Just to correct some inaccuracies in this.
1. In field/heavy/full plate, it’s NEVER worn so tightly that if you fall it would crush your sternum. Also, plates are worn with layers of padded clothing under them to reduce damage from blunt weapons, and chaffing.
2. If you fall forward in any kind of plate, a broken sternum is the least of your worries. Due to its weight and lack of range of motion, you’re either going to be trampled by horses or people, or someone will use the opportunity to kill you.
3. The redirection argument. Lesbi honest ladies, if a mere sword can pierce a breastplate, then you bought shitty armor. I would prefer the sword slip towards the center, then towards the armpits, that hold vital tendons and muscles needed for attack and defense, as well as veins and arteries that can lead to massive blood loss.
With that said. Boob cups just look classless. The photo examples of good cinematic armor are some of the best out there. To add a couple I personally love most.
and this one
Fair points, here’s my say on it:
1. Even with padding depending on how steep you’re making that boob cup it becomes more of an issue the more boob there is.
Which is honestly pretty tame in the case of some games out there.
But for small bumps it probably wouldn’t be a problem, you’re definitely right about that.
2. That’s situational and doesn’t necessarily detract from what I’m saying but that’s definitely true. The issue still stands even if other things can happen that are worse.
3. Redirection is more about where it’s pushing the sword rather than if it’s going into anything. Armor was made in a way to purposely make things glance off. Quite literally, if someone hits a boob-cup it will deflect their blow towards your center. If that blow goes up it is literally sending that directly to your neck and it’s going to give them a wedge to literally push into. Doesn’t have to pierce your armor to cause a huge issue if someone’s putting all of their heavy-armor weight into pushing against you in your armor.
People purposely had pieces of armor called Rondels to protect their armpits when they were in full plate armor because of the “armpit” issue.
"Boob cups just look classless" Definitely 100% agreed.
I get asked this a lot so I guess I’ll answer this and direct people back to this post the next time they ask.
-edit- (wait you weren’t asking you were replying just play it cool roll with it I’ve been making mistakes all day)
please stop submitting that “this is what heterophobia would look like if it were real/what if straight people were oppressed” video
flipped-oppression narratives that turn actually marginalised people into villains for a moral point people apparently couldn’t understand unless they were thinking about how it would affect them are gross and terrible and i’m not going to post them
I, personally, was really impacted by the video.
|thethingsimplied said: Hi, I just read your post on female chest/plate armor and I thought about your logic of how if she was hit in that creased area, all the force would be directed to the sternum. That made me think of modern times and specifically martial arts chest protectors for females. I noticed a bunch of them have that mold that cups the breasts and got to thinking, why are these even sold then?|
I’ve gotten personal messages from people who’ve worn them, and some have even said that it’s been a little bit of a problem — nothing too detrimental though. Most of the time they’re made of plastic/padding/flexible materials and are used for sports like fencing/martial arts (like you said) and other things.
One of the largest issues by far, however, is not solely that all of the force would be in that area (for really light armor like martial arts chest protectors this wouldn’t really cause any/many problems), but all sword blows would also be swept up into that dent of heavy armor. European Breastplates were very successful in that they deflected attacks away from vital organs very well and essentially when hit an attack had a chance of glancing (not that people in heavy armor had to worry about swords getting through much, anyway). They were designed with a very convex shape purposely. A large crevice, instead of making a sword (or even a warhammer, which is MUCH more dangerous to someone in heavy armor!) glance off, will direct all of the attacks directly towards the center of the chest. Not fun.
Martial arts chest protectors can normally have these fine without being all that much of an issue because, like I said before, they aren’t huge plates of metal and they aren’t deflecting warhammers/swords/arrows, and the extra padding in this case helps protect someone’s breasts, which is an excellent case of when more protection over the breasts than for men makes sense and can work (when it’s a very resistant and somewhat-flexible material).
However, thin/light armor like this and isn’t made for deflecting and absorbing hits from arrows/warhammers/swords, and it isn’t designed to be very heavy. It’s supposed to allow for more mobility.
My post was mainly having to deal with heavy armor made out of metal, but thank you for asking!
Random History Tidbits of Women, Wars, and Armor (since they’re on my mind right now, I’m not implying you didn’t know this.):
Women were documented in fighting in at least one troop of English Militia during the Medieval Period. The majority of fighting was actually with spears and the most common armor pieces on a soldier were breastplates and helmets, but most did not own full sets of armor.
Women in history who wore armor simply often wore the male variant, sometimes with changes such as larger helmets.
(Onna-bugeisha in the 1800’s)
Women more often than not directed warfare or acted as spies rather than directly fought in battles. They were quite common as military leaders throughout much of human history — but there were still plenty of female warriors and even completely female bands of warriors that pop up throughout the world!