Talk:Nipple

Jun 2003

why have we lost this:

All mammals have an even number of nipples, through which females lactate;

?

Fixed. - Patrick 17:10 20 Jun 2003 (UTC)

A few mammals don't have nipples; zero is an even number.KJ Sam 07:12 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I was under the impression that having nipples was part of the definition of mammal! Which mammals don't have nipples? Also; some mammals have an odd number of nipples but as far as I'm aware this is a freak occurance and no species generally have an odd number.

A number of marsupials don't have nipples. jk 00:36, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Marsupials are not mammals, they are marsupials. boffy_b 23:23, 2005 Mar 22 (UTC)

"Marsupials are mammals" says the first three words of marsupial. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 23:29, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Well it's all lies and a conspiracy. You'l see. boffy_b 23:52, 2005 Mar 22 (UTC)

Jeremy, I can't find mention of that at marsupial or here. If you have a cite it would make an interesting factiod for both articles. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 00:09, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"I would have assumed that nipples were only available in even numbers had I not learned that female possums, for example, have between seven and 25 nipples. The delightful Virginia opossum, which inhabits the middles of American roads and highways, usually has 13, efficiently arranged in an open circle with one in the center. This information should not tempt you to snicker and point the next time you see a possum: They also have 50 teeth." from "Why Do Men Have Nipples" by Susan McCarthy http://www.salon.com/health/feature/1999/06/08/nipples/print.html 67.129.136.163 14:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A sectional drawing would be more informative here than a photograph of a nipple, to show, for example, the functional relation of the nipple to surrounding tissues. Also, should there be images of other types of nipples (baby bottle, industrial, cattle, etc.)? Tom Haws 07:05, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

Seems appropriate to me. Have any? TIMBO (T A L K) 20:56, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Here's a hint. If the anons are removing the nipple profile continually [drum roll] it might not be a very good image, and the article might be better off empty until something better is found. Sometimes listening to repeated anons is the wisest course. If we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit we can do better. Tom Haws 23:36, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)

Marsupials are a sub type of mammals and they do have nipples inside the pouch.

Marsupials are the group of mammals commonly thought of as pouched mammals. They give live birth, but they do not have long gestation times like placental mammals. Instead, they give birth very early and the young animal, essentially a helpless embryo, climbs from the mother's birth canal to the nipples. There it grabs on with its mouth and continues to develop, often for weeks or months depending on the species. The short gestation time is due to having a yolk-type placenta in the mother marsupial. Placental mammals nourish the developing embryo using the mother's blood supply, allowing longer gestation times. [1]

zen master T 23:27, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It seems to me that a disambiguation page would make sense here.

Monotremes such as Platypus dont have nipples they secrete milk through glands into their fur., Monotremes the the most primitive existing mammals. Marsupials (generally, all have a birth pouch) are a later mammalian grouping, nd have nipples inside their pouches --timc | Talk 01:37, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Warning! there were some racists remarks in this page, about slavery and so on. I don't know how they had been put, it must be some sort of redefinition trick. In fact the text that I removed was this:

Plumbing

In plumbing, a nipple is a short piece of threaded tubing used as a coupling.

Devices

For bicycles, a nipple is a nut placed at the end of each wheel spoke.

But it appeared as a very racist remark (in any case, nothing to do with nipples). I hope it is ok by now. Francesco

What exactly do plumbing and bicycles have to do with racism?207.157.121.50 07:48, 13 October 2005 (UTC)mightyafrowhitey[reply]

Someone should add a picture of a puffy nipple. I like those.

One in 18 people has a third nipple

Is this notable to be written here? :-) (BBC) bogdan | ^Talk 10:46, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps that belongs at supernumerary nipple. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 10:52, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

Nipple Cripple

24.215.89.228's edit about nipple twisting as an school yard torture is interesting, but does not seem to fit in with the formal tone of this article. I am moving it to List of school pranks where there is a section on nipple cripple/purple nurple, and add a link to there from here.

Male nipples

Why do human males have nipples? Its in most mammals but in our evolution it is present. Male dogs for example have no nipples as far as I know.

Check a little closer next time you pet the belly of a male dog :) Anyway, as I understand, the answer is part of evolution. Given the genetic simliarities between males and females (believe it or not), it was not possible for female mammals to develop nipples without a corresponding development in males. Sure other male and female genitals are highly differentiated, but there is a much longer evolutionary history separating those. But genetic differences between the sexes are not different enough for nipples to be able to only appear in the females of the species. Males nipples are a necessary side effect of the development of functional nipples in females. But don't let people tell you that males don't have an organ whose sole use is for pleasure.

Thats a real good answer, I still believe humans will continue to evolve, even if it's minimal changes. Some suggest larger more complex brains, no hair and other things.--King of the Dancehall 02:29, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Male horses and male rats do not have nipples. 67.129.136.163 14:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it to be a question of evolution, but of biological efficiency. Females require the hormones to develop breast tissue. Biologically encoding separate physiological characteristics into genetic structure would be inefficient. Blue Leopard 10:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Males being deviod of nipples wouldn't really give them a biological advantage, and so they were never lost along the evolutionary path

The reason is that all fetuses begin as females, and therefore the nipples (like everything else) develop like the breasts. For reasons of distinction, I don't like to say that males have breasts, I like to say that they have breast tissue and mammary glands. Everything a guy has is because he was a female first. The penis is an enlarged clitoris, the testicles are descended ovaries, and the nipples are because he was a female as a fetus before the formal change to male happened.

The idea that "all fetuses begin as females" is a feminist philosophical argument, not a biological fact. I could just easily say that all fetuses start male, because it is only natural in humans for testicles to descend and a penis to develop, and therefore anyone who is female only became that after first being male when later testicles failed to drop and become ovaries, and a uterus, vagina, and clitoris developed. To simplify: to state that everyone begins as "female" first and later becomes a "male" is a meaningless statement and without any truth value. It all depends on your point of view. I could declare that all humans must come from sperm, and sperm is always male (as it was part of the male body), therefore everyone starts off male. But that would be a meaningless philosophical statement without truth value.

A lot of pictures

This page needs a picture of a male nipple for comparison. As it is, I think the different photos for an erect vs. unerect female nipple are kind of silly... We should just show the nipples of both sexes in their natural, unaffected states.

Agreed - for there to be four pictures, all of female nipples, seems a bit redundant. I don't think there needs to be any more than one - or two, if demonstration of erection is necessary - plus one of a male nipple. A picture of non-human nipples might be useful for comparison, too.

I have no particular objection to this, but aren't there more pictures of nipples here than are really necessary? What's more, all of them seem to belong to white human females. Garik 14:47, 29 April 2006 (BST)

I think it's informative to demonstrate erect/unerect nipples, but if possible they should be on the same person (the difference in areola size in the current pictures is more noticeable than their state).

First commenter above: erect nipples are no less natural than unerect nipples.

Re male nipple pictures, that's what I came to the talk page to suggest. Can we source (or take) an image?

[Note: I moved the section heading 'A lot of pictures' up two comments to keep the discussion together] Njál 21:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the images around a bit to better show a large range of nipples. If anyone thinks there needs to be any more changes to the images in this article then please discuss here first.--Clawed 22:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed them around a litte - tell me if you hate it. For great justice. 17:24, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I must say that I feel this is a far superior image to either of the examples of female nipples already on this page. I'm interested in what the rest of you think. Kasreyn 04:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just did a preview, replacing the 2 existing images with the one above, and it looks a lot less cluttered (the existing images are taller). The suggested image is much more interesting and detailed, as well as being slightly better looking. — Lee J Haywood 11:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

mmm boobies

Well, just to be fair, shouldn't there be a picture of a BIG fat dude with pendulous man-breasts so as to show what a male nipple looks like on a hombre whose breasts are likely larger than a sizable percentage of the female population?

Because it's disgusting. The article also already shows a picture of a 13 yo boy and THATS PEDOPHILIA ON WIKIPEDIA!!!!!!!!!! Cuzandor 20:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Omicronpersei8, Why don't you object to the tits and utters and 13 year old pedophilia; yet you revert me? Come on Omicronpersei8, have some MANBOOBS! This second one isn't even gross. How do you know the author could/think something will be "gross"? Do you have a crystal ball?[manboobs for all] 66.114.93.6 04:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ape nipples

Instead of having TWO pictures of humans, I think we should replace the one of the human torso (which comes from someone which seriously lack muscular mass and is not a real reprentation of a male human) to that one: http://williamcalvin.com/bookshelf/img/Chimpanzee%20infant%206mo%20TTwycross%20249a.jpg or anything similar.

Agree--Light current 22:50, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

does the nipple regenerate?

i saw, on a different unrelated article that the nipple is the only part of the human body that regrows if it is lost, how come it doesnt say it here?