But if you had a baby and were stranded on a deserted island, your baby would have a lower chance of surviving than if its mother had large breasts. This is a FACT OF NATURE and has absolutely nothing to do with your taste in women, so please don’t take offence.
Still opinionable but even if it really worked that way it just doesn't make any sense any way because bigger breasts have nothing to do with more milk. The size of the mammary gland is just not linked in any way to the size of the breast. And the amount of breast tissue has absolutely nothing even remotely to do with how much milk a baby drinks. In fact breasts are not containers that empty and refill. Milk is continuously uninterruptedly secreted so that whatever child would get the right amount of milk at whatever time and from whatever woman (except if they have milk depletion conditions, that have nothing to do with the size of their breast)
Women with bigger breasts are in no way an advantage for the child, they're exactly the same as women with small breasts. The child gets the same exact amount of milk from the 10-15 minutes of suction. So much for the fact of life. Almost every fact of life we believe to understand is a myth, a just so-story even professionals love to use for their own biased and dogmatic reasons and which are impossible to prove.
I repeat it, evolutionary psychology and sociobiology are unscientific nonsense for people who love to be always right (cause if they use the premises of sociobiology they will always be right according to those premises, no matter what they say or even if they contradict each other) and there are billions of things (especially in relationships and sexuality) that have absolutely nothing to do with genes or with evolutionary advantages but just with our free-will.
Micro-evolution is just a silent mean and it can't be used to prove everything that exists in our life and why we make certain choices. In fact genetic studies have always failed against environmental studies in proving that genes are more determinant than evironment and culture (and about this topic I suggest the books from the genetist Lewontin "Not in your genes" and "The Triple Helix") It's especially ridicolous to believe our behavior are controlled by genes since not only it has never been proven (just speculated) that there might be genes for each of our behaviors but also the genome project have disappointed all the researchers who believed we must have been made of millions of genes while we have as many genes as corn and not enough to account for not even 1/16 of our human characteristics. There's no genetic programmation in our actions, what we do depends on how we freely choose to interact with the environment.
Love is way more than procreation and in fact even as far as sex is concerned in many other animals who are not humans, often sex serves no procreative function, just sharing pleasure, having fun and intimacy. It's ridiculous to believe that sexual attraction is just governed by genes (not even genetists believe this nonsense, except the idiots writing on science pop-science magazines) and is just a cute fairy tale impossible to prove but easy to bomb with counterevidences (a favorite of schools, as it makes the task of preventing "thinking for yourself" and "analyzing and balancing the evidences" so much easier)
Evolution and genes are just means; like the piano is a mean not the one producing the musical ideas, just allowing them to be expressed. Bigger boobs have nothing to do with evolution and if nothing they are the product of a modernized nutrition that spikes the levels of IGF-1. The faster growth correlated with bigger breasts, powerful growth spurts and high IGF-1 level is also strictly linked to cancer, especially breast cancer and osteoporosis and diabetes.
And there's no gay gene, we're all perverted polyforms and a plethora of societies were, discriminating between pleasure and relationships with same or opposite sex and procreation with a mate. It's just our cultural heritage that disciplines us according to the social construction of sexuality and morality accepted by that culture (each culture has a different constructed idea of sexuality having nothing in common with the other cultures , and that's because sexuality and so-called "sexual identities" are cultural epistemes not facts of life)
Topic: What is the evolutionary purpose of attraction to large breasts?