At some point, in my past, when I found myself living with a wife who was, shall we say, highly scenic, I began to muse on the way in which I could measure the size of female breasts.
There is the infamous (and, sometimes, highly misleading) system of bra cup sizes, which has gone through several iterations. The inability of the wider world to cope with the reality that some women have large scenery was exemplified by the original system not going above DD. Even today, many bra ranges stop at DD, which leads to too many women still wearing bras that plainly and simply, Do Not Fit.
Little wonder that many well-stacked women, on entering their homes, almost triumphantly, rip off their bras, sometimes with a cry of liberation. I have seen it from 2 wives and several lady friends.
But, I digress. What is a man to do, faced with the myriad shapes, sizes and contours of fine female scenery? How does one evaluate this fine smorgasbord of curvature?
The tongue-in-cheek idea occurred to me that it was time for a new measure. In the old pre-EU days, they had British Standard measures for everything. Of course, that included arcane and old measures like chains, furlongs, rods, poles and perches. Never mind pounds and ounces and feet and inches. And let us not forget the Guinea, still used in posh England for measuring the worth of horses and fine art.
But…no size and feel measure for the female scenery.
Tsk. Tsk. Something had to be done.
Therefore, in a highly subjective way, I invented the latest British Standard measure.
The British Standard Handful. BSH for short.
Roughly, and not particularly scientifically, 1 BSH is the breast size which, when I place my hand over the breast with my thumb and fingers spread apart, results in all 5 of my digits just touching the lady’s chest wall at the edge of the breast.
However, I hear those of you in the back saying: Rupert, what about the really curvy ladies? Surely those scenic and attractive orbs are way more than 1 BSH? And how do you measure those when you cannot spread your hand over them?
A very good question. One to which I have a totally subjective answer involving all over investigation, rule of thumb, and a modicum of consideration. Careful consideration, of course.
Can I write down the rules? Well, not really. It is mostly tactile, and also involves feeling the weight of the breasts. This, by the way, is always best done from behind. This has certain advantages, since evaluating the BSH can be done while the lady is pouring coffee, doing her hair, or makeup, or even reading or tapping on a keyboard. But if kissing her neck will distract her, then so be it.
The important thing to realize is that many breasts on older women, which are suffering from the downward pull of gravity, are often large in terms of BSH. They just look less protuberant because of the movement in the direction of South. And this is fine, because when one gets to play with those breasts in the bedroom, they are often extremely playable, and much larger than they initially looked…
The next leading question would be: what is Rupert’s favorite size in BSH?
Well…around 3-5 BSH. Roughly. Approximately. But smaller breasts can also be highly scenic and interesting, so there is no hard and fast rule.
The BSH standard has served me well. It also allows me to expound on articles like this one. A double win!
UPDATE – It occurred to me the other day that there should be an ASH (American Standard Handful) system. The ASH would be slightly larger in size than the BSH, because everything is bigger in America…