flat chested female athletes

[rustyrunner]

@Telemark

In other words, “I don’t have any proof, and I refuse to acknowledge the contrary evidence presented to me, but I see no reason to change my position.”

I appologize. Those remarks were intended for another. Sorry about that.

What you say is correct, I don’t have the evidence to support what I said.
It was an observation of thirty years as a distance runner, and as a coach and parent involved in athletics, nothing more.

[missyzilly]

I can not believe Im posting this but. SPORTS BRAS PEOPLE!!! I have large breasts and a snug bra makes them look like I have none.

[rustyrunner]

Delusion in a sentence!

[rustyrunner]

@Troppus

A generalization should a statement based on * several* unrelated,random observations. Your personal experience is one data point, which is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion from. All it takes is one large breasted elite athlete to discount your claim.

Experience is very useful and has wide ranging applications, but science requires data, evidence, and testable hypotheses. And as such: anyone presenting scientific evidence ought to expect others to test it. That is how we prove things to be facts instead of guesses.

So if I say elite athletic women 50 years ago had larger average breast size than present how do I go about proving that given that there are no statistics to prove or disprove?

[Telemark]

@rustyrunner

So if I say elite athletic women 50 years ago had larger average breast size than present how do I go about proving that given that there are no statistics to prove or disprove?

Why do you think that there are no statistics about athlete’s bodies from 50 years ago? And even if you demonstrate that one piece of data (which most people would accept anyway), what evidence do you have that it is related to genetics and not simply an artifact of lower body fat due to changes in training and nutrition? Your premise seemed to suggest a cause, and the statistics won’t support that either way.

Since you’re still dismissing anyone who disagrees with you I’m not sure this will have any impact, but we’re here to fight ignorance.

[Irishman]

@Telemark

And even if you demonstrate that one piece of data (which most people would accept anyway), what evidence do you have that it is related to genetics and not simply an artifact of lower body fat due to changes in training and nutrition? Your premise seemed to suggest a cause, and the statistics won’t support that either way.

I’m not sure he really believes it is genetics. I think he was using evolution in a generic way, not intending to imply athletes are a closed breeding population.

I’d be interested to see stats that indicate that average breast size has decreased for female athletes. And I’d be interested to see how the study accounts for different training levels and diet.

But both of those seem irrelevant to the issues that got me involved. As I (and others) have said, sports bras are a strong contributor to the appearance factor that rustyrunner seems to be harping on. Just because there may be a downward trend in breast size data from 50 years ago doesn’t mean that trend is continuing downward. That may be an asymptotic curve that is nearing a plateau. There is little justification provided for female athletes to continue shrinking boobs, even if they have been getting smaller, which isn’t proven. And clothing is a significant factor in appearance that he is dismissing as not possible.

[Telemark]

@Irishman

And clothing is a significant factor in appearance that he is dismissing as not possible.

All true, I’m not sure why he is dismissing what is clearly a major factor. It’s been demonstrated in images and personal reports, but he refuses to acknowledge it.

[rustyrunner]

@raster44

My niece’s daughter is a junior in high school and I just was pleased to see her off to her first formal prom date. I was amazed as to how beautiful and graceful she handled the moment and could see how a young man would be taken by her attributes. I noticed that she had a amble cleavage which I had not noted even when she was wearing a bathing suit. I mentioned it to my Sister-In-Law, her Grandmother, and she said that push-up and padded bras could enhance even the smallest of breasts. I guess I’m dumb in the womanly of matters but I thought she looked so heavenly for her date and hoped she had a wonderful time. She may not be World class in sports but she is World class in life!

“not world class in sports but world class in life”. Lovely. Thanks for that. May you long hold that view.

[rustyrunner]

@Irishman

What is “hypersuspension”? I tried google, but I don’t think volleyball players are jacking up their breasts with car parts.

At the top of the window is a blue menu bar. Go over and select “search”. A drop down opens. Go down and select “advanced search”.

A new page will open. On the right near the top is a field for “User Name:”. Type in “rustyrunner”. Leave all other settings default (no keywords, Threads With at least, Post From any date, Search All Open Forums).

Only one result returns - this thread.

rustyrunner, you have taken a valid observation and projected and over extended it into unsupported supposition. Do female athletes appear to have smaller breasts than average, especially in track and field? Yes. But the why is where you discount known causes. It is known that high performing athletes monitor their diets and have rigorous workouts. Those two factors keep body mass index low, i.e. low fat storage. Some of breast size is from fat storage, some of it is glandular tissue. The percentage varies across individuals, so there’s no easy answer, but since fat makes up a fair percentage of many women’s breast size, and athletes have little body fat, their breast tend to be smaller.

Factor two is that breasts are not well anchored. They are weighty tissue held in place by skin - no muscles, tendons, etc to support them. Bouncing around is thus uncomfortable and can be painful. Therefore, efforts have been made to create garments to aid women be athletic. These include sports bras and compression garments, which are essentially elastic materials. The garments put pressure on the soft tissue, and thus smear it flatter against the body and hold it tight rather than leave it suspended outward and unsupported. Because breast tissue is soft, the breasts get mushed down. A lot less jiggle, a lot less protrusion.

Those two factors contribute a great deal to female athletes looking flat chested. But have you even tried looking for pics of them when not wearing their performance gear? Like afterparty casual shots and such?

Here’s the thing: there is a selection pressure against women with genes for oversized boobs, but it is not direct. Women with oversized boobs tend to come from families with oversized bodies, i.e. predispositions to be obese. These women are not likely to be olympic level athletes, both from genetics but also likely from lifestyle issues learned from their family.

But here’s why you cannot assert that the pressure is genetic and that women athletes will continue to change until they look like men: women athletes are still women, and they are drawn from the same gene pool as everyone else. There is no special “athlete” community that interbreeds with each other to the exclusion of non-athletes. They marry non-athletes as often as other athletes. Ergo, there is no exclusion of genes to do the selecting.

The only way your supposition would have any merit is if olympic level athletes are so eager to improve their performance to reach male performance that they are willing to cheat by using male hormones. Extended use of male hormones will affect their bodies. This is seen from the program that the East Germans had in the 70s and 80s. However, that kind of cheating is difficult because it is tested for. I honestly don’t know enough to know how effective the testing is. We see from the latest results with Lance Armstrong that some forms of cheating have been easier than others.

It is possible that the top level performers are cheating. It is also possible that they are not. I cannot say how likely it is either way, but my gut feels that the bulk are not using high doses of androgenic steroids. Ergo, they are not being hormonally changed.

Therefore, women athletes will continue to look a bit more flat chested than the average population (especially when the average population has implants and tends toward obesity), but there will not be a downward spiral in female athlete chest size.

How can you say there will not be a downward spiral in female athlete chest size and justify it by mentioning implants and obesity. I don’t get it!

[Telemark]

@rustyrunner

I don’t get it!

Yes, that’s pretty obvious.

[Irishman]

@rustyrunner

How can you say there will not be a downward spiral in female athlete chest size and justify it by mentioning implants and obesity. I don’t get it!

I’m saying that current athletes may appear to be smaller than average now, but average size has increased due to increased incidence of obesity and the use of implants. So the comparison of modern athletes to modern average breast size does not correlate directly to 50 year ago athletes against 50 year ago average breast size.

First you need a baseline of modern breast size without implants. Then you need a scaling factor for obesity and the effect it has. Or, conversely, you can compare modern athlete breast size against 50 year ago average breast size.

And even that ignores the potential asymptote effect I mentioned: that any effect to breast size will be a large change due to diet and exercise when those changes are introduced, but subsequent increases in excersise and tighter dietary controls will have diminishing returns with respect to effect on breast size. I’m speaking about populations, not individuals, though it should hold true for individuals as well.

[Maserschmidt]

You know, it occurs to me that whoever invents a successful Turing Troll will wreak havoc on message boards.

[rustyrunner]

@Irishman

I’m saying that current athletes may appear to be smaller than average now, but average size has increased due to increased incidence of obesity and the use of implants. So the comparison of modern athletes to modern average breast size does not correlate directly to 50 year ago athletes against 50 year ago average breast size.

First you need a baseline of modern breast size without implants. Then you need a scaling factor for obesity and the effect it has. Or, conversely, you can compare modern athlete breast size against 50 year ago average breast size.

And even that ignores the potential asymptote effect I mentioned: that any effect to breast size will be a large change due to diet and exercise when those changes are introduced, but subsequent increases in excersise and tighter dietary controls will have diminishing returns with respect to effect on breast size. I’m speaking about populations, not individuals, though it should hold true for individuals as well.

I still don’t get it. If you say implants ( I assume you mean breast implants) is a factor in what I think is obscure reasoning, why should I not counter that with examples of mastectomies, and regarding obesity, liposuction etc, none of which has much relevance to what I origionally stated or intended?

[Irishman]

Mastectomies are a far, far smaller percentage of the population, and often they are followed by implants as part of normalizing the woman’s appearance. Liposuction reduces body fat, but I am not aware of women using liposuction to reduce their breast size. Liposuction is targeted at the torso, so it wouldn’t affect breast size.

But my whole point is that your point of reference (i.e. average breast size) has increased in the last 50 years.

Now you could counter that your point of reference is not average breast size, but rather looking at athletes’ breast size then vs now. In which case I would argue the same other points - diet, exercise regime, and sports bras. But I still think your perception that athletes are getting smaller breasts is based on a perhaps subconscious perspective on what average breast size is. That’s why I mention it.

[rustyrunner]

@Irishman

I’m saying that current athletes may appear to be smaller than average now, but average size has increased due to increased incidence of obesity and the use of implants. So the comparison of modern athletes to modern average breast size does not correlate directly to 50 year ago athletes against 50 year ago average breast size.

First you need a baseline of modern breast size without implants. Then you need a scaling factor for obesity and the effect it has. Or, conversely, you can compare modern athlete breast size against 50 year ago average breast size.

And even that ignores the potential asymptote effect I mentioned: that any effect to breast size will be a large change due to diet and exercise when those changes are introduced, but subsequent increases in excersise and tighter dietary controls will have diminishing returns with respect to effect on breast size. I’m speaking about populations, not individuals, though it should hold true for individuals as well.

So why would Olympic atheletes have breast implants?

[Telemark]

@rustyrunner

So why would Olympic atheletes have breast implants?

He’s not saying that. He’s saying that since many women, especially women we see in media, have breast implants that your perception of what “normal” sized breasts are may be skewed.

[rustyrunner]

@Telemark

He’s not saying that. He’s saying that since many women, especially women we see in media, have breast implants that your perception of what “normal” sized breasts are may be skewed.

What a turn arround! Skewed is a perception, as you say, but when presented as facts need to be verified in some way, something I have never attempted.

[Telemark]

@rustyrunner

What a turn arround! Skewed is a perception, as you say, but when presented as facts need to be verified in some way, something I have never attempted.

First, your response is very difficult to parse. What are you trying to say?

Second, you came in here claiming your perceptions were fact. We’ve pointed out where you’ve made assumptions, where the evidence contradicts your conclusions, and posited some ways in which your assumptions could be skewed. You’ve brought nothing to the table; no facts, no evidence, just assertions and obfuscation. You haven’t even stated your claim in a clear and concise manner.

If you want to engage in a meaningful discussion then you need to make a claim and provide some supporting evidence. You’ve done neither. We can go a few more rounds at this dance, but nothing’s going to change until you make a good faith argument.

[rustyrunner]

@Irishman

I’m saying that current athletes may appear to be smaller than average now, but average size has increased due to increased incidence of obesity and the use of implants. So the comparison of modern athletes to modern average breast size does not correlate directly to 50 year ago athletes against 50 year ago average breast size.

First you need a baseline of modern breast size without implants. Then you need a scaling factor for obesity and the effect it has. Or, conversely, you can compare modern athlete breast size against 50 year ago average breast size.

And even that ignores the potential asymptote effect I mentioned: that any effect to breast size will be a large change due to diet and exercise when those changes are introduced, but subsequent increases in excersise and tighter dietary controls will have diminishing returns with respect to effect on breast size. I’m speaking about populations, not individuals, though it should hold true for individuals as well.

That is obscure reasoning in my opinion, except in your last paragraph. In your second from last you undo all that, and confirm it with your first.

[John_W.Kennedy]

‘“Do not all pronouns require antecedent nouns?” the Earl gently enquired.’
—̵Lewis Carroll, Sylvie and Bruno Concluded