Madeira Darling is a snarky mystic, devout Satanist, serious Marxist, laughing dominatrix, and writer from San Fransisco where they live with their boyfriend in a house full of altars to their various demons.
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.
@largishcat: hey you wanna point me to a single post about dumb lady armor that DOESNT go literally “not only is this SEXIST it wouldn’t even work!” because you’re making it seem like people are concentrating on ~accuracy~ while pretending that boob armor is NOT sexist and let me tell you that is very much not the case. plus its very VERY common for fuckboy nerds to plead ~accuracy~ when defending their sexist media, is there a particular reason why you object to people refuting that
Me: Really, cause I’ve seen many. I’ve also seen a fuck ton of lady armor depicted as practical that simply fucking isn’t.for the aforementioned reasons. Also given the history of military attire, it’s also just an absurd, ahistorical, incoherent argument. Like it’s just a bad fucking argument because (as someone who is really into costume history) it’s simply not true. Like they don’t actually care about accuracy or everything wouldn’t be covered in spikes that prevent you from raising your arm all the way. Incidentally, the arguments against boob plate being workable and protective are… frankly bad (as I explain here). I just hate the modern “utilitarianism” aesthetic invading fucking fantasy art and being outlandishly misapplied to historical periods. I don’t want practical armour for women, I want armour that is every bit as spicy, horned, and over the top badass as the dudes get (or dudes in tiny leather booty shorts, either is acceptable to me). IAlso I have never seen a nerd boy plead accuracy on cleavage armour, ever.
but boob plat is totally unworkable and would totally get you killed you guis (DO YOU SEE THE MAN TITTY ON THAT THING?)
@largishcat HOWEVER that said, the majority of terrible boob plate is in games/media that’s supposed to be vaguely Medieval European, which besides steel responding differently to being worked than bronze (which is why you don’t see medieval knights in muscle cuirasses) lots of boobage was generally not a part of the fashionable silhouette through much of the medieval period, generally you wanted to have a distended pregnant looking belly during the 15th century with small high perky boobs
and during the Renaissance, the ideal was sort of a cone shape… so… y’ know.
And armour tends to follow the dictates of the fashion of a period quite a bit… so like yeah, if you want *~*historical accuracy*~* use actual Medieval and Renaissance silhouettes
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…
Having your female characters armoured significantly differently from your male characters is, in fact, an accuracy booboo (provided they’re playing roughly the same combat role). If a society’s method of warfare is heavy armour and big slow tank sorta stuff, then you’re going to have a bad time if you’re wearing less (unless you’re in a Hoplites and Peltasts situation).but like making all your dudes Hoplites and all your ladies Peltasts… is suspicious, to say the least.
I keep seeing arguments as to why boob plate should be banned from fantasy art because it is unworkable and will kill you and the argument basically says that should you ever fall down or get a blow to the chest, your armor will crunch in on your sternum killing you instantly This argument makes me mad partially because it’s not true, and partially because people’s proposed solutions are usually shitty boring ass “realistic”/”practical” armor (that’s wildly unrealistic and just exists in their imagination because of modern ideas of utilitarianism and practicality and the Victorians removing all the fouffy fabric bits and beautiful paint work from medieval suits of armor so that it looked “right” to them) so here’s my explanation of why it’s wrong and what we should do instead of the boring shit people usually suggest.
1. The problem isn’t whether or not it’s accurate, the problem is whether or not it’s misogynist, Most fantasy armor wouldn’t articulate right, has pointy sticky offy bits that would fuck you up in all sorts of ways, and removes a lot of the ornate metal work and fabric decoration that armor actually involved, but it’s fantasy SO THAT’S OKAY
The issue is that we keep hypersexualizing every goddamned female character ever put in armor and not doing the same thing to dudes, either put the dudes in a chainmail loincloth or don’t draw goddamn boob plate. I mean don’t even get me started on how leather armor is used so goddamned often when it was in fact a weird and incredibly rare choice.
Making it about accuracy distracts from the fact that the actual issue at hand is misogyny.
2. Ever seen Lorica Musculata?
3. That would only happen if you hammered a cleavage line in to a regular cuirass, if you hammer cups out, poured molten metal into a mold, or added boobs externally onto a cuirass (because I mean the real ones are kinda behind a bunch of padding) you’d be fine. This also assumes that armor bends or breaks MUCH more easily than it actually does. Armor is THICK bronze or steel.
4. But the real thing is, the onus is not on you to prove it’s impossible, the onus is on designers to justify why they’re putting it in there in the first place. Especially if you’re doing something where the designs are based on any actual period of history rather than a mishmash, because like men’s armor was based on the fashion trends of the day, and honestly designers are always missing out on awesome design inspiration, because like they could be using ladies’ fashion of the era to inspire their designs and it’d look fucking cool. I mean there are some eras where boob plate makes sense (17th century, ancient rome) and others where it doesn’t (13th to 16th century)
But seriously let’s have a loot at some fashion and armor of history:
14th century:
15th century:
16th Century:
Please note how the men’s fashion mirrors the silhouettes of the armor and vice versa, now please use more creativity in your costume design, armor was way more interesting and varied than most fantasy artists draw and it sucks, also make use of the elaborate headdresses, they look awesome. Like you don’t need to feel utterly bound to historical accuracy but the dull consistency of silhouettes in a lot of fantasy armor bores me to fucking tears, do some actual research and use some actual historical inspiration
Here’s a shitty scan of my husband being clever and awesome.
@largishcat: hey you wanna point me to a single post about dumb lady armor that DOESNT go literally “not only is this SEXIST it wouldn’t even work!” because you’re making it seem like people are concentrating on ~accuracy~ while pretending that boob armor is NOT sexist and let me tell you that is very much not the case. plus its very VERY common for fuckboy nerds to plead ~accuracy~ when defending their sexist media, is there a particular reason why you object to people refuting that
Me: Really, cause I’ve seen many. I’ve also seen a fuck ton of lady armor depicted as practical that simply fucking isn’t.for the aforementioned reasons. Also given the history of military attire, it’s also just an absurd, ahistorical, incoherent argument. Like it’s just a bad fucking argument because (as someone who is really into costume history) it’s simply not true. Like they don’t actually care about accuracy or everything wouldn’t be covered in spikes that prevent you from raising your arm all the way. Incidentally, the arguments against boob plate being workable and protective are… frankly bad (as I explain here). I just hate the modern “utilitarianism” aesthetic invading fucking fantasy art and being outlandishly misapplied to historical periods. I don’t want practical armour for women, I want armour that is every bit as spicy, horned, and over the top badass as the dudes get (or dudes in tiny leather booty shorts, either is acceptable to me). IAlso I have never seen a nerd boy plead accuracy on cleavage armour, ever.
but boob plat is totally unworkable and would totally get you killed you guis (DO YOU SEE THE MAN TITTY ON THAT THING?)
Is that it’s a bad argument for a good cause, most fantasy armour wouldn’t work properly in battle (leather bits where there shouldn’t be, armour that wouldn’t articulate or allow freedom of movement, or have enough room for under armour padding, etc etc) and it’s used as a way to skirt the fact that the real issue is sexism.
Stop appealing to nerd boys desperate need to have all their fantasy media be “UBER HYPER REALISTIC” (because it’s not, it never is because almost none of them do enough research to make things accurate) and just point out that it’s fucking sexist.
Thoughts From The Peacock Angel 