We have been inventing PPE for centuries. But who gets protected?

From fire to shipwrecks and from automobile crashes to biohazards, following are a few examples of the extraordinary range of PPE inventions in the patent archives: 

1880 FIREMAN’S SUIT (Pat. US232233A)

August Beyer, an American inventor, designed this full body suit ‘to be able to approach closely to the fire and to pass through without danger of injury’. A jacket, trousers, gloves, shoes, helmet and even suspenders were made of special ‘fire and waterproof material’. 

1912 OVERCOAT FOR MOTORISTS (Pat. US1197823A)

Patented by Mathias Stein, a Hungarian inventor, this invention aimed to mitigate the effects of ‘being thrown out of a car and flung with some force against some fixed object or on the roadway’. It apparently doubled as a lifesaving coat for seafarers and aviators. 

1916 LIFE SAVING SUIT (Pat. US1197823A)

Shipwrecks were such a common experience that inventors sought to equip passengers with individual devices to assist survival while awaiting rescue. Benjamin, E. Henry, an American inventor, devised a ‘life saving suit’ which ‘when not in use may be packed and carried as other baggage’. What is fascinating in many of the patent illustrations is the context of use in which the invention was imagined. Here, we see the passenger shaking the suit out of the case, climbing into it, fleeing the ship and bobbing comfortable in the water (while eating snacks!).

1923 GAS MASK (Pat. GB297890A)

Lots of gas masks were invented for warfare and industrial purposes. This British invention sought to ensure the ‘gas-tightness of the face-piece’ and minimising ‘moisture on the eye-pieces’. 

1953 SURGICAL MASK (Pat. CA492369A)

This Canadian operating theatre mask also aimed for a good facial seal. The inventor, Leduc J. Edouard, aimed to ‘prevent exhalation of vapors and germs whilst at the same time permitting easy breathing’.  

1986 COLD & WATERPROOF LIFE JACKET (Pat. JPS6124695A)

This Japanese invention combined waterproof clothes with  life–saving . The aim was ‘to make it easy to be found by searching from air when a man is drifting about in the sea by expanding a floating mark which is usually attached to the main life jacket in a rolled form’.

PPE has radically changed from the 1800s to today. Yet some things are notable over time – namely who is inventing and for whom. As per the nature of legal systems and gendered rights at different times, more men than women have patented ideas and they have generally invented things for people like themselves. (Even in this century, while there is more diversity, there remain many similar male shaped bodies in illustrations and descriptions.) 

This is not to say that other people didn’t use these inventions. They probably did. They have to. The point is that they were traditionally rarely the focus of formal inventive attention. This matters because patented inventions tend to rest upon assumptions – height, build, hair, facial features, jobs, physical abilities etc.

Dominant representations of particular types of ‘normal’ reinforce civic roles and responsibilities by equipping certain people to respond to challenging circumstances and ensuring their safety while they do it. Put simply, a particular type of male body is generally better materially protected to be in and to deal with dangerous conditions – and has been for a very long time.  

For PPE to work, it has to fit. As recent reports and books have argued, much commercial PPE is designed for a universal body – a specifically shaped male one. Women, other marginalised groups and differently sized men tend to be overlooked and under resourced. Female care workers might account for the majority of NHS staff, yet available PPE does not.

Of course, this inventive bias isn’t necessarily conscious or deliberate, but the results are the same. A lack of diversity means we keep perpetuating the same problems. To change this requires different focus from the start – from the point of invention.  

At POP we are interested in how inventors create novel forms of clothing that reinforce or alternatively resist, subvert and disrupt social and political norms and beliefs, and in the process, bring new expressions of citizenship into being. In this case, we are seeing increasing reinforcement of particular types of protection for specific bodies – leading us to ask questions like:

How and why do some bodies get more protection than others? Does the abundance of PPE for some and lack for others create different kinds of political subjects? Does this map onto other existing (and stubborn) forms of visibility, invisibility, inequality and injustice? Does this create more-than-citizens and less-than-citizens?