I think she missed (or YT wouldn't let her) do the comparison with the... ahem.... "front part". That'd be a fair comparison because I doubt there's a man that hasn't had an... "accident" with the zip in their trousers sometime in the life.
I have built butt armour for a 16th century foot combat armour. It is not a close comparison at all. Mainly that the legs move away from it not towards it.
I’m uniquely qualified to give an answer to this question! As a big titty goth girl who’s nerdy enough to belonged to a medieval reenactment group, that includes non-choreographed live full steel combat! I chest bind! Just as a big breasted police or military woman does when she’s wearing a Kevlar vest. The modern Kevlar being the lest comfortable of the two. The layers are; modern tank top, large ace bandage, period linen shirt, chain mail shirt, gambeson, gorget, chest-plate. Getting suited is just one of the many reasons you need a squire. Pro tip: pee before you armor up.
I got to ask is your armor more shaped more like a pot bellied man? I saw an old painting of joan of arc and her armor did not look different that male armor. Just slightly smaller to fit her. It appeared it would fit a teenage boy her size.
Possible to try Japanese armor? Or Roman Lorica Segmentata? Overlapping plates with some give to allow for flexing of the torso seems like it would help. I was in the SCA for many years. SCA ladies may have some tips for you. I am a guy, and designed a sort of banded mail for combat archery where you twist your torso a lot.
@@Kalikrates_the_witch_1Nah man the whole Prometheus series is awful. He banks on his name from the 90s/2000s, his recent Napoleon film tanked massively when he's not weaponising nostalgia he's losing money like only the rich can afford
I feel that the costumers should look at historical stays and bodices to base female armor on, but the cupped corsets but older historical corsets have the base for good armor formed for women.
I get the feeling Hollywood costumers have to bow to the whims of the director's aesthetics, regardless of their personal design and craft skills. Usually the difference between good and bad costumes, sets and props are down to directors and producers not who they hire to do the real work
0:02 before I even start, the combination of the text, the background image, and the expression on your face make this one of the greatest thumbnails of all time 👏👏👏
This. 100% this. For exactly the same reasons as any fashion/clothing/armour is designed to enhance the masculinity/femininity . If folks are wearing generic unisex armour then in the medium that we now see these people in it can be tricky to figure out who we are looking at. Anyone remember Transformers 2 where all the battle scenes are of almost identical things hitting each other, and it became impossible to tell who was hitting who. Trope it may be, but a functional and useful one. And one of many. In the real world booby armour would be lethal. I look at the shape and see a shot trap. I dont think the thickness of the armour is the issue, more that that i might actually help and guide blows/arrows in vulnerable areas. I am a wargaming nerd, there are companies/game systems do have functionally unisex armour. At that scale (28mm) it can be very difficult to see that some of the tiny dudes are in fact dudettes without some enhanced booby armour.
"Itty Bitty Tittie Committee" This is why I love your videos! I haven't heard that expression in many years!!! Jill Bearup does great armor analysis on her UA-cam channel.
There's plenty of examples of male armor. Any male going into battle would want their dangling buddies protected yet I've never see armor that clearly separates the shaft and each ball.
It’s because sensitive areas want to be protected by something that has an air gap between the metal and the body. Imagine what would happen if a codpiece like that took a hard hit from a mace and collapsed into your junk. With an air gap you have some space before the jewels get crushed.
@@ThatGuy182545this comment is so blatantly false it shouldn’t even warrant correction… By the imperial period of Rome maybe, but anatomical armor was the gold standard for Greek and Roman heavy infantry for centuries.
Henry VIII's armour had basically a metal dildo sticking out of it to shock enemies. In classical eras male plate could have defined pectorals and abdominals for no other reason than display.
I love how much your humour is shining through in your last few videos! I know you've talked about struggling with a direction for the channel but this new sort of 'DGAF' attitude combined with your fantastic historical, mythological, and literary knowledge is amazing 😂 (Also, solidarity from a fellow sister of the IBTC ❤)
Amusingly, movies tend to make female fighters archers because they think they can't wield swords, However, it takes far more strength to use a war bow than it does to swing a sword. Even large swords are relatively light and of course, no one in movies uses a spear, which was the predominant weapon before gunpowder. If you want to see good female armour on TV, look at Brienne in Game of Thrones.
A good (ish) spear fighting scene is in, ironically, "Troy," the fight between Achilles and Hector. That movie also has llamas sauntering around Ancient Greece.
@@linasayshush Too much flailing around, not enough pokey-pokey. A spear is a thrust weapon, not a club. And how they broke the spears... It is too much "looks cool".
nothing in these movies is particularly historically accurate. but, if any one in history would be wearing booby armor, it would have been a gladiatrix. The Armor of Gladiators was particularly ridicules and unusual, it was a show after all....they practically fought bare naked' despite that there is no evidence gladiatrices wore booby armor, if any thing they probably fought bare chested like the men.
Gladiators wore impractical armour all the time. That's like complaining that the murmillo's helmet isn't practical because it's easier to grab or catch swords. And as you already said, lorica musculata exists for men, so why not also make it for women.
Butt armour was also a thing on 16th century tournament armour. I have built one and it is not a good comparison. As your leg needs range of motion away from butt armour but towards a breastplate.
History is always the best argument against people saying these are to impractical. People were riding into battle with foot long cod pieces. I dont think practicality was their primary concern.
@williamjenkins4913 i'd need a source for that one. I fear it would interfere with the saddle. I'm assuming that you meant unarmoured? Most armoured codpieces were far more modest. I'm thinking of making a fluted 1580s southern German ish style one for my current project but that will have to wait. I'm going to build some "boob armour" for testing.
@@ArmourArtist There is a pretty epic one in the Hofburg Armoury and of course Henry VIII's armor was very proud. The larger ones tend to point or curve upward. Now that you mention it that might be to fit in the saddle.
@@williamjenkins4913 Sorry but I have never seen one of those that was a foot long and most of the wilder examples seem to be either for foot combat in tournament of are modern.
Being a non-boobie haver the knowledge of inadvertent slippage between the body and armor was not a concern I knew would be needed. Now I know, and knowing is half the battle.
Jill Bearup has a lot of great content addressing this very topic, and she largely agrees with you. There is an argument to be made that 14th - 16th century plate armors would be tailored to the wearer, just as they were for men. And a higher dome on the chest to make room for the breasts if needed makes perfect sense. And I'm certain a woman's arming doublet would look a little different than a man's. Molded breasts in a ceremonial or even in a fantasy jousting situation I can see. In these settings it's as much about pomp and showmanship and fashion as it is about protection. No one wore a frog mouth helmet onto the battle field or went into melee wearing a foot long cod piece as far as I'm aware of. So that being said--gladiator armor was more about the show than being functional battle field armor. If a woman was in a gladiator arena, she probably didn't get to choose her armor. Who ever owned her would, and it would be chosen to excite and stoke the crowd. And another point---you are absolutely right. You would always want a gap between the armor and your skin--blunt force trauma transferring through armor is a real thing and caused real injuries. All of this said, Curiously, women are generally sensible people. If a woman is going into a battle where she will be confronted with weapons armor can reasonably protect against, she will get the best available armor she can afford. This is if we are talking about realism. If we are talking about fantasy / historical miniatures that are 28 or 32 mm scale, however, boob armor can help identify female and male figures when you are standing beside a table. If you have a troop of amazons and you want them to really stand out for what they are--boob armor actually helps with that.
Excellent points, have a like. Might I further add that as I’ve heard from Dr. Ryan of told in stone and Metatron the female gladiators (gladiatrixi?) fought in armour that was one might say specially designed to make clear the combatant was female from a distance.
Even though it was in the thumbnail, the number of times you said “boobie armor” was still hilarious 😂 Also, you should keep making short-ish videos on random topics like these every so often, not just in December, they’re super easy to watch, and even though you call it “ranting” it’s fun to see your passion come through on these topics. I know you were talking about revamping/ taking the channel in a new direction some time ago, so just something to keep in mind.
WOAH WOAH WOAH Armor protects from fatal penetration with resistance to puncture (hardness) and DEFLECTION. Having the blow of a piercing weapon directed inward makes it rely only on harness. It eliminates deflection as a form of protection. You see what I'm saying here?
Listening to a clearly intelligent, scholarly woman repeatedly say "Itty, Bitty Titty Committee" in her oral argument about pop culture historical innaccuracies was not something I expected XD Love it!
I dip in and out of this topic (being a nerd, but not a fantasy nerd), but wow! You sold me with this one - fantastic explanation! Signed Lovingly, A Former Member of the Itty Bitty Titty Committee, who has a child and is now a member of the Saggy Sisterhood
I can see how metal bumps could seriously limit ones range of motion using a shield. Shields are mostly kept close to the body. Trying to raise it quick enough to block a headshot could really be hampered.
Hi Cinzia, I think you forgot to add the card/link to the other video you mention at 1m21. Just pointing this out in a friendly fashion in case you'd like to add it to the video. 🙂
Any armour that follows too closely to the contours of your body is stupid. If someone hits you with a heavy blunt object that deforms your chest plate, you need somewhere for the crumpling metal to go. If there’s no dead space between your chest and the armour then it goes into your chest and starts compressing it, causing positional asphyxiation. You can literally be killed by your own armour compressing your lungs.
I thought we were past the point of UA-cam “Historians” commenting on this… Anatomical armor was very much a real thing and I’m sure that if women had been more active in combat roles then they too would have developed something anatomical. The fact of the matter is that very few women have participated in combat throughout history and so there was no need for them to have armor. Also, wait until she finds out about Henry Viii’s butt armor.
Could be wrong though but that part, even if it's not "weaker", it's still an extra target in comparison to a flat one... if someone swings a hammer or a sword, you need an extra step back just to avoid the contact... and any contact on that part (specially if the swing is vertical) would "push" the one wearing the armor down, forcing her to "knee"... and that's a death sentence in a battlefield...
Well the protrusion will have to be there in one shape or another so if that is a disadvantage it is one you would just have to accept and work around.
I giggled every single time you said 'boobie armor" because apparently I'm eternally twelve. However, this was just a fascinating look at this whole topic. Thank you for both of those things!
Is is very stupid to create armour that effectively leads the point of your opponent's weapon to the middle of your body. Injuring you from there is a lot easier than if the curvature of your armour just leads your opponent's weapon elsewhere. I tried it with a sparring partner and getting the point of a sword that's stuck in your sternum area away from you is super awkward and just a weakness I'd rather not have. Edit: I am totally down for Nerdmas.
That screenshot from Skyrim is why I always have to find an armor replacer mod for women. For a while, the best we had was just swapping out the male model for the female model, but these days you can get armor (with a little setup of your own in a separate program) with a more-or-less serviceable dome shape. Makes me less likely to pop a blood vessel while playing.
I get the feeling Hollywood costumers have to bow to the whims of the director's aesthetics, regardless of their personal design and craft skills. Usually the difference between good and bad costumes, sets and props are down to directors and producers not who they hire to do the real work
It’s not the penetration of the cleavage area, but the impacts. Booby armor guides the impact into the cleavage which in turn takes the force of the impact which can cause the sternum to break, shattered bone pieces in critical attacks could penetrate the heart and lungs. These injuries may not be immediately life threatening but will decrease the effectiveness of the wearer. Many boob armor also don’t provide protection to the armpit and neck. These are areas that are key to injuring an opponent. Vambraces extend to protect these areas as well as neck guards. Usually mail is the only protection for the neck and armpits if it is actually used but a piercing weapon could go right through the mail coat that should be under any armor pieces.
If this were in fact something they were concerned about then you would run into the exact same issue with the (mentioned) muscle cuirass of the day. The only thing that could hit with enough force to actually make this a problem would be a cavalry lance, but that’s not how cavalry was used in antiquity so they would have had no reason to produce a domed breastplate (like you start to see appearing later with the introduction of the lance).
@ Actually, not the lance, as the lance is useless without another device that became widespread by 1000 CE. That is the stirrup. Without the stirrup you would be knocked backwards off a horse by the force of the impact. Mounted troops with spears weren’t lancers but more or less mounted spearmen poking at troops instead of using the force of a charge except the power and blunt force of the horse itself. It was after that time that heavily armored cavalry with some exceptions like the catapracts came into being. There were still armored cuirass made back to unrecorded history. Made from various materials to protect from slashing as well as blunt force attacks.
@@Benevolent_Fafnir Her point about be unable to move within armor had me thinking. Watching various videos prior on armor by those that make it and those that use it in sparring combat is that, it has to move with you. There isn’t any slack on the various pieces especially the cuirass. The flanged mace was to damage the armor at key parts to make movement more difficult. Armor was at least 3 layers, the doublet, then the mail shirt prior to strapping on the cuirass. There wasn’t allowed any give from the body, the cuirass moves as one’s skin with your motions. Joints were some of the points that the enemy would strike at with pointed weapons as penetrating mail wasn’t that hard.
Anything that penetrates armor will have a sharp point and get bigger, so the deeper it goes, the more resistance it meets. Having a space between the armor and body can stop a point before it does any harm. The sternum is the last place you want skin tight armor and a "shot trap" to attract points.
Hi LotL. For the few Medieval armor examples I’ve handled, the breast plate is a completely separate piece, with adjustable leather straps linking this separate plate to other plates and other separate pieces. Given that armor was generally constructed in inconvenient and restrictive ways to begin with, restrictive women’s armor would seem a reasonable possibility. I suggest you try some on for yourself, or contact some women who have tried genuine or accurate reproduction Medieval women’s armor. Do let us know what you discover: experiments often reveal the unexpected.
The biggest problem with any part of your breastplate being concave is that if you take any pressure to the chest there's a huge risk that the indented part will actually break your bones...
@@ArmourArtist Very good idea. Armor should never be skin tight. I'm also curious as to what you plan on doing with the arming doublet. HEMA and fencing has chest protection for women that's fitted to bra size, similar to sports cups for men. But since those kinds of plastic materials weren't available to medieval armorers--they would be left trying to create something like a sports bra inside the armor. You don't want them sticking out to be in the way, but you do want them stable, and if there had been a demand for it I'm sure medieval armorers would have come up with a better solution than strapping the breasts down.
If we are talking about 14th to 16th century plate armors for practical armor, as long as the armor isn't right up against your skin that's less of an issue. Because you're actually talking about adding more curves to the armor. Once a blow starts to slide in any one direction it loses most of its power--whether it's a sword or a war hammer or something in between. It's part of the reason you see most plate being rounded and or fluted, so weapons have a much harder time getting full purchase against the wearer. The most compelling arguments in my opinion are about lost mobility. If you're constantly having to contend with two metal half-spheres in front of your chest, that could really get in the way of needed techniques especially when the fighting becomes nose-to-nose close where you're down to daggers and wrestling techniques. As far as pinching, a good arming doublet would solve those problems.
@@ArmourArtist Well, it would have to be one with points on the shoulders and long sleeves so the armor could be attached properly, and it would also need to support mail voiders for vulnerable places like the armpits. So an arming doublet tailored for women would probably be the more practical solution. I'm not up on historical corsets--there might well have been long sleeved corsets where you add points so you could tie spaulders or pauldrons to them. But I am not aware of those. Modern History has a lot of great videos where he shows what all goes into wearing full plate harness.
one has to remember that one of Ridley Scott's biggest film back in the day was Alien a movie that used designs based on genitalia all around for the alien, the ship it was found on, and so many other things so I would say look there to see what he considers more important and not important, because he never switched off and pushed this nightmare of a production forward anyway so obviously he liked something about it LOL
I mean if you want to do some more cinema takes that's tied to literature but not just a straight adaptation, I'd love to hear how you think Patrick Stewart's Captain Picard compares to Captain Ahab in Star Trek First Contact. You said you weren't into violent movies but I think it would be fairly easy to cut those parts out since they wouldn't really matter to anything
While important, and a really wet dream for people with strange obsessions, boobie armour isn't the only thing that had me wondering if Hollywood shouldn't stop doing classical age movies. Crossbow anyone!?!
I completely agree with your points but I'll be honest it still does look cool. 😊 I wanna say when it comes to a lot of armour and stuff most of the time the set designers are just focusing on the cool Factor. Which I completely can understand as someone that gets a bit annoyed when a film claims to be historically accurate but feeds into historical movie tropes. I feel like a good middle ground would be kind of what you explained to where we can have those kinds of armors, but have it set where there's a clear distinction that this (boobies armor) is ceremonial armour and then there's a battle scene and they're wearing a different kind of more appropriate armour for battle.
Came for the title and wanted to encourage you to read a bit about synesthesia, particularly mirror-touch. Sounds like you may have it. My dad has that kind and a couple others and doesn’t like violent movies for the same reason.
Maybe BECAUSE the gladiotorial games were public entertainment and female warriors were added in as a curiosity, "boobie armor" would make sense. Maybe this was a situation where public sexiness trumped effectiveness in battle?
Female Gladiators were basically an scandalous oddity, so I feel it's absolutely open hiw they would have been equipped. Male Gladiators actually wore almost exact opposite of battle armour.
As one with an asymmetrical look on life, I joke with my boyfriend that I reincarnated from an Amazonian lifetime remembering which side was my drawing arm. I straddle half in the same committee.
Boob armor sounds impractical. I know Roman warriors sometimes wore sculpted muscular torso armor, but presumably there would be some sort of padding underneath to absorb the blows
I would like to make one comment about the danger to the sternum. Armor is designed to deflect blows as much as possible, however that is a bit much to expect in a battle or even a one on one fight. There is room between the armor and the body, and an arming doublet is usually used in full plate armor. But if you look at Joan of Arc's depections she is wearing the same shape of breastplate as the men. This would spread the inevitable hard blow to the front over the entire chest/stomach area. "Boobie Armor" would put a metal wedge right over the sternum, female breasts are not hard enough to keep from being pushed in, and that steel point would DRIVE right into the brestbone potentially breaking it. At least those are my thoughts. I am not biologically equipped to be sure about them, but having 'played' at re-enactments some of the blows I have taken on the breastplate have knocked me for a loop even after being spread from beltline to neck.
I may be part of the problem... but now I want to see men in butt armor. Armorer: "This is new armor. I'm trying to make room for each of your cheeks. I'm taking into account the shape of your body." Gladiator: "Um... ok, but this new shape means there is a metal ... ridge ... up in there. What happened to the flap. I used to just have a flap. Can I go back to that?" "No... this is... um... Ceasar's orders?"
As what to call these nerd rants, well, why not just use a Portmanteaus? Nerd +rant= nerant Erudite+Gewitter= EruGewitter (my fave) 😅 Love your channels. Oh, Intellirant!
I have been saying that for years not many women warriors and yes, they were there back then, but no armor was designed to accommodate boobs, if they wore armor it was flat chested like the men's so swinging a sward was unincumbered, and they wouldn't get picked out of a crowd like Viking horns on their helmets not a good idea any horns on were for rites and not warfare
As with Cod pieces and human nature, boasting is WAAAAY more important than actual practicality. Just look at some cars with all the junk that gets done to them, in the nameof looking cool. If the majority of woman took part in combat, Booby armour might have been much more of a thing than you think, just because people like to boast.
Good to see you are keeping abreast with history.
I am forever going to use Butt Armor as an argument on why this trope is dumb. Thank you for that
I think she missed (or YT wouldn't let her) do the comparison with the... ahem.... "front part". That'd be a fair comparison because I doubt there's a man that hasn't had an... "accident" with the zip in their trousers sometime in the life.
I have built butt armour for a 16th century foot combat armour. It is not a close comparison at all. Mainly that the legs move away from it not towards it.
@@ubiergo1978 Yeah, but oversized but otherwise anatomically correct erect codpieces were a real thing and were extremely popular.
I’m uniquely qualified to give an answer to this question! As a big titty goth girl who’s nerdy enough to belonged to a medieval reenactment group, that includes non-choreographed live full steel combat! I chest bind! Just as a big breasted police or military woman does when she’s wearing a Kevlar vest. The modern Kevlar being the lest comfortable of the two. The layers are; modern tank top, large ace bandage, period linen shirt, chain mail shirt, gambeson, gorget, chest-plate. Getting suited is just one of the many reasons you need a squire. Pro tip: pee before you armor up.
I got to ask is your armor more shaped more like a pot bellied man? I saw an old painting of joan of arc and her armor did not look different that male armor. Just slightly smaller to fit her. It appeared it would fit a teenage boy her size.
Possible to try Japanese armor? Or Roman Lorica Segmentata? Overlapping plates with some give to allow for flexing of the torso seems like it would help.
I was in the SCA for many years. SCA ladies may have some tips for you. I am a guy, and designed a sort of banded mail for combat archery where you twist your torso a lot.
Drinking game: take a shot every time Cinzia says "boobie" in this video
don´t have booze but i have mashed potatoes, i hope it counts
Oh I can do this, as I randomly picked this video to watch while eating dinner and drinking a beer! Although I might need two for this game...
She says it 23 times. I was done with my first pint way before my food and had to start a second. Uuh, I am tipsy now. Thanks Cinzia and BoZoiD57
No way, I value my liver to highly.
Beat me to it 😂
It's Ridley Scott, he doesn't just not care about accuracy, he doesn't care about anything or anyone it seems.
But he makes great films
@@Kalikrates_the_witch_1 He *made* great films.
@@Kalikrates_the_witch_1Nah man the whole Prometheus series is awful.
He banks on his name from the 90s/2000s, his recent Napoleon film tanked massively when he's not weaponising nostalgia he's losing money like only the rich can afford
@Rynewulf fair enough, I haven't seen either so I'll take your word on it
I feel that the costumers should look at historical stays and bodices to base female armor on, but the cupped corsets but older historical corsets have the base for good armor formed for women.
I get the feeling Hollywood costumers have to bow to the whims of the director's aesthetics, regardless of their personal design and craft skills.
Usually the difference between good and bad costumes, sets and props are down to directors and producers not who they hire to do the real work
0:02 before I even start, the combination of the text, the background image, and the expression on your face make this one of the greatest thumbnails of all time 👏👏👏
You know, the one place where over the top ineffective armor that serves only to help identify the fighter makes sense WOULD be in a fighting arena.
Yes, and gladiators were not all about practicality. Most gladiators fought bare-chested regardless of whether they were men and women.
This. 100% this. For exactly the same reasons as any fashion/clothing/armour is designed to enhance the masculinity/femininity . If folks are wearing generic unisex armour then in the medium that we now see these people in it can be tricky to figure out who we are looking at. Anyone remember Transformers 2 where all the battle scenes are of almost identical things hitting each other, and it became impossible to tell who was hitting who.
Trope it may be, but a functional and useful one. And one of many.
In the real world booby armour would be lethal. I look at the shape and see a shot trap. I dont think the thickness of the armour is the issue, more that that i might actually help and guide blows/arrows in vulnerable areas.
I am a wargaming nerd, there are companies/game systems do have functionally unisex armour. At that scale (28mm) it can be very difficult to see that some of the tiny dudes are in fact dudettes without some enhanced booby armour.
"Itty Bitty Tittie Committee" This is why I love your videos! I haven't heard that expression in many years!!! Jill Bearup does great armor analysis on her UA-cam channel.
There's plenty of examples of male armor. Any male going into battle would want their dangling buddies protected yet I've never see armor that clearly separates the shaft and each ball.
Buy they did have muscle armor.
@@TaziraiThat type of armour was typically worn by upper echelon officers who weren’t expected to actually fight.
It’s because sensitive areas want to be protected by something that has an air gap between the metal and the body.
Imagine what would happen if a codpiece like that took a hard hit from a mace and collapsed into your junk. With an air gap you have some space before the jewels get crushed.
@@ThatGuy182545this comment is so blatantly false it shouldn’t even warrant correction… By the imperial period of Rome maybe, but anatomical armor was the gold standard for Greek and Roman heavy infantry for centuries.
Henry VIII's armour had basically a metal dildo sticking out of it to shock enemies. In classical eras male plate could have defined pectorals and abdominals for no other reason than display.
Boobie armor 🤣 As one that is not a member of the itty bitty tittie commitee, I can relate these things get in the way.😅🎉
I love how much your humour is shining through in your last few videos! I know you've talked about struggling with a direction for the channel but this new sort of 'DGAF' attitude combined with your fantastic historical, mythological, and literary knowledge is amazing 😂
(Also, solidarity from a fellow sister of the IBTC ❤)
I absolutely love that you are making a video about armour. Great job!
Glad you enjoyed it!
@@scholagladiatoria Matt please don’t encourage the spread of misinformation!
Amusingly, movies tend to make female fighters archers because they think they can't wield swords, However, it takes far more strength to use a war bow than it does to swing a sword. Even large swords are relatively light and of course, no one in movies uses a spear, which was the predominant weapon before gunpowder. If you want to see good female armour on TV, look at Brienne in Game of Thrones.
well said. And a well-balanced sword almost 'swings itself' in a sense. And what you lack in brute force you might make up for in agility and speed.
It is such a bummer that everyone is ignoring the good old spear.
A good (ish) spear fighting scene is in, ironically, "Troy," the fight between Achilles and Hector. That movie also has llamas sauntering around Ancient Greece.
Gladiators do not need war bows they need hunting bows.
@@linasayshush Too much flailing around, not enough pokey-pokey. A spear is a thrust weapon, not a club. And how they broke the spears... It is too much "looks cool".
Brava, Cinzia! I am thrilled to see someone call out this ridiculous, sexist trope!
😂😂😂😂
This was informative and awesomely amusing at the same time. Thanks, Cinzia you made my day.
nothing in these movies is particularly historically accurate.
but, if any one in history would be wearing booby armor, it would have been a gladiatrix.
The Armor of Gladiators was particularly ridicules and unusual, it was a show after all....they practically fought bare naked'
despite that there is no evidence gladiatrices wore booby armor, if any thing they probably fought bare chested like the men.
Gladiators wore impractical armour all the time. That's like complaining that the murmillo's helmet isn't practical because it's easier to grab or catch swords. And as you already said, lorica musculata exists for men, so why not also make it for women.
Precisely, gladiators were entertainers not warriors.We don't send the SAS out in silk shorts but the UFC fighters wear them.
Always happy to see you post.
Nice one Cinzia. Not a rant at all; a balanced commentary on the film industry's assumption that nobody cares about historical accuracy.
This has brought me so much joy! You are the best!
I am totally with you on the watching violence, and reactions. An exceptionally informative, witty video, even for you! I like "Nerdmas!"
Butt armour was also a thing on 16th century tournament armour. I have built one and it is not a good comparison. As your leg needs range of motion away from butt armour but towards a breastplate.
History is always the best argument against people saying these are to impractical. People were riding into battle with foot long cod pieces. I dont think practicality was their primary concern.
@williamjenkins4913 i'd need a source for that one. I fear it would interfere with the saddle. I'm assuming that you meant unarmoured? Most armoured codpieces were far more modest. I'm thinking of making a fluted 1580s southern German ish style one for my current project but that will have to wait. I'm going to build some "boob armour" for testing.
@@ArmourArtist There is a pretty epic one in the Hofburg Armoury and of course Henry VIII's armor was very proud. The larger ones tend to point or curve upward. Now that you mention it that might be to fit in the saddle.
@@williamjenkins4913 Sorry but I have never seen one of those that was a foot long and most of the wilder examples seem to be either for foot combat in tournament of are modern.
@@ArmourArtist ok
Thanks for this fascinating video Cinzia!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you for your fun videos Cinzia, I love all the various topics you cover (geek rant? nerd rant?). Stay amazing! ❤❤❤
Being a non-boobie haver the knowledge of inadvertent slippage between the body and armor was not a concern I knew would be needed. Now I know, and knowing is half the battle.
Jill Bearup has a lot of great content addressing this very topic, and she largely agrees with you. There is an argument to be made that 14th - 16th century plate armors would be tailored to the wearer, just as they were for men. And a higher dome on the chest to make room for the breasts if needed makes perfect sense. And I'm certain a woman's arming doublet would look a little different than a man's.
Molded breasts in a ceremonial or even in a fantasy jousting situation I can see. In these settings it's as much about pomp and showmanship and fashion as it is about protection. No one wore a frog mouth helmet onto the battle field or went into melee wearing a foot long cod piece as far as I'm aware of.
So that being said--gladiator armor was more about the show than being functional battle field armor. If a woman was in a gladiator arena, she probably didn't get to choose her armor. Who ever owned her would, and it would be chosen to excite and stoke the crowd.
And another point---you are absolutely right. You would always want a gap between the armor and your skin--blunt force trauma transferring through armor is a real thing and caused real injuries.
All of this said,
Curiously, women are generally sensible people. If a woman is going into a battle where she will be confronted with weapons armor can reasonably protect against, she will get the best available armor she can afford. This is if we are talking about realism.
If we are talking about fantasy / historical miniatures that are 28 or 32 mm scale, however, boob armor can help identify female and male figures when you are standing beside a table. If you have a troop of amazons and you want them to really stand out for what they are--boob armor actually helps with that.
Excellent points, have a like. Might I further add that as I’ve heard from Dr. Ryan of told in stone and Metatron the female gladiators (gladiatrixi?) fought in armour that was one might say specially designed to make clear the combatant was female from a distance.
Even though it was in the thumbnail, the number of times you said “boobie armor” was still hilarious 😂
Also, you should keep making short-ish videos on random topics like these every so often, not just in December, they’re super easy to watch, and even though you call it “ranting” it’s fun to see your passion come through on these topics. I know you were talking about revamping/ taking the channel in a new direction some time ago, so just something to keep in mind.
WOAH WOAH WOAH
Armor protects from fatal penetration with resistance to puncture (hardness) and DEFLECTION. Having the blow of a piercing weapon directed inward makes it rely only on harness. It eliminates deflection as a form of protection. You see what I'm saying here?
loved this video, good points and funny all at the same time!
Listening to a clearly intelligent, scholarly woman repeatedly say "Itty, Bitty Titty Committee" in her oral argument about pop culture historical innaccuracies was not something I expected XD
Love it!
@@NoBudjetFilms “clearly intelligent” yet she can’t take five minutes to fact check herself before posting a video about armor.
I dip in and out of this topic (being a nerd, but not a fantasy nerd), but wow! You sold me with this one - fantastic explanation! Signed Lovingly, A Former Member of the Itty Bitty Titty Committee, who has a child and is now a member of the Saggy Sisterhood
I can see how metal bumps could seriously limit ones range of motion using a shield. Shields are mostly kept close to the body. Trying to raise it quick enough to block a headshot could really be hampered.
Brilliant argument delivered with humor. 😅 Now I will be checking for boobie armor in my movies and scoffing loudly!
Hi Cinzia, I think you forgot to add the card/link to the other video you mention at 1m21. Just pointing this out in a friendly fashion in case you'd like to add it to the video. 🙂
yeah that vid sounds great and i think i missed it.
Jill Bearup made an excellent video about this topic. I am sorry, but have you ever tried out the assumpations you make here practically?
I love that you're having Watsonian beef with movie makers having in-universe incompetent armourers.
Any armour that follows too closely to the contours of your body is stupid. If someone hits you with a heavy blunt object that deforms your chest plate, you need somewhere for the crumpling metal to go. If there’s no dead space between your chest and the armour then it goes into your chest and starts compressing it, causing positional asphyxiation. You can literally be killed by your own armour compressing your lungs.
I nearly pulled my hair out looking at the trailer
I thought we were past the point of UA-cam “Historians” commenting on this… Anatomical armor was very much a real thing and I’m sure that if women had been more active in combat roles then they too would have developed something anatomical.
The fact of the matter is that very few women have participated in combat throughout history and so there was no need for them to have armor.
Also, wait until she finds out about Henry Viii’s butt armor.
Could be wrong though but that part, even if it's not "weaker", it's still an extra target in comparison to a flat one... if someone swings a hammer or a sword, you need an extra step back just to avoid the contact... and any contact on that part (specially if the swing is vertical) would "push" the one wearing the armor down, forcing her to "knee"... and that's a death sentence in a battlefield...
Well the protrusion will have to be there in one shape or another so if that is a disadvantage it is one you would just have to accept and work around.
I giggled every single time you said 'boobie armor" because apparently I'm eternally twelve. However, this was just a fascinating look at this whole topic. Thank you for both of those things!
I appreciate the gift of “bookie armor” discourse
Please someone recommend her to watch the "Funny armor logic in video games" series of Viva La Dirt league. =P
Is is very stupid to create armour that effectively leads the point of your opponent's weapon to the middle of your body. Injuring you from there is a lot easier than if the curvature of your armour just leads your opponent's weapon elsewhere. I tried it with a sparring partner and getting the point of a sword that's stuck in your sternum area away from you is super awkward and just a weakness I'd rather not have.
Edit: I am totally down for Nerdmas.
That screenshot from Skyrim is why I always have to find an armor replacer mod for women. For a while, the best we had was just swapping out the male model for the female model, but these days you can get armor (with a little setup of your own in a separate program) with a more-or-less serviceable dome shape. Makes me less likely to pop a blood vessel while playing.
How fast you said Itty bitty bitty committee was impressive 👏
Hope there is a movie with female gladiators
I get the feeling Hollywood costumers have to bow to the whims of the director's aesthetics, regardless of their personal design and craft skills.
Usually the difference between good and bad costumes, sets and props are down to directors and producers not who they hire to do the real work
It’s not the penetration of the cleavage area, but the impacts. Booby armor guides the impact into the cleavage which in turn takes the force of the impact which can cause the sternum to break, shattered bone pieces in critical attacks could penetrate the heart and lungs. These injuries may not be immediately life threatening but will decrease the effectiveness of the wearer.
Many boob armor also don’t provide protection to the armpit and neck. These are areas that are key to injuring an opponent. Vambraces extend to protect these areas as well as neck guards. Usually mail is the only protection for the neck and armpits if it is actually used but a piercing weapon could go right through the mail coat that should be under any armor pieces.
If this were in fact something they were concerned about then you would run into the exact same issue with the (mentioned) muscle cuirass of the day.
The only thing that could hit with enough force to actually make this a problem would be a cavalry lance, but that’s not how cavalry was used in antiquity so they would have had no reason to produce a domed breastplate (like you start to see appearing later with the introduction of the lance).
@ Actually, not the lance, as the lance is useless without another device that became widespread by 1000 CE. That is the stirrup. Without the stirrup you would be knocked backwards off a horse by the force of the impact. Mounted troops with spears weren’t lancers but more or less mounted spearmen poking at troops instead of using the force of a charge except the power and blunt force of the horse itself.
It was after that time that heavily armored cavalry with some exceptions like the catapracts came into being.
There were still armored cuirass made back to unrecorded history. Made from various materials to protect from slashing as well as blunt force attacks.
@@michaeltelson9798 an excellent point that further proves the statement that they weren’t worried about strong impacts.
@@Benevolent_Fafnir Her point about be unable to move within armor had me thinking. Watching various videos prior on armor by those that make it and those that use it in sparring combat is that, it has to move with you. There isn’t any slack on the various pieces especially the cuirass. The flanged mace was to damage the armor at key parts to make movement more difficult. Armor was at least 3 layers, the doublet, then the mail shirt prior to strapping on the cuirass. There wasn’t allowed any give from the body, the cuirass moves as one’s skin with your motions. Joints were some of the points that the enemy would strike at with pointed weapons as penetrating mail wasn’t that hard.
Anything that penetrates armor will have a sharp point and get bigger, so the deeper it goes, the more resistance it meets. Having a space between the armor and body can stop a point before it does any harm. The sternum is the last place you want skin tight armor and a "shot trap" to attract points.
Being a bloke, I never considered the trapped boobie element of boob armour but I winced when you said it and am going to remember that bit.
Hi LotL. For the few Medieval armor examples I’ve handled, the breast plate is a completely separate piece, with adjustable leather straps linking this separate plate to other plates and other separate pieces. Given that armor was generally constructed in inconvenient and restrictive ways to begin with, restrictive women’s armor would seem a reasonable possibility. I suggest you try some on for yourself, or contact some women who have tried genuine or accurate reproduction Medieval women’s armor. Do let us know what you discover: experiments often reveal the unexpected.
The biggest problem with any part of your breastplate being concave is that if you take any pressure to the chest there's a huge risk that the indented part will actually break your bones...
Which is why I'm leaving a gap on the one I'm building to test.
@@ArmourArtist Very good idea. Armor should never be skin tight. I'm also curious as to what you plan on doing with the arming doublet.
HEMA and fencing has chest protection for women that's fitted to bra size, similar to sports cups for men. But since those kinds of plastic materials weren't available to medieval armorers--they would be left trying to create something like a sports bra inside the armor.
You don't want them sticking out to be in the way, but you do want them stable, and if there had been a demand for it I'm sure medieval armorers would have come up with a better solution than strapping the breasts down.
If we are talking about 14th to 16th century plate armors for practical armor, as long as the armor isn't right up against your skin that's less of an issue. Because you're actually talking about adding more curves to the armor. Once a blow starts to slide in any one direction it loses most of its power--whether it's a sword or a war hammer or something in between. It's part of the reason you see most plate being rounded and or fluted, so weapons have a much harder time getting full purchase against the wearer.
The most compelling arguments in my opinion are about lost mobility. If you're constantly having to contend with two metal half-spheres in front of your chest, that could really get in the way of needed techniques especially when the fighting becomes nose-to-nose close where you're down to daggers and wrestling techniques. As far as pinching, a good arming doublet would solve those problems.
@@andrewlustfield6079 they would have used a corset.
@@ArmourArtist Well, it would have to be one with points on the shoulders and long sleeves so the armor could be attached properly, and it would also need to support mail voiders for vulnerable places like the armpits. So an arming doublet tailored for women would probably be the more practical solution.
I'm not up on historical corsets--there might well have been long sleeved corsets where you add points so you could tie spaulders or pauldrons to them. But I am not aware of those.
Modern History has a lot of great videos where he shows what all goes into wearing full plate harness.
I was rather surprised to discover that there actually *are* sharks in the Mediterranean (though, sadly, they're rather endangered now).
Hmm, maybe a review/reaction to the armor/costumes/whatever in Xena Warrior Princess? Also, love the name Nerdmas for this! 💜
Is there any way we can Cinzia in a cross-over with Jill Bearup? That might produce the most amazing video in the history of UA-cam.
I'm FAR too small a creator to be considered haha, but thank you for it.
one has to remember that one of Ridley Scott's biggest film back in the day was Alien a movie that used designs based on genitalia all around for the alien, the ship it was found on, and so many other things so I would say look there to see what he considers more important and not important, because he never switched off and pushed this nightmare of a production forward anyway so obviously he liked something about it LOL
I mean if you want to do some more cinema takes that's tied to literature but not just a straight adaptation, I'd love to hear how you think Patrick Stewart's Captain Picard compares to Captain Ahab in Star Trek First Contact. You said you weren't into violent movies but I think it would be fairly easy to cut those parts out since they wouldn't really matter to anything
On the other hand, if there's one thing I've learned from movies, the more attractive you are, the more you're likely to survive a battle.
I am not entirely certain why, but this rant is funny!
plays wonderfully at three quarter speed.
While important, and a really wet dream for people with strange obsessions, boobie armour isn't the only thing that had me wondering if Hollywood shouldn't stop doing classical age movies. Crossbow anyone!?!
I completely agree with your points but I'll be honest it still does look cool. 😊
I wanna say when it comes to a lot of armour and stuff most of the time the set designers are just focusing on the cool Factor. Which I completely can understand as someone that gets a bit annoyed when a film claims to be historically accurate but feeds into historical movie tropes.
I feel like a good middle ground would be kind of what you explained to where we can have those kinds of armors, but have it set where there's a clear distinction that this (boobies armor) is ceremonial armour and then there's a battle scene and they're wearing a different kind of more appropriate armour for battle.
Love your rant. More like this, please.
Came for the title and wanted to encourage you to read a bit about synesthesia, particularly mirror-touch. Sounds like you may have it. My dad has that kind and a couple others and doesn’t like violent movies for the same reason.
Imagine a woman playing golf in booby-armor ... it's not going to work in the tee-box... it's not going to work in the Colosseum either.
Hehehe booby armor needed tassels. With spiky balls at the end of it. Like mini chain maces.
Maybe BECAUSE the gladiotorial games were public entertainment and female warriors were added in as a curiosity, "boobie armor" would make sense. Maybe this was a situation where public sexiness trumped effectiveness in battle?
At least it wasn't an armored bikini. Which is usually what is used because...
Female Gladiators were basically an scandalous oddity, so I feel it's absolutely open hiw they would have been equipped. Male Gladiators actually wore almost exact opposite of battle armour.
a "nerd" and "noel" mashup would be fun
Came to hear a lady say boobie in a posh voice. Was not disappointed.
Nerdmass sounds lovely!
LOL i will never look at a film the same way haha :D thank you for this, really enjoyed it
Absolutely nailed it!
Totally here for Nerdmas
As one with an asymmetrical look on life, I joke with my boyfriend that I reincarnated from an Amazonian lifetime remembering which side was my drawing arm. I straddle half in the same committee.
Boob armor sounds impractical. I know Roman warriors sometimes wore sculpted muscular torso armor, but presumably there would be some sort of padding underneath to absorb the blows
I say go for it, who cares It's a movie, we all know it's it's not a documentary.
Don't let Cinzia loose on the "fantasy" female armour, where she's essentially naked but for a tiny metal bikini.
I would like to make one comment about the danger to the sternum. Armor is designed to deflect blows as much as possible, however that is a bit much to expect in a battle or even a one on one fight. There is room between the armor and the body, and an arming doublet is usually used in full plate armor. But if you look at Joan of Arc's depections she is wearing the same shape of breastplate as the men. This would spread the inevitable hard blow to the front over the entire chest/stomach area. "Boobie Armor" would put a metal wedge right over the sternum, female breasts are not hard enough to keep from being pushed in, and that steel point would DRIVE right into the brestbone potentially breaking it. At least those are my thoughts. I am not biologically equipped to be sure about them, but having 'played' at re-enactments some of the blows I have taken on the breastplate have knocked me for a loop even after being spread from beltline to neck.
the Butt Armor analogy is brilliant 😭👍
I may be part of the problem... but now I want to see men in butt armor. Armorer: "This is new armor. I'm trying to make room for each of your cheeks. I'm taking into account the shape of your body." Gladiator: "Um... ok, but this new shape means there is a metal ... ridge ... up in there. What happened to the flap. I used to just have a flap. Can I go back to that?" "No... this is... um... Ceasar's orders?"
As what to call these nerd rants, well, why not just use a Portmanteaus?
Nerd +rant= nerant
Erudite+Gewitter= EruGewitter (my fave) 😅
Love your channels.
Oh, Intellirant!
Take a drink every time she says "BeWBiE ARmOr!"
Alexa hexagon is back!!!!!!!!!!!🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳
Modern ballistic vests are as flat as possible, because if you had kevlar boobies, the shrapnel could be directed straight to ones face.
Nerdmas? Grinchmas. After all the Grinch just wanted it quiet and to be with his dog.
_Jill Bearup_ has entered the comments section...😊
I have been saying that for years not many women warriors and yes, they were there back then, but no armor was designed to accommodate boobs, if they wore armor it was flat chested like the men's so swinging a sward was unincumbered, and they wouldn't get picked out of a crowd like Viking horns on their helmets not a good idea any horns on were for rites and not warfare
As with Cod pieces and human nature, boasting is WAAAAY more important than actual practicality. Just look at some cars with all the junk that gets done to them, in the nameof looking cool. If the majority of woman took part in combat, Booby armour might have been much more of a thing than you think, just because people like to boast.
Yule Logic
Yay a new Lady of the Library!!!
There are llamas in Troy? I might just watch it now to laugh
Just found your channel. :D
This video is worth a watch just to hear _Cinzia_ repeatedly say *_"Itty Bitty Titty Committee."_*
😊
A point you didn't make, you are adding surface area so either you are making the armour thinner or heavier
A little note; that armor seems to be made of leather, not metal. However even leather armor is still quite rigid and not very flexible.
Can confirm having worn cuir boulli. It does not bend and can have sharp edges.
They are gladiators, the whole point is to make it fun to watch for the audience, not practical