You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
114 points

I raise you Emperor Ferdinand I Armor, specifically it’s Codpiece.

I’m just saying. Sexualized armor is very historical.

permalink
report
reply

Doesn’t make it and less ridiculous to try and be sexy in a situation where you need protection to prevent dying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
98 points
*

True. But it keeps happening.

Be it two thousand years ago or 500 years ago. Sexy armor proves that humans haven’t really changed.


Kings and generals don’t really find themselves alone on the front lines. The armor is nearly ceremonial, no one is supposed to take a shot at the king. Even if the king were expected to visit the front lines.

As such, kings, princes and other nobles never had practical armor. It’s all armor-fashion and status symbols (including sexualization, when said sexualization was in fashion).

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Do we have modern sexualized plate carriers? I know we have the cat-ear helmet bit, but how far can we go?

permalink
report
parent
reply

Ok.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points
*

I believe most full plate armor was hardly practical either, some being so heavy that basically required the wearer to be mounted. Most foot soldiers would wear chain armor with pieces of plate here and there, and thats only the extremely rich who could afford things like that. Full plate also heavily limited your movement, many battles by extremely well geared soldiers were lost because they couldnt out maneuver barely armored militia, or even just rain. Knights wearing full plate needed help to stand if they were toppled! Its funny when people talk about full plate being ‘practical’ and ‘realistic’ when it was mostly a sign of status, ornamental and incredibly impractical.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Something about humans relates sex and danger. We like having them together

permalink
report
parent
reply

You might want to rephrase that. It would be very easy to misinterpret.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Most mounted knights don’t really need crotch protection. Their saddles had a kind of shields projecting up for that purpose. If they get dismounted in a melee, that might be a different situation, but even then, the codpiece will probably not be the weakest part of that armour.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I don’t know, this is starting to sound like a separate discussion with separate issues, and as a result it feels like goalpost moving.

The issue with women’s fantasy armour has long been that it exists for the Male Gaze, as a trope that is propagated by men for the purpose of titilizing men. It’s objectifying the female form, and doing so in a way that does not include women in the discussion at all.

The second image, instead of being a continuation of that, just feels like fashion, and complaints about it land as “no one has ever cared about aesthetics in a suit of armour” which is a totally false take and indefensible platform.

permalink
report
parent
reply

RPGMemes

!rpgmemes@ttrpg.network

Create post

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

Community stats

  • 2.8K

    Monthly active users

  • 1K

    Posts

  • 5.4K

    Comments