in Funny

Breastypes! What’s Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

4.7k Views 11 Comments

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

Front cover of the book

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#2 Breast types! Whats yours?

Breast types! Whats yours?

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#3 Heavy Artillery or Spaniel Ears

Heavy Artillery or Spaniel Ears

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#4 Falsies or Under Chinners

Falsies or Under Chinners

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#5 Smorgasbord or Bee Stings

Smorgasbord or Bee Stings

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#6 Ukuleles Full Moons

Ukuleles Full Moons

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#7 Hot water bottles or Sweet Potatoes

Hot water bottles or Sweet Potatoes

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#8 Water wings or High Buttons

Water wings or High Buttons

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#9 Sunnyside up or Cranberries

Sunnyside up or Cranberries

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#10 Pumpernickel or Cup cakes

Pumpernickel or Cup cakes

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#11 Rock in Sock or 120 Watts (60 each)

Rock in Sock or 120 Watts (60 each)

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One Comment

View More Comments

#12 Rock in Sock or 120 Watts (60 each)

Rock in Sock or 120 Watts (60 each)

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#13 Back cover of the book

Back cover of the book

Leave a Reply

Breastypes! What's Yours? A Ridiculous 1940’s Pocket Comic Book that Labeled Different Shapes and Sizes of Woman’s Breast

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Avatar of Orla Morris

Written by Orla Morris

Full-time dress and costume designer, Half Persian half Italian. I still don’t know how to write, but i'm writing and you are reading :)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

11 Comments

    • 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.

      0
      Reply

      • 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.

        0
        Reply

        • 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.

          0
          Reply

Load more comments