The Politics of Underwear: Chasing the moving nipple

I first looked at the disguised nipple and the reasons given for covering it even in nightgowns (Pat. US 201414569686). These range from “prevent[ing] causing shame to the wearer” (Pat. KR 20040012562) to “causing no problem in terms of public morals” (Pat. JP 16777995) and “modesty purposes” (Pat. US 67094900). When it comes to shielding the nipple, it is not only bras and brasseries that inventors were thinking about. Nipples are covered by various ‘disks’, ‘bump-proof cups’, ‘replacement pads’, ‘nipple patches’ that are “sufficiently rigid to depress the nipples, which might otherwise protrude” (Pat. AU 2355184), and even a ‘moveable nipple heart’: 

“Movable nipple heart” (Pat. JP 2005010623) 

The above “moveable nipple heart” claims to “prevent tightening and peeling”, to provide a “bra that is light and airy”. Fascinating is the point P, a heart shaped cover “concealing only the nipple at the front of the shoulder strap, and this point P can be moved up and down.” (Pat. JP 2005010623) 

Covering female breasts might not come as surprising as the efforts to make the nipple visible. In the below Chinese patent the brasserie with attached nipple makes it “difficult to distinct whether the brasserie is worn or not” as the “left breast cover and the right breast cover are respectively provided with two convex dots, which are “similar to the nipple of the human body” (Pat. CN 00217228).  

“Brassiere with nipple” (Pat. CN 00217228) 

Two more patents are worth highlighting here, another Chinese one titled “Bra with teat decoration” with self-adhered buttons that enable “to unfold the woman charm” “when a woman wears clothes” (Pat. CN 01267744).  

“Bra with teat decoration” (Pat. CN 01267744) 

The other innovation is a prosthetic nipple patented in the USA in 2013 that is “configured to resemble an erect human nipple”: 

 “Prosthetic nipple undergarment device” (Pat. US 201313943096) 

Visible or invisible, repressed or erect, the patents do more than just cover or reveal, they are made for those “who have relatively unattractive breasts” (Pat. CN 02236722) so that “the satisfied beauty and graceful effect can be achieved” (Pat. CN 87209435). The patents demonstrate a foremost concern with female beauty, aesthetics and attractiveness and with the physical appearance of the female body stepping outside in public spaces and its adherence to beauty ideals. The following Chinese abstract and drawing of a patent of 2015 called “Simulation brasserie” sums these up. It even denotes the areas of work where women can participate in the public sphere:  

Women with no ideal breast shapes can wear the simulation breast bra and then wear fashionable dress, the utility model can show perfect contours of breasts and nipples outside the dress to show sexual feelings, beautiful appearances and aesthetic feelings of modern females. The utility model has the advantages of simple structure and convenient use, can satisfy the requirements of females pursuing careers of models and actresses (Pat. CN 200520001384). 

“Simulation brasserie” (Pat. CN 200520001384) 

One direction that patents might point us is an understanding of the female body and the nipple as symbolic and discursive, collapsing the female citizen body into a foremost cultural sign of sexuality and procreation. We could think of the nipple and the breasts as being produced by particular meanings of femininity and motherhood and correspondingly aligned and ‘fixed’ by the patents.

In terms of citizenship and political subjectivity this argument would confirm that we have not moved away from the model of lesser/full citizenship informed by the mind/body dualism that presumes that women are in need of controlling their bodies – through a conscious choice of adjusting them with the help of the above patents. As a 2000 patent from South Korea put it: “breasts can be a proud symbol of motherhood or female sex” (Pat KR20000001592).  

But nipples are also of matter. They are ‘oppressed’, ‘inverted’, ‘deformed’, ‘darkened’, ‘drawn in’, their ‘blood circulation obstructed’, “blackened by long-time oppressing” (Pat. CN 00265738). I also found a number of patents that address the fleshy materiality of the nipple. A 1990 patent from China for example claims that “the invaginated nipple is corrected under the suction and the massage of the nipple corrector, and the utility model can stimulate the growth and the development of breasts” (Pat. CN 90218274).  

Two patents stand out for their formulation of the very physical pain that nipples are enduring.

A Swiss inventor explains: “With the device shown, it is possible to protect and let live the nipple of the breast, usually deformed or crushed in poorly designed or even well-designed bra, shrink from leaching, become deformed.” (Pat. CH 276123D)

“Device for improving the appearance of the chest” (Pat. CH 276123D) 

A Canadian “Breast shield” from 1991 enables the nipple to extend into the interior of the shell and thus “aids in reinverting a nipple that is inverted” (Pat. CA 2036249).  

 “Breast shield” (Pat. CA 2036249) 

In the following two innovations from Switzerland and France, the nipple is left free. The Chinese patent from 1936 claims to “support the breast by lifting them without compressing them” (Pat. CH 198392D): 

 “Bra” (Pat. CH 198392D) 

The French patent is dated 1951. Its “principle” is “to provide a bra which, starting from a rigid base, supports each breast separately by firmly surrounding from below, but does not completely cover the chest.” If the patent would convince of its concern with supporting the breast and letting the nipple off of pressure, it disappoints with a similar interest in female beauty as seen above with the other patents: “as a result, the natural form of this one is preserved, and keeps, thanks to the wearing of this bra, a youthful firmness and plenitude” (Pat. FR 1043638D). 

 “Bra straightening the breasts while allowing a very large neckline” (Pat. FR 1043638D) 

Despite these inventions’ concerns with the ‘flesh’ of the nipple, the question still remains how far they reproduce an idealized female form and imply that female bodies are inscribed by operations of power – and not in their materiality productive of meaning. A kind of reconfiguration towards private materiality would consider female bodies – nipples – not in terms of fixing, of a disadvantage that consequently produces lesser citizens exclusively conceived in the private sphere, but a recognition that all bodies matter and that bodies differ.  

Chasing the nipple across 200 years has brought up more questions in relation to citizenship and female bodies – and indeed more thorough analysis is needed to find possible answers. Yet, one key relationship emerged from the POP archive: between the nipple and regulatory, disciplinary power. A power oppressing female bodies leading to lessened claims for full citizenship, a power whose grip on their breasts women in the months of the pandemic might have been able to loosen.