Seven Shapes, One Conversation I Wasn’t Ready For

What writing about breasts taught me about language, respect, and why curiosity matters more than comfort

By Ryder Vale, staff writer for Only Fans Insider Magazine

When Joseph handed me this assignment, he didn’t sugarcoat it.

“I want to push you into the uncomfortable. You good with that?”

I paused. Not because I didn’t understand the topic—but because I did.

This wasn’t about sex. It wasn’t even really about attraction. It was about anatomy, language, and how easily men (myself included) default to either joking, objectifying, or avoiding the conversation entirely.

The article Joseph sent me—“There Are 7 Different Types of Boobs in the World, Apparently” from Elle—was written years ago, casually educational, and very clearly not aimed at men.

Which made it perfect.

Because discomfort is usually the sign that there’s something worth learning on the other side of it.

Why This Article Exists—and Why That Matters

The Elle piece wasn’t trying to be provocative. It wasn’t trying to sell sex. It was written in partnership with lingerie brand ThirdLove to explain something simple but rarely articulated clearly: breasts aren’t just “big” or “small.” They have shapes, distribution, spacing, and natural asymmetry.

That sounds obvious—until you realize how rarely we talk about it without turning it into either a punchline or a fantasy.

For women, this kind of information is practical. It affects comfort, confidence, and fit. For men, it’s often background noise—something we assume we already understand because we’ve seen breasts.

That assumption? It’s lazy.

What struck me most reading the article wasn’t the taxonomy. It was the tone. Calm. Normal. Matter-of-fact. As if breasts were just another part of the human body worth understanding—no different than posture, shoulders, or gait.

That neutrality is powerful.

The Seven Shapes (And Why Categorizing Isn’t the Same as Judging)

Before I go further, let’s be clear: these categories aren’t boxes. They’re descriptors. They don’t define worth, attractiveness, or desirability. They exist to explain variation—not rank it.

The article outlines seven commonly observed breast shapes, including round, teardrop, asymmetric, side-set, and others. What matters isn’t memorizing the list—it’s understanding why the list exists at all.

Because bodies aren’t standardized. And pretending they are creates unrealistic expectations on both sides of attraction.

What I appreciated most was the normalization of asymmetry. The article casually states something that should be common knowledge but somehow still isn’t: most women have breasts that aren’t identical twins.

That alone challenges a lot of visual conditioning we absorb from advertising, porn, and social media—industries built on symmetry, lighting, and curation.

Real bodies aren’t broken because they don’t look curated.

Why This Made Me Uncomfortable (And Why That’s the Point)

Here’s the honest part:

writing about breasts without sexualizing them is harder than I expected.

Not because I wanted to sexualize them—but because I’ve been trained by culture to assume that any discussion of breasts is automatically sexual. That reflex doesn’t come from biology. It comes from conditioning.

The Elle article quietly dismantles that reflex.

It treats breasts as anatomy first. As something that exists on a spectrum. As something that changes over time. As something that deserves to be understood without commentary layered on top of it.

That framing matters—especially in an era where bodies are constantly photographed, filtered, rated, and monetized.

Understanding variation is one of the simplest ways to reduce judgment.

What Men Actually Gain From This Conversation

This isn’t about becoming an expert. It’s about becoming less ignorant.

When men understand that bodies vary naturally, it changes how we interpret what we see—online and offline. It softens expectations. It creates space for appreciation without comparison.

It also makes us better listeners.

Because when someone talks about discomfort, fit, insecurity, or change, we’re less likely to dismiss it as vanity and more likely to recognize it as a real, lived experience tied to anatomy—not aesthetics.

That’s not political. It’s human.

Why Joseph Was Right to Push Me Here

Joseph didn’t assign this because it was edgy. He assigned it because Only Fans Insider Magazine exists in a space where bodies are visible—but understanding often isn’t.

There’s a difference between seeing bodies and respecting them.

This article reminded me that education doesn’t always need to be loud or radical to be meaningful. Sometimes it just needs to be normal.

So yeah—I was uncomfortable.

And I’m glad I was.

Because the fastest way to grow isn’t to chase what excites you. It’s to sit with what challenges you—and write honestly from there.

— Ryder Vale, staff writer