too subjective?

Explain this, then:
http://discovermagazine.com/2001/nov/featpollock