A flimsy wisp of gossamer Sheltering shapes we hold so dear Behold the truth and shed no tear
These are the facts ’neath the Brassiere…
These ridiculous and sexist photos were taken from a 1940s comic book that labeled different shapes and sizes of women’s breasts. They gave hilarious and offensive names to the breasts according to their shapes and sizes such as Heavy Artillery, Spaniel Ears, full moon, bee stings, and many more. Also taking aim at various female types.
Like it or abhor it, this is a genuine relic of mid-20th century burlesque-like culture, and we suspect in fact that this might have been a souvenir from a sleazy theater showcasing ecdysiastic cheesecake and ribald comedians.
#1 Front cover of the book
#2 Breast types! Whats yours?
#3 Heavy Artillery or Spaniel Ears
#4 Falsies or Under Chinners
#5 Smorgasbord or Bee Stings
#6 Ukuleles Full Moons
#7 Hot water bottles or Sweet Potatoes
#8 Water wings or High Buttons
#9 Sunnyside up or Cranberries
#10 Pumpernickel or Cup cakes
#11 Rock in Sock or 120 Watts (60 each)
#12 Rock in Sock or 120 Watts (60 each)
#13 Back cover of the book
The man who drew these has never seen natural naked breasts.
The drawing choices are pretty interesting (OK, I’m a straight male, so perhaps the subject matter adds some appeal, but…): This is packaged as descriptive communication, but at every turn, it screams “prescriptive.”. The overly stylized, sometimes exaggerated breasts may contribute to this. An individual who reflects their worldview while shaping others’ as well.
Even insofar as the joke was concerned, they aren’t accurate exaggerations/caricatures of existing shapes so much as someone who has only seen clothed breasts shaped differently by undergarments would imagine they would look naked. In this comic, many of the breasts have the bullet-bra shape, which was popular in fashion at the time, and bullet-bra was popular partly because natural breasts don’t have that shape.
It’s funny to see a caricature of someone if you know who it’s supposed to be. Likewise, these would be much more comical if they were based on “real” breast shapes instead of what the artist imagines naked boobs to look like.
We’re probably talking about the same thing, you mention that you think this is prescriptive or what the artist would like to see, and I agree.
I believe I understand your meaning, and I agree with you. I stand by my comment. It seems that men (especially in Western Europe and the United States during the Victorian and postwar eras) were more invested in idealized representations of women than is the case today. That part of that was the unrealistic representation of their bodies. Your comment that these look like breasts shaped like undergarments seems spot on.
I read the title of the book like it was a Greek name. Like “Breast-i-pees”
To illustrate which kinds of breasts you should think are attractive and not, the artist used heavy-handed “ugly” and “pretty” stereotype shortcuts. I guess that’s how culture works.
Lol okay beta cuck
This is so weird, and yet highly entertaining.
Wow this is weird all boobs are the best boobs.
1940s* You may be thinking of the apostrophe in ’40s