Ok, I've been away from Poser for a year now and I'd forgotten how most of the "ready made" women are designed to be Amazons. I guess this is due to the prevelance of teen boys (real teens or "as if" a teen) in this market? ;-) 

Anyway, I'm wondering what the frequency distribution of breast sizes in the real world would be? I know this varies between ethnicities, ages, conditioning/fitness, etc., but what are the most common sizes?  An artist (who is gay and doesn't stare at breast much) wants to know.

Thanks!  

(I assume this is not in need of a content advisory, but I'll mark it anyway until I learn if that's correct!)

I think I read somewhere that 36-C is the most common cup size for bras. As for a distribution - I don't know. Maybe if you could get access to some sales data from a retail chain or a ladies underwear manufacturer. This is probably not something you can just google (although I haven't tried, so why not give it a whirl?)

I tried to google it a bit, but came up with mostly cancer related sites. I need to work on my google kung fu.

I am sure, there is no average!!!!!

If you ask women, they for sure state their own breasts are either too small or too big, teh nips are to small or too big, ....

I am pretty sure I met may be one or two women that stated they were satisfied with the size of their breasts but I am sure, they didn't tell the truth ;)

BTW I'm above 50 :D

I'm talking about objective measures.

A large number, perhaps even most, of the temple vickies around here are made by the women in this community - it's a bit presumptuous to presume this is all some male driven conspiracy.

You know what's really funny? 'Amazon' is Greek for 1 breast..supposedly they 'removed' the other one to be better archers (but then Herotodus was the 'original' father of lies..;) Tried doing one once, just on general principles..but couldn't separate the two..;)

Quote - A large number, perhaps even most, of the temple vickies around here are made by the women in this community - it's a bit presumptuous to presume this is all some male driven conspiracy.

I didn't presume that. What are you presuming?

"I'm wondering what the frequency distribution of breast sizes in the real world would be?"

A Poser forum would be an unlikely source for an answer to that question.  Try google.

Googling on "bra size average" presents this from sexualrecords.com: Average Bust Size The average bust line for American women is 35.9 inches (91.2 cm). The typical bra size is 34B, with the proportions of women's cup sizes breaks down to the following: A-15%, B-44%, C-28%, D-10%, while the remaining 3% are AA, AAA, DD and beyond. Interestingly, manufacturers of women's clothing agree that the average American woman's bust size has expanded in recent decades, if only by fractions of an inch, due to improved diet and birth control pills. So the typical Poser female will undoubtedly be within that 3% containing the DD+ sizing. =)

Quote - > Quote - A large number, perhaps even most, of the temple vickies around here are made by the women in this community - it's a bit presumptuous to presume this is all some male driven conspiracy.

I didn't presume that. What are you presuming?

I am presuming that the following sexist quote is from you: > Quote - I guess this is due to the prevelance of teen boys (real teens or "as if" a teen) in this market? ;-)

It's not sexiest; get off your soap box before you get splinters. :-)

Thanks, Bushi. My googling only turned up medical sites, and worse...  Should have know clothing manufacturers were the place to turn to.  

if an old theory of neuropsychiatry is correct, then both males and females may feel compelled to depict giant breasts in the gallery here. whilst the reason for this can't be discussed here, I don't actually have any figures on what percentage of the giant-boobed images are posted by teenage boys. :lol: at least somebody answered the original question of breast size distribution. although I haven't the foggiest why such information is needed here, it's further evidence to support an old theory of neuropsychiatry :lol:

Why can't you mention the "old theory of neuropsychiatry?" Are you referring to Freud's obsessions or something else? Enquiting minds want to know. ;-)

There is some huge project in the US funded by a collective of big retailers to re-conceive sizing for clothes... they are doing regional/ethnic surveys as well as national. You could try looking for them and seeing if that leads to anything. Don't know the name of it. Might have been covered by National Public Radio?

In a well known London lingerie shop, the woman who does all the fitting says that the average UK breast size is 36D or E... Must be all the hormones in the water!!

Also bare in mind that a great number of woman are wearing the wrong size bra, usually too small. So most woman do not know their actual bra size unless they have been properly measured.

Attached Link: http://www.fashion-incubator.com/mt/

It's not sexiest; get off your soap box before you get splinters.

It sounded sexist to me, too.  Probably because the seemingly prevalent theory around here is that all or most men are obsessed with large-breasted women and that somehow that is a bad thing.

Personally, I don’t think the theory is true—obsession is a strong word. But for a male to be attracted to a woman’s breasts is quite normal. It stems from all animals’ basic instinct to reproduce. For human males, strong, healthy breasts on a woman signal a good candidate for nurturing children. For females, strong, healthy buttocks on a male signal the ability to thrust hard & long, thereby improving the chances of fertilization.

Of course this is all subconscious and is just nature at work. Hence, it is a good thing. After all, if it weren’t for nature, none of us would be here now, would we?

"For human males, strong, healthy breasts on a woman signal a good candidate for nurturing children. For females, strong, healthy buttocks on a male signal the ability to thrust hard & long, thereby improving the chances of fertilization."
That might be true, but it's also believed that it denoted to the woman that the said male would be a good provider; one who was a swift and fleet footed runner, and could chase after the prey.  Besides being fertile, women looked for mates who could bring home the venison.  Don't forget that with humans, it takes at least ten years before a child reaches a modicum of maturity.  That's a lot of time and effort, and historically usually required two parents to be successful.

bob, there are many things that can't be discussed here properly omne ignotum pro malefico est :lol:

wanders even further off topic  every other mammal on the planet seems to manage perfectly well without breasts

Quote - wanders even further off topic  every other mammal on the planet seems to manage perfectly well without breasts

Not true.  All the higher primates have breast, just not as developed as in humans.  But then, the genus Homo is the only one whose offspring take up to 12 months to even become ambulatory.  Under such conditions, close knit family groups, including the continued involvement of the male sexual partner are necessary.  Therefore, breast serve not only as a source of nourishment for the offspring, but also as a source of pleasure  and COMFORT for the spouse. 
The intrepid hunter, after a day of battling saber-tooth tigers, and slaughtering bison, sought not only gratification, but comfort in the BOSOM of his family.
As for the lower mammals having breast, what do you think the teats on a cow are?   Or what are those strange inflamations on a bitch's belly (canine) after she's whelped a litter of puppies?  The only thing unusual about the human female's mammarys, is their placement high on the chest (but then OUR offspring can't suckle on their own, they need to be held in the arms), and that  women have so FEW of them.  Other than that, everything's the same, and ebverything's normal, and Blessed be G-d that it is so!
David P. Hoadley

Quote - every other mammal on the planet seems to manage perfectly well without breasts

:lol: They have more nipples instead.

"I guess this is due to the prevelance of teen boys (real teens or "as if" a teen) in this market?"

There was a poll a year ago, maybe 2 that revealed most users here are between 35 and 55 (as I recall).

Personally, I like the theory that bouyant breasts evolved when proto-humans spent a period of time as semi-aquatic animals, sometime after coming down out of the trees. (Which also explains why we are hairless.) The theory posits that once the trees were left behind, the best way to escape from the mostly-feline predators was to jump in the water. I suppose large breasts would have been needed to hold the baby's head above water while the mother floated on her back.

Note that I don't believe this theory for a minute, but I do like it! :biggrin:

Incidentally, elephants also have breasts on the upper part of their torsos, between their forelegs. They are also large, long-lived mammals that tend to have small litters (1-2 offspring) and have a long maturation and getsation period. Also, contrary to popular belief, many of them are actually Democrats.

:bored:

now that's something that could be checked; the specific gravity..;)

As for what men obsess about, wasn't there a 'kink' post recently?..;) (women too..;)

Quote - "I guess this is due to the prevelance of teen boys (real teens or "as if" a teen) in this market?"

There was a poll a year ago, maybe 2 that revealed most users here are between 35 and 55 (as I recall).

that represents the people who responded to the poll.

i doubt many teens who come here to post pictures of and look at pictures of big boobs will be responding to polls.... unless you put pictures of big boobs in the polls.

Man this thread has gone nutty :-)  Thanks to the people that provided factual information. To the folks that wondered why I asked: it isn't any different then asking about proportion or eyes or other aspects of "drawing" realistic figures. To the people that think this is all about evolution: you can make "evolution explains it" into almost any argument since it isn't not checkable; as the bouyancy poster showed ;-)