The Problem Is Clearly Just Impractical Lady Armor

bataillemeup:

thepeacockangel:

bataillemeup:

thepeacockangel:

And not way women are written or the contrast with the way male characters are designed or even good old fashioned misogyny.

Because men

(Minoan warriors)

have never

(ancient Egyptian warriors) 

worn anything

(Early Hastati)

skimpy

(the Dying Gaul)

or impractical

(French soldier)

into battle 

(Zulu warrior 1940s)

Ever

(German landsknechts)

At all

(Maori warriors… who just FYI are the reason New Zealand is founded on a treaty and not a constitution) 

Ever

(early Spartan Hoplite)

Nope, no seemingly impractical or skimpy outfits on warriors.  What a silly idea.

(Mayan warrior)

This really speaks to the whole ritualistic aspect of war – sacrifice and spectacle and all that.

Yes but also to the fact that different cultures have had different methods of warfare that have favored different levels of armor and like even the big hats serve a purpose (so a commander can see where his guys are from a distance) so… it varies. Like there’s literally zero reason for the enforced buzz cuts in many modern militaries, it’s just aesthetic…

Hugo Boss designed nazi uniforms. The uniforms were so tailored they couldn’t be sat in. Aesthetics of war indeed …

and they didn’t want to have to have a belt so they had this impractical internal suspension system that didn’t work anyway so they had to have a belt, and consumed a fuck ton of labor to make. My husband and I talk about this all the time.