Female plate armor with or without breast cups.

[danshive]

 

So... they WEREN'T 2nd and 3rd class citizens?

 

Do you really think the men that were massacred in battles were privileged? If you had more compassion and sympathy for men, it might lead you to accept that men suffer too. And perhaps, even be grateful for their many sacrifices they have made throughout history.

The point was simply that they wouldn't have armor designed for them, and that was one of the reasons they wouldn't. Whether that was good, bad, or who should be grateful for what is beside the point of the discussion as to whether the plate armor makes sense from a practical and/or historical perspective.

 

The fact that women didn't have equal rights is relevant, as that was a factor in them being excluded from having armor designed to suit them. If they had equal rights, there would have been more women who would have chosen to fight, and a far greater likelihood that there would have been relevant historical examples of armor designed for them. Whether or not they should be grateful is an entirely different discussion, as is the discussion regarding whether inequality was a fair tradeoff for relative safety.

 

In short, I believe your offense to be unwarranted and irrelevant to the thread at hand.

[cooltrickle]

nivea:

 

Do you not think that any world that would treat women badly, would also treat men badly? I'm just saying, I think people have such little compassion toward men that they don't acknowledge that men suffer too. This causes them to wrongly believe that only women suffer, and that it is only men that cause women to suffer.

 

Could you tell me what rights a man has that women don't have? I think if you're going to make such a powerful indictment you should be more specific.

 

Can you also explain why my above comments have insulted people on the grounds of race and religion?

[JenLit]

Good advice. I just wish people would give men the benefit of the doubt too, and not just assume they view women as second class citizens.

 

Who, if not men, do you think he was refering to when he said that women were second class citizens and that they were prevented from fighting? Who was treating women like second class citizens?

My first thought: the Church.

 

I do not doubt then and today there were and are men of both inclinations, and everything in between. I might make an argument though that today there is a smaller percentage of them than in or around the 15th century. But I feel it is important to keep in mind that people don't change much, 15th century people were just like us; they didn't have the heavy machinery yet, the broader access to education we can shoulder today, but they had the same ingenuity, emotional system, intellect as everyone now. They knew what they had in their spouses, or didn't, they knew when what they were told by others made sense, or didn't.

 

I fear your prominently worthwhile point of willful sacrifice, dutiful, honorable action, which I freely admit isn't the first thing that occurred to me and I thank you for bringing that up because it adds to/refreshes my understanding, will be trampled over by sexist/non-sexist platitudes, due to the framing. :(

[JenLit]

I DO think it looks better with alittle indentation for where the breast are cosmetically, but I think they over do it in Skyrim.

re:over-doing: You clearly haven't seen the codpieces from Star Wars:The Old Republic yet! :D ;)

[nivea]

nivea:

 

Do you not think that any world that would treat women badly, would also treat men badly? I'm just saying, I think people have such little compassion toward men that they don't acknowledge that men suffer too. This causes them to wrongly believe that only women suffer, and that it is only men that cause women to suffer.

 

Could you tell me what rights a man has that women don't have? I think if you're going to make such a powerful indictment you should be more specific.

 

Can you also explain why my above comments have insulted people on the grounds of race and religion?

 

 

Of course men where treated badly, anyone not of rich means or the "correct" race in a area would not have the same choices that someone of well off means would have.

But the issue is that women where considered even farther beneath those men, men suffered but not as much as women in history. Does that mean I hold the past against men now, or do not acknowledge the plight of men forced into slavery and worked to death? Of course not, it happened it was bad for everyone... but it was worse for some then others.

 

How about the right to vote? The right to say no to men who want sex? The right to say no to forced virginity checks? The right to drive a car? The right to have a education? The right to do more then have a baby? The right to not have said baby?

 

With all the troubles lately and the sheer amount of coverage in the News lately I am shocked you have herd of none of those issues?

 

 

 

ANYWAYS, this is about if a women would have Breast on their plate armor, not a contest on who is oppressing who.

I stand by my thoughts on it, women would not have had armor made for them because they where not allowed to fight.

[nivea]

I DO think it looks better with alittle indentation for where the breast are cosmetically, but I think they over do it in Skyrim.

re:over-doing: You clearly haven't seen the codpieces from Star Wars:The Old Republic yet! :D ;)

 

 

You mean the ONLINE kotor? Pfffffft you would have to pay me to play a online kotor... I was so disappointed in that. T_T

I think they over did it in some armors, but that's just my opinion on it. I do appreciate the fact that everyone has skimpy armor this time around though, thats just awesome.

[JenLit]

You mean the ONLINE kotor? Pfffffft you would have to pay me to play a online kotor... I was so disappointed in that. T_T

I think they over did it in some armors, but that's just my opinion on it. I do appreciate the fact that everyone has skimpy armor this time around though, thats just awesome.

Come to think of it, for my personal taste they got most proportions wrong. Maybe a US thing. And the males make me think of that one Blackadder episode all the time... The droids look good though. Anyhow, naturally I was referring to video, not actually playing that. ;)

Edited December 19, 2011 by JenLit

[nivea]

You mean the ONLINE kotor? Pfffffft you would have to pay me to play a online kotor... I was so disappointed in that. T_T

I think they over did it in some armors, but that's just my opinion on it. I do appreciate the fact that everyone has skimpy armor this time around though, thats just awesome.

Come to think of it, for my personal taste they got most proportions wrong. Maybe a US thing. And the males make me think of that one Blackadder episode all the time... The droids look good though. Anyhow, naturally I was referring to video, not actually playing that. ;)

 

I kinda lost interest in it when I heard the praise "MMO" next to the word Kotor, so I never tracked it... now I shall need to look it up XD

[cooltrickle]

 

So... they WEREN'T 2nd and 3rd class citizens?

 

Do you really think the men that were massacred in battles were privileged? If you had more compassion and sympathy for men, it might lead you to accept that men suffer too. And perhaps, even be grateful for their many sacrifices they have made throughout history.

The point was simply that they wouldn't have armor designed for them, and that was one of the reasons they wouldn't. Whether that was good, bad, or who should be grateful for what is beside the point of the discussion as to whether the plate armor makes sense from a practical and/or historical perspective.

 

The fact that women didn't have equal rights is relevant, as that was a factor in them being excluded from having armor designed to suit them. If they had equal rights, there would have been more women who would have chosen to fight, and a far greater likelihood that there would have been relevant historical examples of armor designed for them. Whether or not they should be grateful is an entirely different discussion, as is the discussion regarding whether inequality was a fair tradeoff for relative safety.

 

In short, I believe your offense to be unwarranted and irrelevant to the thread at hand.

 

I was replying to the very short comment you made, which was "So... they WEREN'T 2nd and 3rd class citizens?". I would answer, no, at least not anymore than most men were at the time. I think people are conditioned to ignore the suffering of men, but not the suffering of women. This leads to the incorrect conclusion that since men aren't suffering, it must be men that are causing the suffering of women.

 

I'm not offended. I'm just concerned about the 21st century trend of encouraging society to view men as nothing but trouble. When I have the opportunity, I like to offer my viewpoint to help balance things. I'm just sorry, I had to do it this thread. You're right, it is irrelevant to the topic, but it wouldn't be right to let someone make harmful comments about men, without providing balance.

Good advice. I just wish people would give men the benefit of the doubt too, and not just assume they view women as second class citizens.

 

Who, if not men, do you think he was refering to when he said that women were second class citizens and that they were prevented from fighting? Who was treating women like second class citizens?

My first thought: the Church.

 

I fear your prominently worthwhile point of willful sacrifice, dutiful, honorable action, which I freely admit isn't the first thing that occurred to me and I thank you for bringing that up because it adds to/refreshes my understanding, will be trampled over by sexist/non-sexist platitudes, due to the framing. :(

 

Well, the Church was run entirely by men in those days, so it amounts to the same thing. I'm glad I added a new perspective concerning men. That's all I intended to do: to try and add balance. If you look at my post history, you will see I'm really not interested in arguing with people. But, I'm becoming increasingly concerned about the anti-male bias in the media and other places. I think it's so prevalent that people say things without realising that it's harmful to men. So, that's why I posted what I did.

[JimboUK]

the age of plate armor was dominated by males...women were 2nd, 3rd class citizens. they didn't fight, were told not to fight, and only in rare verging on unique instance did they fight.

 

In the 21st century, women have more opportunity than ever to take part in war. The British military personnel killed in Afghanistan since 2001 is 391. How is it that only two of those casualties are women? Bullets and bombs don't discriminate, so the only possible explanation is that female soldiers don't want to be on the front line near the danger. Neither do men, but they do it anyway, because it's their duty. So, please have some more respect for the men that have given up their lives in defence of our countries. Don't make any more remarks implying that men are sexist or oppressive for trying to shield women from the barbarity of war, now or at any time in history.

 

People are talking about medieval times, not the 21st century. Back then women didn't fight, not because they didn't want to but because they weren't allowed to. Women back then weren't really people in their own right, once married they were the property of their husbands, equality is a very recent thing, go back a hundred years and women couldn't even vote in the UK. As for the modern army, women are still banned from serving on the front line, that explains why less of them get killed.