Who said Adam or men have nipples? I don't. I have items that look like miniature, flattened versions of them but I don't have them. They do not physiologically function in the same way as the genuine female items do either in the milk-supplying department of in the pleasure rôle they have and for which women are blessed. (I guess most aren't complaining). What I do have, though, are a couple of images of the genuine item to remind us where women come from. Woman is from man as Eve is from Adam. Women are, actually, spoiled (double blessed) in as much as they have acquired, for purely pleasurable purposes (denied us with the pseudo-nipples), a miniature replica of our progenerative organ (what the Chinese euphemistically call the 'jade stalk'), to likewise and additionally remind us that woman is derived from man too.

She has been given something of the man (a miniature 50% bonus functioning stalk) whilst leaving an image behind in the upper regions (having taken 100% of the original). I suppose that one could argue that aesthetically we would (as men) be the poorer without this nipplic image, and I would agree, as it creates artistic peaks for the mountain tops we were forever denied.

So I guess you could call them memorials of origins. That, at any rate, is what the Ruach whispered to me as I started answering you.

I hope this gives you some peace on this Shabbat!

P.S. What is much more troubling to me (aesthetically-speaking) is what our first parents must have looked like without belly-buttons.

Forgive me if I've misinterpreted what you have written. But are you saying that (not to put to fine a point on it!) before God took woman from Adam he had neither nipples nor belly button. Belly button I can understand, as he had no earthly mother. And when Eve was created God left an impression of her breasts on Adam and she was given a miniature version of his genitals?

Partly (as far as male genetalia are concerned). I am saying that pre-Eve Adam looked as he did after Eve was made from him and as men do today (though who knows - no one was there by them). Adam's pre-Eve nipplets were simply immature nipples and remained so after Eve was created as a sign that Eve was made from him and for aesthetic beauty. Nothing more than that.

Lol I have never had a discussion like this before so for modesty's sake I hope you're mind is soon at rest ;)

lol, but why, I ask, would God have given Adam pre-Eve nipplets when they were of no earthly use? Even male animals have nipples, just check your cats, if one is male. And the animals came before Adam. So was God thinking when he made Adam that he knew before hand (as he knows everything before hand, even our own prayers before we've thought them up) that he would make a female version of human kind which would need such bodily parts?
I don't think anyone else is following this convo! (hopefully)

Beresheeth /Genesis2:23
And Ahdahm said, "This is now bone of my bones, and
flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Isha, because she
was taken out of Ish."

It was necessary for Adahm to have nipplets so that Chawa could have full blown nipples.

ok, I posted the same question on ukchristians.net and I received this reply which has sufficiently put my mind at rest.

http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5248

Maybe for the same reason GM cars all have the ability to have the steering wheels moved to the right side of the vehicle for European and Canadian drivers. Our vehicles are largely interchangeable in physicality the determinative factors are the hormones. Men have actually been able to nurse children, bizarre but if it meant saving a life, then who's to judge? No one knows if Adam had nipples or a belly button, maybe he didn't. The same thing is common in nature, maybe the better question is , why not?
I don't think there is any cause for alarm, maybe it's Abba's sense of humor at work?