Funny Pictures. Safe For Work, and Safe For The Kids Too.

I shall raise an army to save this thread! And the kitten!

 

Essential for pre-empting all ad-homeniem arguments while on the internets, a comprehensive guide. =P

 

^

 

A friend linked this to me, suggesting it's a bit like me.

 

troll science explanation: pokemon are secretly made of unobtanium carbide.

 

V
V
V

 

every single time.

 

And I believe it.

 

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.

That said, Red Sonja: Blue was pretty good with dealing with the bikini armour.

 

Is there ANY historical record of 'bikini armor' at all (other than in Las Vegas-type shows, and science fiction conventions)? I do know that during the middle ages, women would occasionally pretend to be boys in order to fight -- we know about that mostly because of battlefield wounds, and so on. Of course, there was at least one famous case with a female warrior, such as Jeanne D'Arc where it wasn't a big secret, but I've never seen her depicted wearing a bikini. In the Amazon myth (or at least one version of it), Amazon warriors supposedly would have their right breast removed in order to make their right arm stronger (better to use a bow). I've never seen anyone go quite that far for purposes of Cosplay, though...

 

Actually, they removed the right breast since they could not draw a bow with a big flesh bag in the way. Stand up, pretend you have a pair of watermelons on your chest, and imagine drawing a bow. The string of the bow would get awfully close to the breasts even if you are careful to avoid that. It was just easier to remove one than to reinvent the wheel for a petty issue like that. (Not so petty, they were warriors after all. A missed shot could easily mean death.)

But yeah, bikinis are not armor in any case. Armor is supposed to block things that harm you, not highlight sexual appeal.

 

The average cup size is not "a pair of watermelons". Haldurson is right. The myth is, as far as I understand it, that the Amazonian tribeswomen (a mythological race; historically they were the Scythians and other similar groups) removed their right breast so that the 'development', as it were, would go to their right arm, making it stronger. But, as Olympic-level archery shows, breasts are - for the majority of women - no real issue with regards to the use of a bow.

And bikini armour is largely an invention of modern fantasy art, thanks to artists like Frank Frazetta and Boris Valejo as far as I'm aware. Women would have worn, largely, armour similar to that of their male counterparts regardless of the period of history. So Jeanne d'Arc would have worn a full suit of armour, if depictions are anything to go by, just one crafted for her smaller, slimmer build.

But fighting doesn't necessarily mean armour was worn. There were supposedly tribes (particularly in Britain, I believe) who went into battle wearing nothing but a torc around their necks and woad. Yes, no armour - or even clothing, for that matter. It's not a stretch to think that Boudica (well, insert your preferred spelling there) may not have worn anything that could really class as 'armour'.

 

Yeah, that. With "stronger" bows (meaning "ones with higher draw weight) drawing them fully required a lot of strength, and even more so if you did not lock your arms to make it easier for your arms (in fact, trying to release an arrow from a bow that you can barely draw to its full range, without locking your arms, is likely to have a result similar to what shooting a shotgun one-handed would do to your arm - you will end up dislocating something). Thus, they had the choice between using weaker bows, or getting rid of one "decoration".

Actually, that is not a good proof. While I am sure that there isn't much truth in the "myth" of Amazonian warriors, I know enough about bows to tell you that bows vary greatly in their draw weight. And the bows you see while watching "Olympic-level archery" aren't the ones with the highest draw weight, even far from it.