Liberal

Liberal (pronounced lib-ruhl (U) or lib-er-uhl (non U))

(1) Favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs (and in this context a synonym of progressive and antonyms of reactionary.

(2) Noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform (used often with an initial capital letter, something in some cases perhaps influenced by the existence of political parties with the name (where the initial capital is correct)).

(3) Of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.

(4) Favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties (now better described as libertarian now the definitions of “liberal” are so fluid).

(5) As “liberal education”, of or relating to an education that aims to develop general cultural interests and intellectual ability (as distinct from specific vocational training).

(6) Favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression.

(7) Of or relating to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.

(8) Free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant, unprejudiced, broad-minded

(9) Open-minded, free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values etc.

(10) Characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts; unstinting, munificent, openhanded, charitable, beneficent; lavish.

(11) Given or supplied freely or abundantly; generous.

(12) Abundant in quantity; lavish.

(13) Not strict or rigorous; not literal (often of translations, interpretations etc).

(14) Of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts.

(15) Of, relating to, or befitting a freeman (now rare).

(16) A person of liberal principles or views, especially in politics or religion.

(17) A member of a “liberal” party in politics (if applied to a part actually named “Liberal”, in some contexts an initial capital should be used).

(18) Unrestrained, licentious (obsolete although the sense seems still to be understood by the Fox News audience).

1350–1400: From the Middle English, from the twelfth century Old French liberal (befitting free people; noble, generous; willing, zealous), from the Latin līberālis (literally “of freedom, pertaining to or befitting a free person” and used also in the sense of “honorable”), the construct being līber (variously “frank, free, open unrestricted, unimpeded; unbridled, unchecked, licentious”) + -ālis.  The –alis suffix was from the primitive Indo-European -li-, which later dissimilated into an early version of –āris and there may be some relationship with hel- (to grow); -ālis (neuter -āle) was the third-declension two-termination suffix and was suffixed to (1) nouns or numerals creating adjectives of relationship and (2) adjectives creating adjectives with an intensified meaning.  The suffix -ālis was added (usually, but not exclusively) to a noun or numeral to form an adjective of relationship to that noun. When suffixed to an existing adjective, the effect was to intensify the adjectival meaning, and often to narrow the semantic field.  If the root word ends in -l or -lis, -āris is generally used instead although because of parallel or subsequent evolutions, both have sometimes been applied (eg līneālis & līneāris).  The noun came into use early in the nineteenth century.  The antonym in the sense of “permitting liberty” is “authoritarian” while in the sense of “open to new ideas and change”, it’s “conservative”.  Liberal is a noun & adjective, liberalism, liberalizer, liberalization, liberalist & liberality are nouns, liberalize is a verb and liberally is an adverb; the noun plural is liberals.

The mid-fourteenth century adjective meant “generous” (in the sense of “quantity”) and within decades this has extended to “nobly born, noble, free” and from the late 1300s: “selfless, magnanimous, admirable” although, as a precursor of what would come, by early in the fifteenth century it was used with bad connotations, demoting someone “extravagant, undisciplined or unrestrained”; Someone something of a libertine (in the modern sense) therefore and it was in this sense Don Pedro in William Shakespeare’s (1564–1616) Much Ado About Nothing (1599) spoke of the lustful villain in Act 4, Scene 1:

Why, then are you no maiden, Leonato,
I am sorry you must hear. Upon mine honor,
Myself, my brother, and this grievèd count
Did see her, hear her, at that hour last night
Talk with a ruffian at her chamber window
Who hath indeed, most like a liberal villain,
Confessed the vile encounters they have had
A thousand times in secret.

The evolution in use continued and while in the sixteenth & seventeenth centuries “liberal” was used as a term of reproach suggesting “lack of restraint in speech or action”, with the coming of the Enlightenment there was a revival of the positive sense, the word now used also to mean “free from prejudice, tolerant, not bigoted or narrow” and that seems to have emerged in the late 1770s although by the nineteenth century, use often was theological rather than political, a “liberal” church (Unitarians, Universalists et al) one not so bound the rigidities in doctrine & ritual as those said to be “orthodox” (not to be confused with the actual Orthodox Church).  It was also in the nineteenth century that in England the phrase “liberal education” became widely used although what to claimed to described had a tradition in pedagogy dating from Antiquity although the it path to modernity was hardly uninterrupted, various forms of barbarism intervening and in this context it probably is accurate to speak of some periods of the Medieval era as “the Dark Ages”.  There was never anything close to a standard or universal curriculum but theme understood in the nineteenth century was it was the only fitting education for what used to be called “a gentlemen” (a term related in sense development to the Classical Latin liber (a free man)) and contrasted with technical, specialist or vocational training.  Historically, the “liberal arts” inherited from the late Middle Ages were divided into the trivium (grammar, logic & rhetoric) and the quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music & astronomy).

Much associated with the worst of America’s “corrupting coasts” (New York City & Hollywood), Lindsay Lohan is a classic liberal.

The now familiar use in politics began in the first decade of the nineteenth century, one of the many ripples from the French Revolution (1789) when it was used to suggest a tendency to “favor freedom and democracy” over the long dominant hierarchical systems which characterized feudal European society.  In English, the label was initially applied by opponents to whichever party or politicians championed individual political freedoms and it seems the word often was spoken with a French accent, the implications being that such notions were associated with chaos and ruin; the revolution of 1789 had shocked and frightened the ruling establishment(s) just about everywhere.  However, there seems to have been a fork in the sense development in the US which came from a tradition which of course viewed more approvingly revolutions which swept away tyranny and there, certainly by the 1820s, “liberal” was already being used to mean “favorable to government action to effect social change” and some historians have linked this to the religious sense of “free from prejudice in favor of traditional opinions and established institutions” (and thus open to new ideas and plans of reform); this theme has continued to this day.  From the very foundations of the first colonial settlements, in what became the US there has always been a tension between the lure of freedom & democracy and that of religious purity, the notion what was being created was a society ordained by God.

In politics the usual brute-force distinction is of course between “liberals” and “conservatives” and while the nuances and exceptions are legion, it does remain the core template by which politics is reported and it applies to institutions as varied as the Roman curia, the Israeli cabinet, the Church of England and presidential elections in the Islamic republic or Iran; while not entirely accurate, it remains useful.  What is less useful is the noun “liberalism” which in the nineteenth century did have a (more or less) accepted definition but which since has become so contested as to now be one of those words which means what people want it to me in any given time and place.  That the title of the “true inheritor” of liberalism has been claimed groups as diverse as certain neo-Marxists and the now defunct faction of the US Republican Party which used to be called the “Rockefeller Republicans” illustrates the problem.  Also suffering from meaning shifts so severe as to render it a phrase best left to professional historians is “neo-liberal”, first used in 1958 as a reference to French politics and theology but re-purposed late in the twentieth century to describe a doctrine which was a synthesis of laissez-faire economics, deregulation and the withdrawal of the state from anything not essential to national security, law & order and economic efficiency.  Some critics of latter day neo-liberalism call it "an attempt to repeal the twentieth century" which captures the spirit of the debate.

1972 Chrysler Valiant Charger R/T E49 (left) and 1974 Ford Falcon XB GT Hardtop (right), 1974 RE-PO 500K endurance race, Phillip Island, Victoria, Australia, November 1974.

The fifth round of the 1974 Australian Manufacturers' Championship, the 1974 RE-PO 500K event was run under Group C (Touring Cars) regulations over 106 laps (501 km (311 miles)) and one quirky thing about the race was it being a footnote in Australian political history, both the E49 Charger of Lawrie Nelson (b 1943) and the Falcon GT of Murray Carter (b 1931) carrying “Liberal” signage as part of a paid sponsorship deal arranged by the Liberal Party of Australia.  Carter finished second (Nelson a DNF (did not finish)), like the Liberal Party in that year's federal election (ie, they lost), although then party leader, Sir Billy Snedden (1926–1987), provided one of history's more memorable post election statements when he claimed "We didn't lose, we just didn't win enough votes to win." and he'd today be most remembered for that had it not be for the circumstances of his death which passed into legend.  Carter would later reveal that despite his solid result, the Liberal Party never paid up, the sponsorship deal apparently what later Liberal Party leader John Howard (b 1939; prime minister of Australia 1996-2007) might have called a "non-core promise".  

Death of former Australian Liberal Party leader Sir Billy Snedden.

The Liberal Party was in 1944 founded by Sir Robert Menzies (1894–1978; prime-minister of Australia 1939-1941 & 1949-1966) as essentially an “anti-Labor Party” aggregation of various groups and he emphasized at the time and often subsequently that he wanted his creation truly to be a “liberal” and not a “conservative” party; it was to be a “broad church” in which some diversity of opinion was not merely tolerated but encouraged.  Mostly he stuck to that although some would note as the years passed, perhaps he became a little less tolerant.  By 2024, the Liberal Party of Australia has fallen under the control of right-wing fanatics, religious fundamentalists & soft drink salesmen and it doubtful someone like Sir Robert would now want to join the party, even if they’d have him.  The current party leader is Peter Dutton (b 1970; leader of the opposition and leader of the Australian Liberal Party since May 2022).

The Australian arm of Rupert Murdoch's (b 1931) media empire has become essentially the propaganda unit of the Liberal Party of Australia.  In 2018 Brisbane’s Murdoch-owned Courier-Mail (known to sceptical locals as the “Curious Snail”) was able to run a gushing puff-piece on Mr Dutton, headed (left) by a statement from his wife Kirilly (b 1974): “He is not a monster.”  People might give him the benefit of the doubt on that one but the Courier-Mail has never been able to run the one on the right because neither Mr Dutton or his wife have ever denied he’s a Freemason.

A depiction of Peter Dutton in the regalia of a Freemason Grand Master (digitally altered image).  Note the apron worn beneath the jacket, a style unique to The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry.

The arrival of political parties called “Liberal Party” & “Conservative Party” (often with modifiers (Liberal Democrats, Liberal Movement etc) created the need for labels which distinguish between the “liberal” and “conservative” factions within each: while all members of a Liberal Party are “big L Liberals” some will be “small c conservatives” and some “small l liberals” which sounds a clumsy was of putting things but it’s well-understood.  Some though noted there were sometimes more similarities than differences, the US writer Ambrose Bierce (1842-circa 1914) in an entry in his Devil's Dictionary (1911) recording: "Conservative (noun), a statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others."  These days it he might be called a cynical structuralist.  Bierce, a US Civil War (1861-1865) veteran, never lost his sense of adventure and, aged 71, vanished without a trace in one of the great mysteries in American literary history.  The consensus was he probably was shot dead in Mexico and in one of his last letters there’s a hint he regarded such as fat as just an occupational hazard: “Good-bye. If you hear of my being stood up against a Mexican stone wall and shot to rags, please know that I think it is a pretty good way to depart this life.  It beats old age, disease, or falling down the cellar stairs. To be a Gringo in Mexico--ah, that is euthanasia!”

So, “liberal” being somewhat contested, while the comparative was “more liberal” and the superlative “most liberal”, modified forms appeared including anti-liberal, half-liberal, non-liberal, over-liberal, pre-liberal, pseudo-liberal, quasi-liberal, semi-liberal, uber-liberal, ultra-liberal, arch-liberal, classical-liberal, neoclassical-liberal and, of course, liberal-liberal & conservative-liberal.  In modern use there have been linguistic innovations including latte-liberal (the sort of “middle class” liberal who, stereotypically, orders complicated forms of coffee at the cafés & coffee shops in up-market suburbs, the term very much in the vein of “Bollinger Bolshevik” or “champagne socialist”.  A latte liberal is a variation of the earlier wishy-washy liberal (someone who will express fashionable, liberal views but will not deign to lift a finger to further their cause) with the additional implication they are of the middle class and committed only to the point of "virtue signaling".  The portmanteau word milliberal (the construct being mill(ennial) +‎ (li)beral is a liberal of the millennial generation (those born between 1981-1986).  The term boba-liberal comes from internet-based (notably X, formerly known as Twitter) political discourse (mostly in the US it seems) and is a slur describing a liberal-leaning Asian American with politics or attitudes considered too tepid or whitewashed by other Asian Americans, stereotyped as focusing on superficial gestures over more meaningful actions especially in regards to Asian American activism.  Those who comment on stories on Fox News have also contributed to the lexicon, the portmanteau libtard (the construct being lib(eral) + (re)tard) and the meaning self explanatory, as it is for NazLib, the construct being Naz(i) + Lib(eral).  So, especially in the US, “liberal” is a word which must be handled with care, to some a mere descriptor, to some a compliment and to others an insult.  While there are markers which may indicate which approach to adopt (is one's interlocutor carrying a gun, driving a large pick-up truck, listening to country & western music etc), none are wholly reliable and probably the best way is to work into the conversation a “litmus paper” phrase like “liberal gun laws”.  From the reaction, one's path will be clear.

But although there are some for who it seems a calling, being a liberal is not in the DNA and there have been some who became conservative, just as there are conservatives who converted to liberalism.  Indeed, were the views of many to be assessed, it’d like be found they are various to some degree liberal on some issues and conservative on others, a phenomenon political scientists call “cross-cutting cleavages”.  Political journeys are common and may be endemic to one’s aging (and certainly financial) path, there being many youthful anarchists, socialists and nihilists who have ended up around the boardroom table, very interested in preserving the existing system.  The path from liberalism can also be a thing of blatant opportunism.  It is no criticism of Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021) that he re-invented himself as an anti-liberal because that was the way to become POTUS (president of the United States), despite for decades his stated positions on many social issues revealing his liberal instincts.  It’s just the way politics is done.  It’s also the way business is done and it was unfortunate Rupert Murdoch (b 1931) elected to settle in the matter of Dominion Voting Systems v. Fox News to ensure no more of Fox’s internal documents entered the public domain.  Those which did appear were interesting in that far from Fox’s anti-liberal stance being Mr Murdoch’s ideological crusade, it was more the path to profit and were Fox’s audience to transform into something liberal, there would go Fox News.

Once was liberal: Candace Owens Farmer (née Owens and usually styled “Candace Owens”; b 1989) with "Candace Coffee Mug", one item in a range of Candace merchandise.

Because race remains the central fault-line in US politics, political cartoonists and commentators have never been prepared to have as much fun with the black conservatives as they enjoyed with “gay Republicans”, the latter a breed thought close to non-existent as last as the 1990s.  Black conservatism is to some extent aligned with black Christian religiosity but it’s a creature also of that under-reported demographic, the successful, black middle class, a diverse group but one which appears to have much in common with the priorities of their white counterparts.  In that sense Candace Owens is not wholly typical but she is much more entertaining and here early political consciousness was as a self-declared (though apparently retrospectively) liberal before moving to a nominally conservative stance although whether this was an ideological shift or a pursuit of clicks on the internet (on the model Mr Murdoch values to maximize revenue from Fox News) isn’t clear.  What is clear is Ms Owens knows about the Freemasons, her research into the cult beginning apparently when she “freaked out” after learning Buzz Aldrin (b 1930; who in 1969 was the second man to set foot on the Moon) is a confessed Freemason.  On 30 September, 2024, she discussed the Freemasons on her YouTube channel:

What is Freemasonry?  OK, so during the late Middle Ages, the world was united under the holy Roman Catholic church.  OK?  So if you had any opposition to the church throughout Europe, you were forced to go underground.  Right?  We were a Christian society.  And among the only organized groups that were able to move freely throughout Europe were these guilds of stonemasons, and they would then be, therefore, because they could move freely, hence, Freemasons.  They were able to maintain the meeting halls or lodges in virtually every major city, and the Masons were, essentially, very talented at architecture, and they had a bunch of secret knowledge — sometimes secret knowledge of architecture and of other topics.  And that knowledge was dated back to the times of Egypt. Right?  And it was essential maintaining this knowledge in the construction of European churches and cathedrals.

So one of the things that is well known is that Freemasons were in opposition to the church.  Right? They wanted to crush the church, which is why it is not ironic that the person who founded the Mormon church, as just one example — many of the churches, the very many Protestant faiths that we have — was Joseph Smith and he was a Freemason.  That's a fact, just as one example. Now, you may know some people that are Freemasons and you're going, well, I know this person and he goes to a lodge and he's completely harmless.  Yes. It is a known thing that 97 — like, something like 97% of Freemasons are not in the top tier degree of Freemasonry.  And it is understood that at the top tier degree of Freemasonry, you essentially become one of the makers of the world.

So I'm — just for those of you guys who've never even heard of that, and like I said, I would have been among you. I'm very new to relearning American history through the lens of Freemasonry. Some known Freemasons — George Washington was a Freemason, Thomas Jefferson was a Freemason, Benjamin Franklin was a Freemason, Buzz Aldrin was a Freemason — don't get me started. For those of you that have been listening to this podcast for a long time, you already know where I'm at — or where I'm at when it comes to NASA and the weird satanic chants that they were doing to establish the Apollo program and all the weird stuff that happened leading up to the moon landing. So I freaked out when I learned Buzz Aldrin was a Freemason.  It's not helping my case in believing those moon landings, I'll tell you that for free.  Franklin Roosevelt was another Freemason.

They're even on the moon: Autographed publicity photo of confessed Freemason Buzz Aldrin issued by NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) prior to the Apollo 11 Moon mission (16-24 July 1969).

Most have concluded Mr Aldrin secretly would have left on the surface of the moon some sort of Masonic symbol or icon.  Of the other eleven men to have walked on the moon, only Apollo 15's James Irwin (1930–1991) and Apollo 16's John Young (1930–2018) are known to have been confessed Freemasons but so secretive is the cult there could be others.  As a footnote, as a member of New Jersey's Montclair Lodge No. 144 which is associated with the Scottish Rite, Mr Aldrin presumably would have worn his apron underneath his jacket, something unique to the Scottish tradition. 

Whether Ms Owens changed her views on matters Masonic after hearing Mr Aldrin had endorsed Mr Trump isn’t known but he issued an unambiguous statement of support, sentiments with which presumably she’d concur.  The former astronaut was especially impressed the Republican candidate had indicated in a second term he would elevate space exploration as a “policy of high importance again” and that his first administration had “reignited national efforts to get back to the Moon and push on to Mars.”  Beyond that, Mr Aldrin noted: “The Presidency requires clarity in judgement, decisiveness, and calm under pressure that few have a natural ability to manage, or the life experience to successfully undertake. It is a job where decisions are made that routinely involve American lives – some urgently but not without thought.  For me, for the future of our country, to meet enormous challenges, and for the proven policy accomplishments above, I believe we are best served by voting for former President Trump. I wholeheartedly endorse him for President of the United States. Godspeed President Trump, and God Bless the United States of America.”  Masonic votes having the same value as any other, Mr Trump welcomed the support.

They're everywhere: Confessed Freemason Most Worshipful Brother Harry S. Truman (1884–1972; US president 1945-1953) in Masonic regalia including Worshipful Master collar and apron (over jacket) with Provincial Honours.  Although he served as US president or vice president for eight years, Truman later wrote: “The greatest honor that has ever come to me, and that can ever come to me in my life, is to be Grand Master of Masons in Missouri.”

Masonic aprons are obligatory wear for any Mason when in a lodge or temple and they’re worn always on the outside except in Scotland where the tradition is for them to sit under the jacket.  Like much else in the cult of Freemasonry, the apron is a symbol of a mason’s place in the hierarchy (as codified a system as the precedence afforded to the orders of knighthood in the UK's imperial honors) and although variations exist, there are essentially five layers of apron-wear:

(1) Enterered Apprentice: The apron of an entered apprentice is plain white to symbolise purity and innocence and usually made of lamb's leather.

(2) Fellow Craft: The Fellowcraft apron has the same white background as that of the Enterered Apprentice except for the addition of two blue rosettes.  Despite much research and speculation, it’s not known why the color blue is used.

(3) Master Mason: The decoration on a Master Mason’s apron is much more elaborate and is recognizably Masonic in a way the simpler constructions are not.  Because many Master Masons elect not to progress to the status of Worshipful Master, for many this will be the apron they wear for their entire Masonic career.

(4) Worshipful Master: The only change to the apron when one enters the chair as Worshipful Master is the blue rosettes are replaced by three levels.  The symbols are distinctive so the wearer instantly is recognizable as being a present or past Worshipful Master of a Lodge.

(5) Provincial Honours: Once a mason has gone through the chair and become Worshipful Master, his title changes from Brother to Worshipful Brother.  As the years pass, he may be granted Provincial honours and his apron will then be changed from light blue to dark blue with gold braid.

Knowing masons are everywhere among us, Ms Owens had been scheduled to speak at a number of engagements in Australia  & New Zealand but interestingly, in October 2024, the Australian government issued a press statement confirming her visa had been "canceled", based on her "capacity to incite discord", leading immediately to suspicions her silencing had been engineered by the Freemasons.  It’s good we have Ms Owens to warn us about liberals and the Freemasons, an axis of evil neglected by political scientists who tend often to take a structralist approach to the landmarks in the evolution of the use of the term “liberal” which they classify thus:

(1) Classical Liberalism which emerged in the seventeenth & eighteenth centuries, was rooted in the ideas of the Enlightenment with an emphasis on limited government, a free market (ideas as well as goods & services), individual liberty, freedom of speech, the rule of law and the enforcement of private property rights.  The movement was a reaction to absolute monarchies and state-dominated mercantilist economies.

(2) Social Liberalism (understood as “liberal” in modern US use) was a layer of rather than a fork off classical liberalism but it did accept a greater role for the state in regulating the economy and providing social welfare to ensure a fairer distribution of wealth and opportunity.  It was a nineteenth century development to address the excesses of “unbridled” capitalism” and its critique of economic inequality was remarkably similar to that familiar in the twenty-first century.

(3) Neoliberalism as a term first appeared in the late 1950s but in the familiar modern sense it was defined in the era of Ronald Reagan (1911-2004; US president 1981-1989) & Margaret Thatcher (1925–2013; UK prime-minister 1979-1990) who embarked on project built around a philosophy which afforded primacy to free markets, deregulation, privatization and a reduction in government spending, often combined with globalization.  Their program simultaneously to restrict the money supply while driving up asset prices had implications which wouldn’t be understood for some decades.  The Reagan-Thatcher neoliberal project was a reaction to the post oil-crisis stagflation (a portmanteau word, the construct being stag(nation) + (in)flation)) and the alleged failure of the welfare state & the orthodoxy of Keynesian economics, named after English economist and philosopher John Maynard Keynes (later Lord Keynes) 1883-1946).

(4) Political Liberalism was most famously articulated by US philosopher John Rawls (1921–2002) in his book A Theory of Justice (1971), a work nobody much under forty should attempt because few younger than that would have read enough fully to understand the intricacies.  In summary, it does sound remarkably simple because it calls for a pluralist society built on principles of justice and fairness, administered by a system of governance which permits a diversity of viewpoints while maintaining a fair structure of cooperation.  Rawls’ political liberalism draws one in to what soon becomes and intellectual labyrinth; once in, it’s hard to get out but it’s a nice place to spend some time and most rewarding if one can maintain the same train of thought for several weeks.

(5) Cultural Liberalism is not new but from the mid-twentieth century, its range of application expanded as previously oppressed groups began to enjoy a recognition of their rights, initially usually as a result of a change in societal attitudes and later, by a codification of their status in law, the matters addressed including ethnicity, feminism, civil liberties, reproductive rights, religion and the concerns of the LGBTQQIAAOP community.

(6) Liberal Internationalism is an approach to foreign policy (really a formal doctrine in some countries) advocating global cooperation, international institutions, human rights, and the promotion of democracy.  Its core tenants included support for multilateralism, international organizations like the United Nations (UN), global trade and the promotion of liberal democratic governance worldwide.  What is called the “liberal world order” has underpinned the western world since 1945 but its dominance is now being challenged by other systems which have their own methods of operation.

Cup

Cup (pronounced kuhp)

(1) A small, open container now manufactured usually using ceramics, plastic, glass or metal, typically with a single handle and used as a receptacle from which to drink fluids (tea, coffee, soup etc) and often categorized by design according to their nominal use (tea cup, coffee cup etc); many cups are supplied in sets with a saucer on which the cup sits protecting surfaces from spillage and offer a place on which a stirring spoon may sit.  A cup can be made from glass but may not be a “glass” while a glass made from glass may also have a handle while mugs are essentially cups but called something else.

(2) The bow-like part of a goblet or the like.

(3) A cup with its contents (“a cup of tea” etc).

(4) The quantity contained in a cup (which can be a general reference to any cup or a precisely defined measure).

(5) As a customary unit of measure, a defined unit of capacity frequently used in cooking, the quantum of which varies between (and sometimes within) markets but historically based on a half pint (now usually expressed as 220-250 ml or 14-20 tablespoons).  Measuring cups are available with graduations.

(6) An ornamental bowl, vase, etc especially of precious metal, offered as a prize for a contest (the use of “cup” often persisting even when trophies have been re-designed in a different form); a sporting contest in which a cup (or some other trophy) is awarded to the winner (collective known as the “cup competitions”).

(7) Any of various mixed beverages with one ingredient as a base and historically served from a bowl (claret cup burgundy cup, gin cup, cider cup etc).

(8) In Christianity, the chalice used in the Eucharist (used also of the consecrated wine of the Eucharist).

(9) Something to be partaken of or endured; one's portion, as of joy or suffering.

(10) In many fields, any cup-like utensil, organ, part, cavity etc; anything resembling a cup in shape or function.

(11) In botany, parts such as the flower base of some plants.

(12) In women’s underwear, the two forms containing the breasts in a bra or other garment in which an apparatus with a similar function is integrated (camisoles, bathing suits etc).

(13) In certain sports, a concave protective covering for the male genitalia, reinforced with usually with rigid plastic or metal (in some markets called a “box”, “cup” the common form in North America).

(14) In golf-course construction, the metal receptacle within the hole or the hole itself.

(15) In astronomy, a constellation or a crater.

(16) In pre-modern medicine, as “cupping glass”, a glass vessel from which air can be removed by suction or heat to create a partial vacuum, formerly used in drawing blood to the surface of the skin for slow blood-letting (also called the “artificial leech”).  The concept (cupping) remains in use (though without the blood-letting) in certain beauty treatments popular in East-Asia.

(17) In metalworking, a cylindrical shell closed at one end, especially one produced in the first stages of a deep-drawing operation; to form (tubing, containers etc) by punching hot strip or sheet metal and drawing it through a die.

(18) In mathematics, the cup-like symbol ∪, used to indicate the union of two sets.

(19) As CUP, the international standard (ISO 4217) currency code for the Cuban peso.

(20) In tarot card reading, a suit of the minor arcana or one of the cards from the suit.

(21) In ultimate frisbee competition, a defensive style characterized by a three player near defense cupping the thrower (or those three players).

(22) A flexible concave membrane used temporarily to attach a handle or hook to a flat surface by means of suction (the “suction cup”, the origins of which were in biomimicry (octopodes et al)).

(23) To take or place in, or as in, a cup.

(24) To form into a cuplike shape.

Pre-1000: From the Middle English cuppe & coppe, created by a blending of the Old English cuppe (cup) and the & Old Northumbrian copp (cup, vessel), from the Late Latin cuppa which etymologists list as being of uncertain origin but thought probably a variant of the earlier cūpa (tub, cask, tun, barrel) which may have been cognate with the Sanskrit kupah (hollow, pit, cave), the Greek kype (gap, hole; a kind of ship), the Old Church Slavonic kupu, the Lithuanian kaupas, the Old Norse hufr (ship's hull) and the Old English hyf (beehive).  Etymologists are divided on whether the source of the original Latin was the primitive Indo-European kewp- (a hollow) or the non Indo-European loanword kup- which was borrowed by and from many languages.  The Old English copp was from the Proto-West Germanic kopp (round object, bowl, vessel, knoll, summit, crown of the head), from the Proto-Germanic kuppaz, from the primitive Indo-European gew- (to bend, curve, arch), the source also of the obsolete English cop (top, summit, crown of the head) and the German Kopf (top, head).  The Middle English word evolved also under the influence of the Anglo-Norman cupe & the Old French cope & coupe.  The Late Latin cuppa begat many words meaning “cup” including the Old French coupe, the Saterland Frisian & West Frisian kop, the Old Frisian kopp, the Italian coppa, the Middle Dutch coppe, the Dutch kop & kopje, the Middle Low German kopp, the German Low German Koppke & Köppke, the Danish kop, the Spanish copa and the Swedish kopp.  It was a doublet of coupe, hive and keeve.  The German cognate Kopf now means exclusively “head”.  The first cups doubtlessly were formed by a “cupping” of the hands in order to drink and that action would have been pre-human and an important evolutionary step in the development of the brain.  Later, whatever fell conveniently to hand (sea-shells, the shells of nuts etc) would have been used before drinking vessels came to be fashioned from clay, wood or other materials.  Cup is a noun & verb, cupped & cupping are verbs; the noun plural is cups.

Art Deco and the coffee cup.

By the late fourteenth century, “cup” had come to be used of just about in the shape of what is now understood as a cup, the sense of “quantity contained in a cup” emerging about the same time.  The sense of a “cup-shaped metal vessel offered as a prize in sport or games” dates from the 1640s, the origin thought to be the traditional ceremonial ritual of celebrating victory by drinking wine or some other alcoholic brew and while it’s speculative, anthropologists have suggested there may be some symbolic link with the idea of “drinking the blood of the vanquished”.  The idea obviously persists, and among the more disgusting versions is drinking from a shoe or boot worn by the victor during the event.  That particular form of podophilic mixology actually has a long history but of late it’s become something of a fetish on the podiums in motor-sport; the term “shoey” was coined in the barbarian nation of Australia.

The origin of the use of “one cup in life” is in the Biblical scripture: And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt. (Matthew 26:39 (King James Version (KJV, 1611))).

The word cup appears in many scriptural verses which refer to God's judgment or a time of great suffering, Christ Himself asking James and John if they could "drink the cup" (Matthew 20:22) assigned to Him (by which he meant the suffering He soon would endure on the cross, experiencing God's judgment for the sins of humanity.  It’s an important theological point, emphasized (Hebrews 4:15) by Jesus seeming to be overwhelmed and saddened by the prospect and awfulness of his impending crucifixion, praying to God he be spared this fate.  Jesus was, although the son of God, also fully human and few humans wish to suffer humiliation, torture, and death so his prayer was natural but critically, almost at once he submits and resolves to obey the will of the Father.  Whatever his human anguish at what is to come, his absolute commitment was to obeying God.  The idea then is that “suffering is to be endured” was by the fourteenth century expressed in phrases like “the cup of life” and whatever may be the cup, it is “something to be partaken of” because it is the will of God.  In figurative use thus, “one’s cup” is that which is one’s lot to be endured; that which is allotted to one for good and bad whether it be paradise on Earth or nailed to the cross at Golgotha.

The daffodil (one of the common names of flowers of the genus Narcissus); as in many flowers, the alternative name for the corona is the cup.

To be in one's cups was to be “intoxicated”, a use dating from the 1610s which may have been a direct development from the mid-fourteenth century Middle English cup-shoten (drunk, drunken).  One’s “cup of tea” is what interests one and came into use in the 1930s of things or concepts although it’s documented from 1908 applying to persons; tellingly, the use of “not my cup of tea” is more common.  The “cup-bearer” was an early fifteenth century job description to describe the “attendant at a feast who conveys wine or other liquor to guests” but a more specialized use was of the court official who carried with him the cups, plates and other utensils to be used by those fearing poisoning (usually royalty or feudal barons).  The phrase “storm in a tea cup” refers to a fuss being made over a trivial matter and is in the same vein as “much ado about nothing”, “tempest in a teapot”, “storm in a teapot”, “lightning in a bottle” and “make a mountain out of a molehill”.

America's Cup (left), FIFA World Cup (centre) and William Webb Ellis Cup (left).

In sport, cups are a popular choice as trophies and they range from small ones in anodised plastic to large, heavy constructions plated in gold or silver.  The America's Cup is contested in yacht racing and, first awarded in 1870, is the oldest international sporting competition still running.  Informally, competitors call it the “Auld Mug”.  The Fédération Internationale de Football Association’s (FIFA, the International Federation of Association Football) World Cup was first contested in 1930 with the tournament since run at four year intervals (skipping 1942 & 1946 because of World War II (1939-1945)).  The name “World Cup” remains although the trophy hasn’t, in the conventional sense of the word, actually been a cup since 1974, the last year the finals were contested by 16 teams (there will be 48 in 2026).  The Webb Ellis Cup is the premier trophy in international rugby and since 1987 tournaments have been run every four years.  The cup is named after English Anglican clergyman William Webb Ellis (1806–1872) who, according to legend, while a pupil at Rugby School, Webb Ellis ignored the rules of the football game he was playing, picking up the ball and running with it “…thereby creating rugby.”  There’s no satisfactory evidence to support the tale and within the game there’s the joke what Webb Ellis invented was rugby's (some say Rugby School's) tradition of theft.

Example of the idiomatic use of cup in the phrase “one’s cup runneth over”: Model Adriana Fenice (b 1994) in 32G (10G or anything between 70-82G depending where sold) bra.

The verb use “to cup” was a part of pre-modern medicine by the fourteenth century, describing the use of something cup-like to press against the skin to draw blood closer to the surface prior to “slow blood-letting”.  Medical dictionaries note there were two modes of cupping: one in which the part is scarified and some blood taken away to relieve congestion or inflammation of internal parts (“wet cupping”, or simply “cupping”), the other in which there was no scarification no blood was abstracted (“dry cupping”).  The concept (as “cupping” and without the bleeding) is still used in certain beauty treatments popular in East-Asia.  The cupful (quantity; that a cup holds, contents of a cup) was known in late Old English and persists to this day, the phrase “cup runneth over” is used to refer an over-supply of anything and was from the Hebrew Bible (Psalms:23:5) where the message was “I have more than enough for my needs” and thus a caution against greed, or in the words of Johann Sebastian Bach (1685–1750): Ich habe genug (I have enough) an unfashionable view in a materialist age although one with which Ms Fenice might concur.  Modifiers are appended as required, hyphenated and not including the teacup (circa 1700), the egg-cup (used for making the eating of boiled eggs easier (1773)) and the cupcake (1828).  Cupcakes were “small cakes intended for one” and were an invention of US English, the name derived either from cup-shaped containers in which they were baked or from the small measures of ingredients used.  The slang use to describe an “attractive young woman” was another American innovation from the 1930s.

Art Deco and the tea cup: 1934 "Tango" trio by Royal Doulton in bone china, the cup with the classic pointed handle.

The use of “cup” in recipes is probably one of the less helpful uses of the word and for those not familiar with the conventions, they were probably baffled and wondering which of the various sized cups they had should be used.  The origin of “cup” as a measure lies in the old English unit which was ½ an imperial pint and thus (10 imperial ounces (284 ml), often later rounded to 300 ml.  Elsewhere, countries did their own thing: In Australia & New Zealand it was set at 250 ml after the conversion to metric measurements in 1973; In the US it was a liquid measure equal to 8 fluid ounces (237 ml which was usually rounded to 240); In Canada it was set at 8 imperial ounces (227 ml and rounded to 250).  The “metric cup” is now a universal 250 ml and for recipes this appears to be the preferred use even in North America.

Bra cups

Example of the idiomatic use of cup in the phrase "storm in a D Cup": Lindsay Lohan in demi-cup bra, from a photoshoot by Terry Richardson (b 1965) for Love magazine, 2012.

If in cooking "cup" has been (just about) standardized around the world, the bra cup, that other use of cup as an expression of volume is bafflingly diverse, anomalies appearing even within a manufacturer's catalogue.  The use of cup in the bra business seems to have begun in the 1930s although among historians of the bra (a surprisingly well populated niche in the discipline of the history of fashion) many differ in detail; the vague consensus seems to be the term was first used in this context in the early 1930s, was wide-spread by 1940 and almost universal by the early 1950s.  The principle of the cup size was compelling simple in that there were two variables (1) the torso and (2) the breasts.  The measurement of the torso was expressed by the bra band size (measured under the bust) in inches (or its metric equivalent) such as 30”, 32”, 34” etc, the graduations between the numbers handled by the fastening mechanism (usually a hook & eye arrangement) allowing a “tight” or “loose” fit so a 32” band could be worn by someone with a torso measurement in a 31-33 inch range.  The cup size range corresponded with the volume of the breast and (in ascending order) these were expressed in letters: A, B, C, D etc so when combined, the products were called 32B, 34C etc.  In theory, the two values worked progressively (up & down: alphabetically & numerically) so the cup size of a 32C was the same as a 30D and a 34B; in the industry, the concept is called "sister sizes", each cup the same dimensions but mounted on a different sized structure (defined by the back-band) and labelled accordingly.  That's the theory and within a manufacturer's single range it may often be true but there is no recognized definition for cup sizes so not only are any two 32Cs from different manufacturers likely to be a slightly different size, nor can it be expected the dimensions of the cup of any 30D will align exactly with that of any other 34B.  It may but it can't be predicted and the expectation should be it will likely "tend towards".

Maaree's graphical depiction of the "sister size" concept.  The point is that while band size is an absolute (expressed usually in inches or centimetres), cup size can be an absolute (within the same band size) or a comparative (when applied to different band sizes. 

English borrowed the word brassiere from the French brassière, from the Old French braciere (which was originally a lining fitted inside armor which protected the arm, only later becoming a garment), from the Old French brace (arm) although by then it described a chemise (a kind of undershirt) but in the US, brassiere was used from 1893 when the first bras were advertised and from there, use spread.  The three syllables were just too much to survive the onslaught of modernity and the truncated “bra” soon prevailed, being the standard form throughout the English-speaking world by the early 1930s.  Curiously, in French, a bra is a soutien-gorge which translates literally and rather un-romantically as "throat-supporter" although "chest uplifter" is a better translation.  The etymological origin of the modern "bra" lying in a single garment is the reason one buys "a bra" in the same department store from which one might purchase "a pair" of sunglasses or trousers, both of which, centuries ago, began as two separate items.     

Bra size multi-national conversion chart by Fredericks of Hollywood.  Like the footwear business, it seems an industry crying out for an ISO (International Organization for Standardization) but while something buyers might welcome, it seems unlikely industry would share the enthusiasm.  Sizing systems for shoes and bras evolved independently in different regions, based either on local traditions and preferences or just wholly arbitrary choice and there would be much commercial resistance to having to change long-established conventions, something which would necessitate updating labels, packaging & advertising, as well as re-educating initially baffled consumers.  Obviously, that would be costly and therefore lobbied against.  ISO 19407:2015 does provide guidelines for converting shoe sizes between regions but that’s more an acknowledgement of a problem (and a “sort-of”) work-around than a solution and the ISO seems never to have contemplated bras.  Probably, the only way such ISOs could successfully be imposed would be to give industry a long lead-time (perhaps 25-30 years) to permit an orderly and phased world-wide introduction but realistically, few are expecting progress.

Unfortunately the manufacturers complicated things in a number of ways.  Given the A,B,C,D ascending sequence, it would have been reasonable to assume E,F,G & H would follow and in some cases they did but not all, some adopting a double letter convention yielding DD, EE etc but these did not represent fractional sizing-steps between single letters; what was to some manufacturers a DD was an E to others and some were so taken with the idea they added triple lettered sizes so a 32DDD was nominally the equivalent of a 32F from another house.  Some quirks were understandable such as the one which explains the rarity of the I cup, the explanation being the character might be confused with a numeric "1" which, given the syntax of the system, seems improbable but one can see their point.  Although there are a few "I cup" bras, most manufacturers skip the letter and either leave a nominal gap between the "H" & "J" cups or include a "HH" cup in the range (although there are the odd few who stop at "G" and handle icremental increases in volume with "GG" & "GGG".  It's only the descriptions where there's a lacuna, the actual cup sizes on offer still graduated although it can be mystifying because, between manufacturers, the same size can actually be tagged as "H", "I", "HH", "J" or even "GGG" and while that can make in-store shopping merely time-consuming, for on-line shoppers it makes life especially difficult, the the attraction of an ISO.  

1962 Chrysler 300H (left) and 1963 Chrysler 300J (right).

Chrysler in the US, not wanting the market to think there was a "3001", was in 1963 guided by the same rationale when for the first time since 1956 a letter was skipped in the designation of the 300 “letter series” cars; there’s nothing to suggest the corporation ever pondered a “300HH”.

The BUFF: The new version of the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress (replacing the B-52H) will be the B-52J, not B-52I or B-52HH.   

The US Air Force also opted to skip “I” when allocating a designation for the updated version of the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress (1952-1962 and still in service).  Between the first test flight of the B-52A in 1954 and the B-52H entering service in 1962, the designations B-52B, B-52C, B-52D, B-52E, B-52F & B-52G sequentially had been used but after flirting with whether to use B52J as an interim designation (reflecting the installation of enhanced electronic warfare systems) before finalizing the series as the B-52K after new engines were fitted, in 2024 the USAF announced the new line would be the B-52J and only a temporary internal code would distinguish those not yet re-powered.  Again, the “I” was not used so nobody would think there was a B-521.  Although the avionics, digital displays and ability to carry Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM, a scramjet-powered weapon capable exceeding Mach 5) are the most significant changes for the B-52J, visually, it will be the replacement of the old Pratt & Whitney TF33 engines with new Rolls-Royce F130 units which will be most obvious, the F130 promising improvements in fuel efficiency of some 30% as well as reduction in noise and exhaust emissions.  Already in service for 70 years, apparently no retirement date for the B-52 has yet been pencilled-in.  In USAF (US Air Force) slang, the B-52 is the BUFF (the acronym for big ugly fat fellow or big ugly fat fucker depending on who is asking).  From BUFF was derived the companion acronym for the LTV A-7 Corsair II (1965-1984, the last in active service retired in 2014) which was SLUFF (Short Little Ugly Fat Fellow or Short Little Ugly Fat Fucker).

Under the A-B-C-D etc cup-sizing system, a given designation varies in dimensions (and thus volumetric capacity) according to the band size, the cup of a 28A smaller than that of a 32A (which should share size and shape with that used on a 30B).   

The theory: Individual results may vary.

Then there was the band size.  Most countries of course use the metric system so dimensions had to be converted but the convention for those advertised in inches was to use increments of 2 (28, 30, 32 etc) while for metric users it was in jumps of 5 cm (70, 75, 80 etc) which is close but not quite the same (28” = 71.12 cm; 30” = 76.2 cm; 32 = 82.28 cm).  More of a problem was that for the system to work, some math was required because the number from the under-bust measurement didn’t directly translate to the advertised bra size: What the buyer had to do was take the number and add 5 inches (12.7 cm) so if one’s under-bust measurement was 29” (73.7 cm), one (at least in theory) needed something with a 34” band (86.4 cm, the closest in the metric countries being the 85 cm range).  However, if the number was over 33” (83.8 cm), then one added only 3” (7.6 cm).  At that point, one needed to determine the appropriate cup.  This required a further measurement, one taken which represented the bust at its fullest projection, the somewhat misleadingly named “over-bust” number which was actually taken following the nipple line.  Many recommended taking it while wearing a bra but if that was a poor fit, that would hardly be helpful and the ideal method turned out to be (and usually this was necessary only if the volume was above a certain point) holding the breasts in place at the desired location while another did the measuring.  An ideal project then in which to involve one’s boyfriend or girlfriend, the only instructions needed being (1) the tape should rest lightly on the skin and (2) it should straight across the back, parallel to the floor.  The relationship between the over-bust measurement and the band size indicated the needed cup size: if the difference is 1” (2.54 cm) then it dictates an A cup; 2” (5.08 cm) and it’s a B cup and so on.  In many cases the simple under/over equation will work but not in all and some authorities have added additional measurements to be taken while in different positions, the 6 listed including lying flat on one's back and leaning forward so the breasts are perpendicular to the ground.  Definitely, the more dimensions which are taken, the more this seems a job for two.  

The math of cup sizes.

In practice it transpired the human body wasn’t so accommodating of production line rationalization but the system worked well enough for it to have endured for decades although only a percentage of women find an ideal fit without the help of an in-store fitter.  Quite what that number is depends on who is asked but it’s clear it’s a long way short of 100%.  The outcome for bra wearers wasn’t helped by the lack of standardization in either the labeling or the technical specification of the cup size.  The inches vs centimetres thing was manageable but even in some countries which had long switched to the metric system, bras sizes were often expressed in inches (a similar aberration to the (almost) universal use of inches for certain products including the wheels used on cars and computer monitors) and because of the internationalized nature of the market with so much imported product, in many countries, both sizing regimes simultaneously were on sale, often in the same shop.  Helpfully, many displayed wall charts with conversion tables.  For some reason, in Australia and New Zealand, the decision was taken to use the dress sizing standard used in the antipodes (8 = 30”, 10 = 32” etc), thus bra sizes like 8C, 10D etc which local users presumably adapted to but it seems a needless complication.  Additionally, regardless of what country one was in, there was no guarantee a given size from one manufacturer would exactly align with that from another and in England, a comparison by a consumer organization revealed band and cup size differences existed in stated sizes even between various styles produced by the same manufacturer; not all 32Ds were created equal.  Given that, it seems obvious it’s best to seek the assistance of a fitter but in the internet age, customers found capitalism offered a handy on-line, home delivered alternative, the trick being to order half a dozen bras of slightly different declared sizes (eg 32C, 30D, 32E etc), the ones not quite right being able to returned for credit at no cost, the site paying all the P&H (postage & handling).  That approach has attracted much criticism because of the environmental impact and it’s a significant cost to the distributor and some have now moved to restrict the practice.

Details of fifteenth century bras in Linen from Austria.

Although it wasn’t until well into the twentieth century the idea of cup sized was codified (though to this day not standardized), the concept turned out to be ancient, something confirmed in 2008 when, as part of her PhD research, Austrian anthropologist Beatrix Nutz was undertaking at the University of Innsbruck in Austria, retrieved from the dirt, wood and straw (all discarded stuff apparent used as insulation) of centuries ago in the foundations of an Austrian castle, four linen bras among some 4000 textile fragments.  What was striking was the medieval garment was the similarity to the version first patented in the United States in 1914 something perhaps unsurprising as there really is only one way to achieve the functional effect desired if a minimalist approach is pursued and that’s what was done, a few centuries apart.

Fifteenth century "longline" bra in Linen from Austria, the midriff-enveloping fabric originally extending beneath the cups.

The detailing on the garments would be familiar to those bra shopping in the twenty-first century, the lower ends decorated with finger-loop-laces, sown on with lace-stitches, resulting some simple needle-lace decoration.  There’s structural overlap too, one of the unearthed bras in the style of the “longline” bras which first became popular in the 1930s, both representing the practical expedient of combining a type of corset with a bra.  Clearly, while not necessarily something with wide commercial availability, garments in the style of the linen bras must have been well-known (at least in certain circles because in French texts as early as 1315 CE there are mentions of the “breast bags” or “shirts with bags” women used to support and restrain their breasts and one disapproving author called them “indecent” although it seems his objection was to “breasts too large” rather than the pre-modern lingerie used to minimize their appearance and the longest known surviving fragment in this vein is a verse from fifteenth century Vienna:

Ir manche macht zwen tuttenseck
Damit so snurt sie umb die eck,
Das sie anschau ein ieder knab,
Wie sie hübsche tütlein hab;
Aber welcher sie zu groß sein,
Die macht enge secklein,
Das man icht sag in der stat,
Das sie so groß tutten hab.

Translation:

Many a woman makes two bags for the breasts,
with them she roams the streets,
so that all the guys look at her,
and see what beautiful breasts she has got;
But whose breasts are too large,
makes tight pouches,
so it is not told in the city
that she has such big breasts.

Nursing bras use specialized cups: Lindsay Lohan inspects the apparatus in Labor Pains (2009).

The most obvious specialized cup is that used with nursing bras which feature an arrangement whereby most of the cup’s fabric can be semi-separated from the superstructure, enabling breast-feeding without the need to remove the whole garment.  Among bra manufacturers, there are different implementations by which the functionality of a nursing bra's apparatus is achieved and presumably chest-feeders (the preferred term among the woke to describe those who used to be called “breast-feeding women”) choose whichever best suits them; it may simply be that for manufacturers the production-line rationalization achieved by being able to adapt the specialized cups to the structures used for conventional bras is compelling, dictating the designs.  Which chest-feeders choose is of some significance given how often heard is the complaint the process is “tiring”.  To those who will never be chest-feeders it sounds more a pleasant and diverting relaxation rather than anything tiring but they all say it so it must be true.

The "push-up" bra (the best-known of which is the "Wonderbra") lives up to its name by using strategically placed padding which has the effect of "pushing up" the breast tissue (it has nowhere else to go), creating the visual effect of something bigger and higher.  Most padding is purely functional but there are also novelty items such as the one above which is variant of the "hand bra", also a thing.  

The cupless: A "special purpose" bra available in S, M, L & XL.

Other variations include the demi-cup (also called the half-cup ("semi-cup" not a recognized term)), the bullet cup, the adhesive cup (an enlarged & shaped adaptation of the so-called "tit-tape" technology), the padded cup and the seemingly paradoxical cupless (or open-cup), the last a niche market.  Those wanting to have "their cake and eat it too" who like to go braless while enjoying the benefit of some support can buy clothes with a "built-in bra" or a "shelf-bra" although the law of physics continue to operate and beyond a certain size (and more to the point: mass), these things simply: "don't work".  The cups of a "push-up bra" include thick padding towards the bottom of the structure, this having the effect of "pushing up" the breast tissue, lending things a higher, fuller look.  There are degrees to which this can be implemented: the more the padding, the greater the effect.

Vaquera’s crew neck T-shirt with trompe l'oeil underwear.  Despite the model’s expression (it’s part of their training for the catwalks), the look really should be worn for fun.  The skin-tone of the legs is because of tights, not Photoshopping.

Bra cups can even be virtualized.  The technique called tompe-l'œil (from the French and literally “trick the eye” describes an optical illusion created by rendering on a two-dimensional surface something which appears as a three-dimensional object and the trick had been around for millennia when first the term was used in 1800 by French artist Louis-Léopold Boilly (1761-1845) for a painting he exhibited in the Paris Salon.  While it wasn’t for a few decades trompe-l'œil (usually in English as trompe l'oeil) was accepted by the academy as a legitimate part of high-art, architects and interior decorators continued to exploit the possibilities and the term entered their lexicons.  It has of course for years also been used in the prints on T-shirts but of late this has extended to depictions of underwear.  For most of the twentieth century, the sight of an exposed bra strap was a social faux pas, Vogue and other dictators of fashion publishing helpful tips recommending (for the well-organized) sewing on Velcro strips and (for everyone else) the industry’s DLR (device of last resort): the safety pin.  By the 1980s things had changed and the bra emerged as a fashion piece which might in part (or even in whole) be displayed.  It’s a look which waxes and wanes in popularity but one which has never gone away although it’s one of those things where ageism remains acceptable: beyond a certain age, it shouldn’t be used.  Now, fashion houses are promoting trompe l'oeil bras, knickers and other underwear printed on T-shirts, one attraction being it’s possible to create depictions of garments appearing to possess an intricacy or delicacy either not financially viable or impossible IRL (in real life).

A mastectomy bra with prostheses (left) and with the prostheses inserted in the cups' pockets (centre & right).

There are also bras for those who have lost a breast, the cups of which are “double-skinned” in that they feature internal “pockets” into which a prosthetic breast form (a prosthesis) can be inserted.  Those who have had a unilateral (or single) mastectomy (the surgical amputation of one breast) can choose a cup size to match the remaining while those who have lost both (a bilateral or double mastectomy) can adopt whatever size they prefer.  There are now even single cup bras for those who have lost one breast but opt not to use a prosthetic, an approach which reflects both an aesthetic choice and a reaction against what is described in the US as the “medical-industrial complex”, the point being that women who have undergone a mastectomy should not be subject to pressure either to use a prosthetic or agree to surgical reconstruction (a lucrative procedure for the industry).  This has now emerged as a form of advocacy called the “going flat” movement which has a focus not only on available fashions but also the need for a protocol under which, if women request an AFC (aesthetic flat closure, a surgical closure (sewing up) in which the “surplus” skin (often preserved to accommodate a future reconstructive procedure) is removed and the chest rendered essentially “flat”), that is what must be provided.  The medical industry has argued the AFC can preclude a satisfactory cosmetic outcome in reconstruction if a woman “changes her mind”  but the movement insists it's an example of how the “informed consent” of women is not being respected.  Essentially, what the movement seems to be arguing is the request for an AFC should be understood as an example of the legal principle of VAR (voluntary assumption of risk).  The attitude of surgeons who decline to perform an AFC is described by the movement as the “flat refusal”.