HOME | DD
EthicallyChallenged — One to Go
Published: 2015-09-26 18:59:35 +0000 UTC; Views: 106884; Favourites: 1424; Downloads: 1007
Redirect to original
Description
Ever since I saw an illustration of a chainmail bikini for the very first time, I knew something was amiss. Later in life, when I picked up a pencil with a conscious decision I would become an illustrator, I knew that one day I might be called upon to paint a breastplate with a cleavage cut out. So far I was able to avoid painting any of that “sexy female armour” crap. Today I am conscious of the fact, that if a decent paying client comes along and my schedule happens to be clear, I will probably not be able to say no. But as any self respecting little whore, I do have one very important rule…
The first time will be on my terms.
Here's a little quiz for your consideration:
1. A female warrior's main concern is to stay:
a) alive
b) sexy
2. The main purpose of a man's armour is to:
a) look fierce
b) protect vital organs
3. The main purpose of a woman's armour is to:
a) protect vital organs
b) accentuate cleavage, waistline, hips and legs
4. To blow a runny nose, a man uses:
a) a MAN-SIZED tissue
b) a tissue
5. To carry personal items, a man can use:
a) a man-bag
b) a bag
6. To protect her vital organs, a female warrior uses
a) armour
b) female armour
7. Form follows:
a) function
b) the 90-60-90 ratio
Thank you kindly for your participation. Please send your answers to tits@ass.cum
Related content
Comments: 206
Tolkien's fantasy was dark age. A historically based fantasy setting can be virtually ant time period. Warhammer is renaissance, and 18th century pirate fantasy is not advanced enough to be steampunk or sci-fi. No reason to discard the 15th century and start talking of rayguns. 15th century is still archaic to us.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
In addition fantasy can even be set in ancient days when Minoan warriors went into battle with nothing but a loin cloth and a big fuck off shield, and their women wore dresses cut to leave the boobs bare. In which case 'sexy female armour' would actually be historically accurate.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It takes a certain kind of vitriol to hate fantasy armor so much that the only way to express it was by making a picture of a bunch of eviscerated women.
Fun fact: Picts went into battle naked and slew scores of Romans. True, they eventually lost, but they took a lot of heavily armored opponents with them.
👍: 2 ⏩: 1
If vitriol it is, then it is a fantastically productive kind of vitriol that the world need a lot more of!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You first, cochise. Give it your best shot.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
(after a couple more minutes, looking at what used to be a rebelling Gladiatrix squad): "So you still think that God is always on the side of larger battalions?"
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It's not just female armour in fantasy. Thanks to Hollywood any heavily armored character will typically will lose against a non-armored one. Knights in full plate armor lose to lightly armored heroes and even in modern settings you would have to wonder why anyone would bother with a main battle tank since they are so easily defeated by practically everything.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
But it is much more with female characters than male
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Teraz rozumiem czemu laska-paladyn ma zaciesz z łatwej roboty.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
On the downside, the Emperor's harem will be significantly shorter after the revolt gets put down.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wow great tension in this image, do you think she has 10 seconds to live of more like 30 seconds? Your thoughts...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Extremely sexy image. Would you say she has more or less than 10 seconds to live?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
About as long as it takes the opponent to close the distance and swing
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Would you agree that she has utterly no chance of survival? It seems to me she might as well be holding a dildo, Even her posture says I'm a dead woman...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Mark Twain had a lovely quote on this subject:
“There are some things that can beat smartness and foresight? Awkwardness and stupidity can. The best swordsman in the world doesn't need to fear the second best swordsman in the world; no, the person for him to be afraid of is some ignorant antagonist who has never had a sword in his hand before; he doesn't do the thing he ought to do, and so the expert isn't prepared for him; he does the thing he ought not to do; and often it catches the expert out and ends him on the spot.”
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Excellent quote from one of the english languages greatest wordsmiths. Thank you for sharing it!
Is your point that our beautiful blonde is the ignorant antagonist? Could she have a chance? Something in her posture tells me she is already dead, and the quiet calm confidence of the swordsman, and the smirk on his face, leads me to believe he is looking forward to killing her. I can't help but wonder with the way he is peeking under the cloak of his dead opponent, what nasty plan he might have for them...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Pretty sure the armored fighter is also a female, which is part of the artist’s whole point. No “female armor”, just armor- which keeps the fighter alive, as opposed to sexy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes that is what he states in his description. Not sure though about the armored fighter though looks pretty masculine.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Since you’ve read those notes, this topic is moot
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
"Realistic female armor" is an oxymoron. Men were soldiers -not women. Armor for women was never massed-produced. Portraying a woman as a capable combatant is fantastic -not realistic. The only reason to portray a warrior as a woman is for the love of the female form, for which scanty armor is appropriate, or for marxist propaganda, in which case you're a tool.
👍: 1 ⏩: 2
"Only" and "never" are shackles of language. Better allow for more possibilities than oneself can come up with. Where does historical depictions of a plate-armoured Jeanne d'Arc fit into your categories? Jeanne not being a warrior in reality is irrelevant, the depiction is what matters here.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Actually, female warriors pretty much used the same "one-size-fits-all" that the males of big armies did. The fact is, women with big tits would had made poor warriors, because they would be a hindrance, so those weren't warriors.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Bullshit. Even today the draft applies to men -not women.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol but women still fight. Now as before. not as much as men. but there have been societies where women did plenty of fighting and many specific stand out cases where women fought. You are just factually incorrect. Either a terrible troll, or terribly ignorant.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No army in history has ever deployed men and women in equal measure. What army today has as many women as men in combat?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
None, of course. You are changing what you said though. you said:
"Realistic female armor" is an oxymoron. Men were soldiers -not women. Armor for women was never massed-produced. Portraying a woman as a capable combatant is fantastic -not realistic. "
Women have fought in wars, and do. often. Not nearly as much as men. But what i quoted you as saying above is WRONG. Now choose. Are you a troll? or wildly ignorant? Or emotionally damaged by women to the point of delusion? something else. Read your comment. Consider why you would post that. Its a misogynistic and negative thing to say. and a lie.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No matter how many times you repeat, "women fight" it doesn't make it right. You admit yourself there are no female battalions, women are not in equal measure in battles, etc. There can't be a realistic version of something with no real reference point.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Anyone reading this see your pathetic inability to form a coherent argument and stick to it.
portraying a woman as a capable combatant is realist. You know how I know that? because it happens every day. Are you so ignorant or fucking stupid that you cant admit that there are women who are more than capable combatants.
rarehistoricalphotos.com/775-c…
775 confirmed kills split between 12 women. fuck off, you have the mental capability of a 8 year old if you've lived this long and think what you claim to think. Hard to believe you arent a 12 year old troll though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Your source is soviet propaganda.
I deny the historicity of standing armies normally issuing platemail to women. What proof can you give to the contrary?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I want to see what happens to the last one - she's the hottest!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is amazing. Many laughs have been had sharing this piece of art. Aside from the humorous jab at fantasy tropes, the image is just god damn beautifully made. As are all of your images. Well done man, well done.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank you so much! Glad I made you laugh, that really makes me feel great!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
1-7: whichever gets the job done best.
The warrior in full armor is also a woman, it seems? Great job with the details, as always!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
1. A, but in the rules of fantasy, a chainmail bikini offers a +10 AC and no Dex penalty. So in certain fantasy settings, it can be B.
2. B, but if I can look fierce while doing it, even better. Demoralizing your opponent can go a long way.
3. A, though to be fair, Batman's, Robin's, and Batgirl's armor in batman forever did both. BATNIPS!!!
4. A. If anything is mansized, you use it instead, even if you're a woman. (Who turns own more for free?)
5. A. Only because a man bag comes equipped with 3 extra pouches and a 3 year warranty.
6. B. But only if the armor is made for that female or if it is close to her body type. She doesn't need to be just putting on an old (A.) armor.
7. A. unless it is fitted perfectly to your tits, hips, and ass, then use the fitted armor and be happy that you're not rolling for penalties.
You would be welcome, buy the E-mail you provide doesn't work. The only reply I get is from an African Prince who need my bank account info to store money he got from his father.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The armor doesn't bother me so much - it's only practical against certain weapons - but high heels, that's a problem.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Well, if they knew how to fight and ganged up on her instead of fighting one at a time they'd probably still win.
But if she was a trained/skilled fighter and they were just "Women in sexy pointless armor holding swords"...but then they'd run like bunnies.
Of course, if we are trying to add "Realism" here, how in the world is the setup to this scene possible?
I mean, are these "Harem Guards" who function to 1. look pretty 2. keep in the harem, perhaps tie up and punish, cute younger girls 3. overwhelm and castrate naked men who aren't the king/king's friends who sneak in...?
They'd be desperate enough to fight then - "King Caligula is paying us 10x a month earning what we would in a year at a tavern, even way more than a brothel would earn... If he falls our families are destitute!" But again they'd all rush her and go for the eyes.
Also, how can a woman who isn't a cliche "Soviet Wife" move in such armor for a while, much less fight even that one sided battle?
Just my thoughts. Awesome drawing, and is that armor a tribute to "The Mercenary"?
IMO the "Chainmail Bikini" was put in by the industry to try to discredit/destroy scifi/fantasy as they butchered it by turning the "New Wave" into P.C. chowder. More or less it came with Marvel's "Red Sonja" more or less "Put a woman in coz...Women's Lib/Equality laws..." Really, she was magically as strong as Conan -but- her magic was a "Chastity Belt" to keep her from just turning the comic into an XXXtravaganza that would make Dr. Wertham rise from his grave. If she let a man bed her without defeating her in combat first she'd become "Just another woman" and the ONLY man who could maybe beat her was Conan who then was too distracted by her to do it - seriously, they made a special ep about that... So it was the 70s with a woman being forced by law/tax break loss threat in the workforce but then quick rules to prevent 'fraternization'...
Myself I'm for "Old school" but the women are buxom barmaids, princesses, harem girls, sexy sorceresses, etc. Sorry but the MEN are the ones wearing armor and fighting.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Also, how can a woman who isn't a cliche "Soviet Wife" move in such armor for a while, much less fight even that one sided battle?"
Well, for starters, real plate armor is nowhere near as heavy as it is often portrayed in schlocky fantasy art. A complete suit of plate armour made from well-tempered steel would weigh around 15–25 kg(33-55 pounds), which isn't very much! It's actually significantly less weight than the full equipment a modern soldier is expected to carry into battle. Plus, it is spread evenly across the body, instead of awkwardly focused on certain parts of the body(like, for example, a backpack full of gear), which makes movement more easy. Remember, the people who actually historically fought in plate armor would require a great deal of mobility compared to the modern day wherein virtually all combat is done at range-it doesn't make sense to assume that armor would heavily restrict movement.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzTwBQ…
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlIUr…
So the answer is 'by being a fighter, male or female, who has any level of training/competency upon the battlefield at all, because moving in plate armor is actually not very physically strenuous in the first place, and a normal person can do it fairly well'.
Your other nitpicks are missing the main point of this piece in a bunch of minutia about a hypothetical that no one but you raised-that main point being, of course, that someone wearing armor is going to be far more effective in combat than someone without. Also, if you had done any research you would know that history is full of women who rode into combat in armor, so your last comment is as inaccurate as it is sexist.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ha! Oh your response had me in stitches. Good on ya! Well put and well done.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Sexy armor is for the bedroom while armor is for the battlefield.
Unless its a magic armor that protects with magic then who knows how it will look.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>