I think a lot of people misunderstand when someone says they want more feminine looking armor. I don't necessarily think people want armor to look slutty so to speak but to look as if a female is actually wearing it as opposed to simply looking like a smaller version of a male. There is a difference between sexy and slutty.
I understand that, but my problem with that is threefold. First, again there is the notion that all "females" (or "males") look, want to look, or should look the same.
Second, functional and practical armor is gender-neutral. I honestly don't get the "looks like a man" complaint unless the armor in question has explicitly male-looking features comparable to the desired explicitly "feminine" features. At the very least that would mean, say, a chestplate shaped like a steroid hulk-dude's torso, nipples and all. Or a bulging codpiece. Or a full helmet with a faceplate that looks like a bearded guy. And I say "at the very least" because these features -- with the possible exception of the codpiece -- still wouldn't be nearly as impractical or flat-out dangerous as the usual "feminine" armor designs are. Which brings me to ...
Third, that "sexy" is a "female" thing. As I said, I wouldn't mind more revealing/gendered outfits as long as they aren't mandatory but are equal-opportunity on both genders in terms of both emphasis on sexualized features and coverage (or lack thereof).





Retour en haut















