So lemme get this straight
this is ok and sexy and fun haha
This is ok and artsy and oh wow how modern
THIS IS OBSCENE WHAT A SLUT I CANNOT BELIEVE THIS IS WHAT SHES DOING THIS IS MADDNESS HOW DARE SHE WHAT A SLUT WHAT DOES HER FATHER THINK I AM GOING TO FAINT
Is this correct?
reblogging a gain
Because naked women have to be under a man’s control or else they’re dangerous and scary
Current Tour de France champion Chris Froome tweeted this picture of him working the seams out of the new sexy, fuck-me racing suit that he and the other cyclists on Team Sky will wear during all of their races this year. It’s just a sensible suit that can easily take Chris from the finish line to the club. It’s just a sensible suit that says, “I’m serious about improving my performance through ergonomics, but I also want something sexy and slutty to wear while I swish and sway my ass on the go-go box at the race’s after-party.” It’s the kind of suit that The Slut Dress would pick up in a bar and have dirty, sloppy, sweaty, wet awkward sex with in a stall in the men’s bathroom.
A reminder that “male” armour usually works just as well with female bodies. If you’re trying to design something practical, useful and historical looking (or even just something the follows the laws of physics), never ever put in boob cups. Aside from the fact they give the armour a sort of “focus point” for swords, falling down on them would send the shock right into the sternum. Regular plate armour leaves enough space between the chest for small to medium sized boobs anyway. But say the girl underneath is a buxom lass, you can still avoid that cleavage, boob cup shape while leaving enough space for her melons.
But aside from plate, things like the top picture, chainmail and all sorts of leather armour are unisex. I know you might be thinking that the feminine thing to do when designing a female warrior is to show off a bit of thigh or neck or cleavage or something, but really, understand that if the goal of that armour is to protect completely, putting an obvious gap in it is a terrible idea and she’ll surely get stabbed very quickly.
And don’t feed me the “it’s magic, I don’t got to explain shit” line. Bollox. Magic armour and forcefields need to make some sense too. Show me something that LOOKS like it’s generating a barrier over the character instead of just saying “Oh the G-string of Invulnerability is just as good as wearing full plate anyway”. If that’s the case, everyone would wear it. And why can’t they just tie it around their belt? Make me believe that your magic armour and spells have logic to them. If not, please don’t play your world straight. I’m all for super stylised designs as long as they’re sold as such, but if you’re trying to make a world that feels real enough for people to believe and get immersed in, think this stuff out. If you’ve designed someone with sparse, gapped armour that shows skin, give your character a reason to wear it.
It’s also worth noting that shaping breasts into the armor weakens the metal and ruins it. One arrow can pierce through the molded material and straight into her heart very easily.
Just for consideration.
Side note: “it’s magic, I don’t have to explain shit” — this is lazy storytelling, and lazy storytelling is only tolerated by rocks (because they are too heavy to move away from you).
Never understood the need to make the breast plate look like a freaking corset. It’s not really protecting the chest if it’s creating a visible aim where a weapon can hit.
reblogging because its about damn time I have this on my blog (I am a teensy bit of a historical armour and weapons nerd)