A few years ago I read a research study discussing the effects of diet on body shape, if I remember right it was about modern diet but touched on historic times (I might have that reversed) today's diet is much higher in fat (which we don't burn off) and women do in fact have proportionally larger breasts. I believe if you look at older standardized size charts that can be confirmed. Combine that with the numerous chemicals which we consume with estrogen-like properties and it really does seem like breasts are getting larger. Look at a bunch of 16 years old girls - twig thin and huge bustlines, my friends didn't look like that 25 years ago. One of the differences between the early American diet and the European diet was also the amount of fat (more meat being available to the average person in the U.S. in the 18th & 19th centuries). Supposedly the first generation of women raised here had larger breast than their mother's did, one generation is too fast for it to be genetic. I'll see if I can find the article so I've got citations.
Beth -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wendy Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 11:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [h-cost] Re: Bosoms The big bosom thing is something I've been wondering about for a while too. I've seen very few portraits, if any, that show women with large breasts pre-19th C even in portraits where the women are robust. Clothing styles definately didn't encourage large bosoms, I know a lot of women who have trouble making garb that fits. They either use a princess style cut, which isn't appropriate, or squish themselves (which is not flattering or, I imagine, comfortable) Could large breasts be a modern occurance? Our food is pumped full of hormones and other chemicals. In the last few decades, girls are physically maturing faster than they used too. My friends and I started menstrating around 14-15 years old, now girls are 11-12. In the past, ideal beauty may have been small breasts as compared to now, where bigger is not big enough (I was so born in the wrong century); but not all portraits were idealized. Wendy --- On Sat 12/31, Sue Clemenger < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: From: Sue Clemenger [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:59:50 -0700 Subject: Re: [h-cost] Re: Bosoms Just a bit of wondering....In addition to Sheer Bad Taste (tm) and<br>inaccurate information on the part of a fair number of modern reenactors and<br>RenFairies, could some of the TOAP effect be coming from our larger bodies?<br>I'm not referring to the largely mythical<br>we're-so-much-taller-than-they-were idea, but the reality of a lot of 21st<br>century Americans being, well, *koff* heavier than optimal health would have<br>us. Myself included, so no slam meant. You get somebody who's well-endowed<br>to begin with, like me, and add some overweight to it, and I *can't* avoid<br>having a shelf. Even in a modern bra, I've got a shelf. In a corset,<br>though, it's quite a bit more obvious, especially when compared to the same<br>area on a woman less rounded and endowed.<br>The best (historical) support I've had that didn't present a huge shelf was<br>the shell for the fitted gown from Robin's workshop. I suspect that's from<br>a different sort of support/compression going on than with a corset.<br>Oh, and Happy New Year, everyone! ;o)<br>--Sue in foggy-drippy Montana<br><br>----- Original Message -----<br>From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]><br>To: "Historical Costume" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]><br>Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 2:08 PM<br>Subject: [h-cost] Re: Bosoms<br><br><br>><br>> > I think of the melons on a platter in the 18th Century, not Elizabethan,<br>> > as the corsets are shaped differently. The Renn and Elizabethan are<br>> > more tubular in shape to the 18thC cone shape that gives you a higher<br>> > bustline. That and the 18thC women showed them off a bit more than<br>> > earlier women, what with the partlets of the earliers times.<br>><br>> It depends on what you mean by melons on a platter. In both time<br>> periods, I think you see a lot more at Ren Faires and reenactments<br>> than the ideal for the time period. 18thC is supposed to produce<br>> "pleasing mounds", and I have not seen paintings where they show a<br>> cleavage line (the actual line from breasts pressed together).<br>> Winterthur Museum in Delaware has a portrait of a lady who is rather<br>> large busted, and still no line! Bet she wasn't like that in real<br>> life, but we're talking about the ideal.<br>><br>> And while Elizabethans had partlets, 18thC have handkerchiefs, a<br>> folded square or triangle of cloth that covers the shoulders and<br>> bosom. Sometimes they were sheer and some were embroidered. Wearing<br>> one depended on time of day and age. They protect from the sun, and<br>> young women would tend to go without while those with wrinkles could<br>> keep covered.<br>><br>> And in both centuries there was a gamut of class distinctions,<br>> ethnicities, yadda yadda.<br>><br>> -Carol<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>h-costu me mailing list<br>[email protected]<br>http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h -costume<br> _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list [email protected] http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list [email protected] http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
