In which a group of graying eternal amateurs discuss their passions, interests and obsessions, among them: movies, art, politics, evolutionary biology, taxes, writing, computers, these kids these days, and lousy educations.

E-Mail Donald
Demographer, recovering sociologist, and arts buff

E-Mail Fenster
College administrator and arts buff

E-Mail Francis
Architectural historian and arts buff

E-Mail Friedrich
Entrepreneur and arts buff
E-Mail Michael
Media flunky and arts buff


We assume it's OK to quote emailers by name.







Try Advanced Search


  1. Seattle Squeeze: New Urban Living
  2. Checking In
  3. Ben Aronson's Representational Abstractions
  4. Rock is ... Forever?
  5. We Need the Arts: A Sob Story
  6. Form Following (Commercial) Function
  7. Two Humorous Items from the Financial Crisis
  8. Ken Auster of the Kute Kaptions
  9. What Might Representational Painters Paint?
  10. In The Times ...


CultureBlogs
Sasha Castel
AC Douglas
Out of Lascaux
The Ambler
PhilosoBlog
Modern Art Notes
Cranky Professor
Mike Snider on Poetry
Silliman on Poetry
Felix Salmon
Gregdotorg
BookSlut
Polly Frost
Polly and Ray's Forum
Cronaca
Plep
Stumbling Tongue
Brian's Culture Blog
Banana Oil
Scourge of Modernism
Visible Darkness
Seablogger
Thomas Hobbs
Blog Lodge
Leibman Theory
Goliard Dream
Third Level Digression
Here Inside
My Stupid Dog
W.J. Duquette


Politics, Education, and Economics Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
The Corner at National Review
Steve Sailer
Samizdata
Junius
Joanne Jacobs
CalPundit
Natalie Solent
A Libertarian Parent in the Countryside
Rational Parenting
Public Interest.co.uk
Colby Cosh
View from the Right
Pejman Pundit
Spleenville
God of the Machine
One Good Turn
CinderellaBloggerfella
Liberty Log
Daily Pundit
InstaPundit
MindFloss
Catallaxy Files
Greatest Jeneration
Glenn Frazier
Jane Galt
Jim Miller
Limbic Nutrition
Innocents Abroad
Chicago Boyz
James Lileks
Cybrarian at Large
Hello Bloggy!
Setting the World to Rights
Travelling Shoes


Miscellaneous
Redwood Dragon
IMAO
The Invisible Hand
ScrappleFace
Daze Reader
Lynn Sislo
The Fat Guy
Jon Walz

Links


Our Last 50 Referrers







« On Design Constraints | Main | More on Constraints »

October 22, 2008

Fact for the Day

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

In 1991, the average bra size in the U.S. was 34B. Today, it's 36C.

My source for this fact is an episode of the History Channel's great "Modern Marvels" series that was devoted to underwear. A fun and informative episode in many ways, though its failure to so much as mention thongs and g-strings struck me as a serious oversight.

Best,

Michael

posted by Michael at October 22, 2008




Comments

Peter will be relieved though. He must hate thongs and g-strings with a passion, since their advent has coincided with the steady advance of the shaved ahem-ahem. I doubt he could make himself watch an episode that featured g-strings.

Posted by: PatrickH on October 22, 2008 10:38 PM



Got any information on the trend in bubble butts? Let us know if you run across anything.

Posted by: Charlton Griffin on October 22, 2008 10:49 PM



What is the trend for weight?

Posted by: Geek on October 23, 2008 1:52 AM



In 1991, the average bra size in the U.S. was 34B. Today, it's 36C.

And we thought Reagan had conquered inflation!

Posted by: Reg Cæsar on October 23, 2008 1:53 AM



Peter will be relieved though. He must hate thongs and g-strings with a passion, since their advent has coincided with the steady advance of the shaved ahem-ahem. I doubt he could make himself watch an episode that featured g-strings.

You don't know how 100% correct you are. I'm really, really hoping that fashion (so to speak) changes, and women will return to embracing their natural style, but sadly it's probably not going to happen :((

Posted by: Peter on October 23, 2008 9:33 AM



This increase in boob size is not entirely gratifying.

Has anybody else noticed that this is the result of the growth of a wad of fat on the top of the boob that pops over the top of the bra? Ever notice how many girls are walking around with that roll of lumpy fat just above their bra?

Yes, I know that boobs are mostly fat. The addition of this spare tire on the top of the boob is not appetizing.

Like fake boobs, the fat boob is a step backward. This is devolution.

Posted by: Shouting Thomas on October 23, 2008 10:32 AM



"This increase in boob size is not entirely gratifying."

Speak for yourself doubtin' ;)

Posted by: Ramesh on October 23, 2008 10:57 AM



I agree with ST. I think women , in general, were more attractive in the 80's than they are now. I left the U.S. in '91 and returned in '01. People, especially young women, were noticeably "bigger" when I returned than when I left.

Posted by: kurt9 on October 23, 2008 11:43 AM



Sometimes it's like they have three or four levels of boobs. The fat layer above the boobs, the boobs themselves, the roll of fat that squishes out under the bra, and then the spare tire around the belly. Maybe in the future guys will adapt to it, thinking "The more the merrier." Who cares which boob-level you squeeze, it's all bulgey and wobbly, and isn't bulgey and wobbly where the fun is?

Posted by: Michael Blowhard on October 23, 2008 12:56 PM



It's all bulgy and wobbly? Well yes, and so is Bertha the Human Boxcar, crushing the scales at 600 lbs. Lots of rolls of Charmin to squeeze there, huh Mr. Whipple-Blowhard? :-)

But seriously folks! I do find the under-bra roll a tad revolting, though it disappears when the bra does. But a layer of soft tissue doesn't hurt a woman at all, IMO. I'm with "Michael Whipple" on the sex appeal of curvy women.

And an addendum to Peter: you would of course, love g-strings and thongs with a deep and desperate love if shaving the tee-hee wasn't the fashion. More revealing of the GNP, eh?

Posted by: PatrickH on October 23, 2008 1:34 PM



And an addendum to Peter: you would of course, love g-strings and thongs with a deep and desperate love if shaving the tee-hee wasn't the fashion. More revealing of the GNP, eh?

Not necessarily ... some women look good in thongs, but most do not. And g-strings are too stripperish for my tastes.

As for the revealing factor, well, sometimes it's better when a treasure remains hidden from plain sight, only to be revealed in all its magnificent glory after a little exploration.

Posted by: Peter on October 23, 2008 2:12 PM



Garments smaller, women the same. Anyone who actually interacts with women knows this.

Posted by: JV on October 23, 2008 2:15 PM



Boobs are just the first course anyway...if it gets the job done I don't care which layer...

I think women seemed prettier in the 80's because more (types) of women wear presentable clothes now. In the 80's unless you were pretty, you couldn't look pretty, so you stopped trying...

Posted by: Ramesh on October 23, 2008 4:09 PM



I showed this to the missus, and she fired back:

I don't think is so much about women getting bigger, but rather women getting professionally fitted. Most women wear too small of a bra, and are shocked when they find out how large their "correct" size is. I myself was shocked a couple of years ago when I went for a professional fitting.

Posted by: Reg Cæsar on October 23, 2008 11:59 PM



The neatest thing about this little post is how it's, um... supported, on both sides, by Donald's on "design constraints".

Posted by: Reg Cæsar on October 24, 2008 12:05 AM



The underbra roll is quite often (on women who aren't just plain big) caused by a poor fit.

Posted by: CyndiF on October 24, 2008 12:27 PM



Oh, man. This is a great post, Michael. Where's that Agnostic guy who knows all the stats on women??

Does everyone agree that the increase in boob size is the result of hormones in our water supply?

The privilege of reading men's complaints about lumpy boob fat is only exceeded by talking about dick size with my gay hairdresser.

Let's talk more about dick size. Cyndif? Tatyana?

Posted by: Sister Wolf on October 27, 2008 2:09 AM



What, have dick sizes dropped? Man, we need the Brita filters from hell applied to water everywhere to prevent men from being estrogenized into hermaphroditism. This is crisis time, guys. Guys? Guys?

Hey, guys, put down those dolls! And why are you dudes wearing that makeup?

[Hours pass]

Darlings! So which one makes me smell better? Chanel or Oscar de la Renta?

Posted by: PatrickH on October 27, 2008 12:24 PM



Two words: breast implants.

Posted by: Ann on October 27, 2008 2:27 PM






Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:



Remember your info?