Sexy fantasy armor...

[Hero in a half shell]

But, really, what gets me the most is Jack Bauer.

He's like 50 and always looks constipated whilst wearing a dark shirt and jeans.

Don't you remember the episode where Jack Bauer ran around in massively bulging Speedos all oiled up making hip thrusting motions at the camera in every scene?

No? Maybe that was just a dream I had...

Nevermind.

 

[Arkynomicon]

90% of all armour in fantasy video games would not work very well in real life. This goes for both genders.

 

[CloudAtlas]

That is what I have difficulty understanding, I see most people arguing against unrealistic armor in a fantasy setting where they have unrealistic things, and then showing historically inaccurate armor, and using characters that could not possibly move like that in that armor as being more "realistic and practical" in both fantasy and historical games. If the primary complaint is "more skin showing" or the outfit " looks slutty" and the alternative they offer is also impractical it is " slut shaming" rather than "breaking immersion".

Maybe it would be useful for you to think of it in terms of internal consistency instead of "realism".

In most fantasy worlds, the majority of the fighting is still with other humans (or humanoid races) armed with swords, spears, bows, clubs and what not, and with animals and lesser beasts. And in such situations, wearing regular armor is actually useful. I mean, if heavy armor wasn't useful, why would so many male warriors wear heavy armor? And in such a setting, it is just weird (to many) when the female warriors all wear chainmail bikinis, armors with stupid cleavage windows and the like. The armors don't necessesarily have to be "real", as in "that is what soldiers wore during some period in the real world", but they should make some sense within the context of this fictional world.

You can come up with many good reasons why nobody is wearing metal armor in your fictional medieval-ish world. But you'll always have a hard time explaining why one half of your fighters wears them, while the other one, the female half, performing the exact same roles, is half naked.

Yea sure many examples cited here as "practical armor" are in fact not all that practical. But at least they're MORE practical than what our female heroines have to wear in other instances.

How 'realistic' exactly an armor has to be in order to make someone happy, to not hurt her suspension of disbelief, that largely depends on the person herself, on her personal preferences, of course, but also on the nature of the fictional world itself. Sure, in some bonkers anime where nothing makes sense anyway, to complain about some armor not being "realistic" there is strange. It's all stupid anyway. But in a world like Middle-Earth, Skyrim, or whatever, a world that very much tries to give you an 'authentic' feeling, chainmail bikinis just don't fit.

And your name doesn't have to be Sherlock Holmes in order to be able to guess why designers so readily and needlessly violate internal consistency in this specific instance.

 

[Eddie the head]

Because they might not see the two things as linked. This is a text book argument from incredulity. Your inability to imagine why someone would use a sexual clothing mod other then "sexual gratification form killing" doesn't mean it's the only reason someone would do it.

Thus why I'm asking this person to tell me what it is.

Your response is "I can't tell you, but, oh, I'm sure there is one!"

Please, by all means, tell me.

Ok fist no you weren't. I can't speak to your intentions, but your vernacular was in the rhetorical realm.

Second my inability to imagine an answer would be just as irrelevant. And just because I might not have an answer doesn't' mean that yours is in any way good.

Third there is the simplest answer.(Witch I did say already.) That he just likes to look at woman in skimpy clothing, and there is nothing more to it. That one is a null hypothesis I'm not assuming any links. Until you can show a link in his psyche between the killing and sexual gratification then your position is irrational.

 

[Something Amyss]

Naked will not work for a member of a S.W.A.T team for instance. Nor would exposed breasts(male or female) or an exposed midsection(male or female). There are too many bullets flying around to forgo at least some padding. And that's what bullet proof vests and the like were made for. Yes, they cover up the body. But how is that a bad thing?

It's amusing to picture a woman being asked to wear a bullet proof vet and her responding that it's no better than trying to put her in a Burka, though.

I wanted to make a point, but when looking at the rest of what you said, I thought I'd make a second one, as well. The whole "some groups go topless" thing is definitely true. Even in the Northeast of what's now the US it wasn't uncommon for women of indigenous tribes to go topless: in appropriate weather. I mean, yeah, this goes to what you said about women and climate: just because women weren't ashamed of their breasts doesn't mean they went around in the middle of a Noreaster completely naked.

But more to my original point, based on this.

What bugs me about the "putting women in burkas" thing is that I don't otherwise disagree with her whole premise. I'm fine with the idea of socketed armour where you can put the best mods on any armour you damn well please. The problem comes in with this repeated insistence that I'm somehow oppressing women (and on par with a rather misogynistic culture) because I want my characters to wear sensible clothes. Which sort of undermines the choice afforded by armour sockets/slots in the first place. Not to mention, that's its own brand of shaming.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

What if I find practicality sexy? Huh? What then?

Doublets and correctly shaped cuirasses totally turn me on.

Nothing makes me harder than full Havel's cosplay. [small][small][small][small][small][small]hard as a rock you might say[/small][/small][/small][/small][/small][/small]

OT: Is sexy impractical armour worth all the hubbub it gets? In most cases no. When it comes to things like Kill la Kill, Dragon's Crown etc, there's nothing wrong with it, it fits the theme and the vibe those games give off. When it comes to things like the new Samus concept art, (haven't heard from that in a while actually) it does come off as sexist. Why? Because a great character with tons of history and depth was suddenly sexualized for the soul reason of appealing to the sexual preferences of a demographic someone thought might make them more money.

 

[The Lunatic]

Ok fist no you weren't. I can't speak to your intentions, but your vernacular was in the rhetorical realm.

Second my inability to imagine an answer would be just as irrelevant. And just because I might not have an answer doesn't' mean that yours is in any way good.

Third there is the simplest answer.(Witch I did say already.) That he just likes to look at woman in skimpy clothing, and there is nothing more to it. That one is a null hypothesis I'm not assuming any links. Until you can show a link in his psyche between the killing and sexual gratification then your position is irrational.

So, you're saying that my hypothesis has no more possibility than yours does.

Okay, well, given in the post after that, he literally talks about dressing sexy whilst "Doing your job".

I'm gonna put 2 and 2 together over here...

 

[elvor0]

I wasn't considering 300 as accurate, if you look at the link below the gladiator in my post with the picture, the topless female gladiator statue was accurate. When I am referring to " Medieval" I am referring to common themes in games such as " King Arthur and knights of the round table" and Merlin the wizard stories which much fantasy games are based on, during which time many Celts and Gauls fought topless and naked.

You would avoid confusion if you used the term "medieval" correctly. And in the Arthus saga too... which is just, well, a saga, not necessarily a description of events that actually happend at a specific point in history... you don't have all men fighting in platemail and all women fighting in chainmail bikini.

Which is the point here.

What you keep bringing up however - the fact that there were some peoples for which it might have been not unusual to fight naked - is not.

If there was a game playing in the classic period, featuring Romans and Celts, or some other culture, and showing neither of them displaying, well, very Christian or Islamic attitudes towards covering up their private parts, and do that more-or-less authentically and for both genders, and not just use the setting as excuse to show some titties, then that would be totally fine by most people you're arguing with here I guess, me included. The majority of complaints would certainly come from a vastly different direction - prude conservatives.

That is what I have difficulty understanding, I see most people arguing against unrealistic armor in a fantasy setting where they have unrealistic things, and then showing historically inaccurate armor, and using characters that could not possibly move like that in that armor as being more "realistic and practical" in both fantasy and historical games. If the primary complaint is "more skin showing" or the outfit " looks slutty" and the alternative they offer is also impractical it is " slut shaming" rather than "breaking immersion".

It's not slut shaming. At all. That's a completely different argument to the one everyone else is having. The people linking those armors are likely unaware of the im-practicality of those armors, or haven't had it pointed out. I once used Samus' armor as a showcase "practicality" to which someone royally handed my arse to me about the various impracticallity of Samus armor. Colour me corrected. How "realistic" something is however, shouldn't throw internal consistancy out of the window.

The enemy could be happy go lucky teddy bears that shoot death inducing rainbows out of their arses, but if within the setting it has been established that the Humans in the setting are exactly the same as regular humans, and the men wear traditional(that is to say full plate) armors, the same laws of biology would be applied to both genders. So why do the women in this setting all run around in plate lingere that offers no protection? Humans are not capable of surviving disembowlment are they? People are not slut shaming, that's an incredibly obtuse argument that you're only having with yourself. Nor are people here advocating the use of Burka, burka like clothing, or the covering up of women because its sinful.

Basically take this set of armor,(regardless of whether or not you think it looks good or its actuall impact on mobility) it is the same armor, but for the Men it's full chest armor, for Women, it's a sports bra. That's inconsistant, they're both supposed to be full plate, yet the women get saddled with an exposed midriff and a boob plate, despite its obvious dangers. Why?

Spoiler

This is completely independant of the fact that mages can throw fireballs and people rock up to kill dragons every week, people in this universe still fight with swords, not everyone can cast magic. If both of them had exposed stomachs, it would be fair. It'd still be stupid, but at least the genders are treated equally.

People like myself, do not like plate mail lingere because it breaks immersion for the reasons mentioned above, and by many other people. Not because we want to bully women into wearing Burkas.

And yet, you're stating that by us arguing for gender EQUALITY, we're actually arguing for highly damning, sexist and mysoginist views. Which makes no sense.

"I think men and women should both wear the same sort of armor so they have equal protection" does not equal "I want women to be controlled, bullied and shamed for showing skin." That's an insane strawman and putting words completely unrelated to what they said in peoples mouths.

 

[Hagi]

You really have trouble grasping this? How people might enjoy sex and violence but not sexual violence?

It's the difference between eating a steak while having a beer and taking a blender and mixing your steak through your beer.

 

[The Lunatic]

You really have trouble grasping this? How people might enjoy sex and violence but not sexual violence?

It's the difference between eating a steak while having a beer and taking a blender and mixing your steak through your beer.

Yeah, but, it's at the same time. So, it's literally chewing steak whilst your mouth is full of beer.

Which sounds pretty awful.

 

[Hagi]

You really have trouble grasping this? How people might enjoy sex and violence but not sexual violence?

It's the difference between eating a steak while having a beer and taking a blender and mixing your steak through your beer.

Yeah, but, it's at the same time. So, it's literally chewing steak whilst your mouth is full of beer.

Which sounds pretty awful.

You're assuming both the violence and sex are being consumed at the same time.

They're not. They're simply both present and ready to be consumed.

Just because I'm holding a beer in my left hand and a steak in my right doesn't mean I'm doing what you're saying.

I mean by your logic I have a deeply held association between violence and gorgeous sunsets because both of those are present on my screen at the same time frequently in my modded Skyrim.

Just because two things are both there at the same time and even getting mixed (the beer and steak do mix in your stomach) doesn't imply that's their purpose for being there nor any association between them.

 

[The Lunatic]

You're assuming both the violence and sex are being consumed at the same time.

They're not. They're simply both present and ready to be consumed.

Just because I'm holding a beer in my left hand and a steak in my right doesn't mean I'm doing what you're saying.

I mean by your logic I have a deeply held association between violence and gorgeous sunsets because both of those are present on my screen at the same time frequently in my modded Skyrim.

Just because two things are both there at the same time and even getting mixed (the beer and steak do mix in your stomach) doesn't imply that's their purpose for being there nor any association between them.

This analogy isn't really making sense at this stage.

Given nobody has answered the question I asked, instead continually dodging the question.

I'll instead say this. State another form of media in which you would find heavily sexualised women doing violent acts.

If the answer isn't some creepy B movie or snuff porn, I'll be impressed.

By all means. I'll entertain the idea, that somehow, having an incredibly overly sexualised women beating the shit out of people is somehow separate from sexual gratification, if you can come up with an example where it's not the intent of the media.

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

I am not throwing the term burka around out of context, when my friend and coworker was forced to wear one or be killed and risked her life and the lives of those she cared about to free herself from such things and would still be killed today if she attempted to return to visit her own family I do believe I use the term quite accurately. What I find ridiculous and insensitive is to downplay the effect on the lives of the women who have endured and continue to endure such things. No woman should be shamed into hiding her body. There is nothing shameful about a womans body.

Maybe it is a mater of perspective, my pov as a female native american I see too often women are forced to conform to others beliefs public and private shaming of women, men trying to tell their girlfriends what they should wear and see people actually being uncomfortable with women's skin even in games? It is absurd. Maybe they need exposed to MORE nudity to desensitize them to the fact that naked isn't shameful.

When discussing traditional medieval settings, how could they also have Romans, Greeks, Celts and Gauls without having nudity being standard when in reality it was? I was under the impression that was considered Europe as well.

This right here is the entire problem with your argument - you are arguing against something entirely different than the topic at hand and strawmanning people's arguments to do so. The entire point to the whole "sexy armor" debate is not in any way about shaming women, but about the writer's not treating women in general the same way they do men. People want gender equality here, which couldn't be any farther from condemning women. If male warriors consider it practical to wear semi-realistic, unsexualized armor in battle, then so should women warriors. That's ALL people are arguing here - not that women can't be sexualized at all, just that they shouldn't be sexualized at times when men being sexy wouldn't make sense either. Wanting consistency in a fictional universe and wanting women to hate themselves in reality are two entirely different things.

 

[Ariseishirou]

I say it'd all dependent on the world/setting. If every one is wearing sexy and skimpy and death-armor? Go right ahead! If the world has full plate mail and normal non-skin armor for one gender and a battlethong as the armor for the other gender? Forget that shit, my huge disbelief suspension maker thing just says "This is stupid."

Yeah I'm exactly the same way. Dudes are wearing fur loincloths and chicks are wearing chainmail bikinis? Sure, whatever, it's clearly just an escapist fantasy world instead of a realistic one. If "durr hurr but it's lighter and lets them move and shows how awesome they are in battle" is an argument in favour of skimpy boob plate in your world, it would apply equally to male warriors. Armour is heavy. They'd be much more comfortable running around in gitch.

This is why I don't get up in arms about Soul Caliber, really. Sure, there's Ivy, but just about every hot dude has a shirtless fanservice mode, so whatever. It's that kind of game.

Likewise, if some armour is going to be realistic, I want it all to be realistic, a la Dark Souls. It's really only the "dudes in massive plate armour, chicks in chainmail bikinis" art that bothers me. I suppose the reverse would as well, but I've literally never seen it.

 

[Hagi]

You're assuming both the violence and sex are being consumed at the same time.

They're not. They're simply both present and ready to be consumed.

Just because I'm holding a beer in my left hand and a steak in my right doesn't mean I'm doing what you're saying.

I mean by your logic I have a deeply held association between violence and gorgeous sunsets because both of those are present on my screen at the same time frequently in my modded Skyrim.

Just because two things are both there at the same time and even getting mixed (the beer and steak do mix in your stomach) doesn't imply that's their purpose for being there nor any association between them.

This analogy isn't really making sense at this stage.

Given nobody has answered the question I asked, instead continually dodging the question.

I'll instead say this. State another form of media in which you would find heavily sexualised women doing violent acts.

If the answer isn't some creepy B movie or snuff porn, I'll be impressed.

By all means. I'll entertain the idea, that somehow, having an incredibly overly sexualised women beating the shit out of people is somehow separate from sexual gratification, if you can come up with an example where it's not the intent of the media.

Movies, TV shows, anime, comics, books. Pretty much everything really?

I mean where the heck did you think the chainmail bikini came from? I'll tell you, it's not games.

Simplest example, Red Sonja. She's featured in all of the above except anime (and please don't tell me to give a concrete example out of anime, you can't possibly be that sheltered).

 

[MCerberus]

but I don't believe its worth drumming up so much controversy over, like with Dragon's Crown.

What was the controversy? A couple of magazines gave them middling-to-good reviews, justified only in part by saying the girls were offputting.

Aaaaaactually, that's nowhere close to practical.

Plate armour was not designed to just put metal between your flesh and the sharp things. That's helpful, but there's more to it than that.

It was shaped in such a way as to deflect blades and points, to make them turn off to the side rather than taking the full impact.

In terms of modern armour, there's still that practicality issue, too. I've found a couple of companies offering "form-fitting" armour (which still doesn't have the full contour), and I sort of wonder if there's any efficacy there. They say it doesn't compromise protection and maybe it doesn't, though it's a different era. Still, most female combat armour has been modified for changes internally rather than to give women a form-fitting, boob shape.

A couple of things, if you look at that "Controversy", the outfits were noticeable, because they were designed to be. When a reviewer has to say "Come on, seriously?", then it's fair game to knock off points. But it became more than that, because of course it has to.

Second, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "form fitting" modern armor "it fits women"? The US military in particular has a problem where pretty much all of its stock is based off a narrow range of male dimensions, making it impractical but "better than nothing" for female soldiers to wear.

 

[The Lunatic]

Movies, TV shows, anime, comics, books. Pretty much everything really?

I mean where the heck did you think the chainmail bikini came from? I'll tell you, it's not games.

Simplest example, Red Sonja. She's featured in all of the above except anime (and please don't tell me to give a concrete example out of anime, you can't possibly be that sheltered).

Uhmm... I really don't think you're quite aware of what kind of skyrim mods he's talking about if you think Red Sonya is sexualised compared to those.

 

[Thaluikhain]

What bugs me about the "putting women in burkas" thing is that I don't otherwise disagree with her whole premise. I'm fine with the idea of socketed armour where you can put the best mods on any armour you damn well please. The problem comes in with this repeated insistence that I'm somehow oppressing women (and on par with a rather misogynistic culture) because I want my characters to wear sensible clothes. Which sort of undermines the choice afforded by armour sockets/slots in the first place. Not to mention, that's its own brand of shaming.

There's a lot of that regarding the burqa itself.

In some places, women are forced to wear the burqa, regardless of what they might choose. Many people object to this, and many of those who do demand that women be forced not to wear it instead, regardless of what they might choose.

There is something of a problem there.

 

[Hagi]

Movies, TV shows, anime, comics, books. Pretty much everything really?

I mean where the heck did you think the chainmail bikini came from? I'll tell you, it's not games.

Simplest example, Red Sonja. She's featured in all of the above except anime (and please don't tell me to give a concrete example out of anime, you can't possibly be that sheltered).

Uhmm... I really don't think you're quite aware of what kind of skyrim mods he's talking about if you think Red Sonya is sexualised compared to those.

I'm fully aware of the kind of Skyrim mods he's talking about.

Are some of them more sexualised than Red Sonja? Certainly (then again, many sexy armor mods are not). But are you seriously going to stand here and claim Red Sonja isn't heavily sexualized, inspired by completely different motivations than the desire to see a hot big-breasted woman in as skimpy clothing as basically possible?

You asked for a heavily sexualised woman doing violent acts in another medium, I gave you one.

If you want more extreme they're not hard to find at all. Red Sonja ain't a stereotype for nothing, trust me when I say that there's absolutely no shortage at all of people taking that stereotype much further in pretty much every single medium.

It might not be your taste, to be honest it's not really mine either, but that doesn't mean it's some vile perverted thing that must surely be about sexual gratification from violence. It just means people like fictional sex. It just means people like fictional violence. Both being present at the same time doesn't mean they're automatically related and mixed.

If you find yourself incapable of grasping something so utterly simple, something so omni-present in our culture since basically forever, then I'm honestly not sure what to say...