Heh. That barely even annoyed me. The massive lack of leg armor in the inner thigh area, in a portrait that demonstrates the capacity to make plates around limbs? That was annoying.

Burying your head in the sand and defending the indefensible (which is what you were doing, whether or not it's what you're defending) is certainly not "reason."

And when you respond to, "Bikini mail is bullshit," with, "There are few period pieces for realistic armor, therefore bikini mail," you are defending it. If you don't want to defend it, don't defend it, because you're just spouting the obvious and the irrelevant. A lack of period pieces will legitimately produce this, as to someone who doesn't really know how armor works, that seems like an entirely reasonable and functional form for female armor to take. It cannot produce this. Mentioning it has zero bearing on things like this or this because even without references, it's patently obvious even to someone who knows nothing about armor that those are not functional; it cannot possibly be the reason, and can scarcely be called a contributing factor by any reasonable person. So why do you bring up lack of reference if lack of reference cannot be an issue, save to toss up a paper thin defense? How is bringing up an explanation that fails to explain so absolutely "trying to bring this back around to reason?"

I did not reply to your earlier posts because, quite frankly, they were blatant trolling. However, as to institutionalized -isms infecting people? Yeah. It happens. And not only to the Other. It's happened to you. You've demonstrated internalized misandry when you brought up flashing the guards as a reliable tactic. It is extremely sexist against men, even though it came from the fingers of a man, because fact of the matter is, that's a pretty basic and desperate tactic, the kind any reasonably seasoned guard has likely seen used dozens of times before, and the kind that's more likely to get the guards to grab you and take you in while you're vulnerable than get you out of any sort of trouble.

And no, having seen it work once does not change reality, and it does not change misandry. It might work sometimes, but it is by no means a sound or reliable plan.

The comic Artesia normally has excellent armour and clothing.

It has graphic violence and sexuality, so if you look it up you're fore-warned -- but the armour looks great, regardless.

Doug.

Artesia is one of my favorite hot bitches, it's true Spike Spiegel said it best, "I love a woman who can kick my ass".

That is an incredible picture, as soon as one ignores the realism aspect. The shield in particular is just done perfectly.

Yeah, that's definitely "reasonable" armor, if not entirely "realistic."

Well the art is for a fantasy setting, namely MtG.

Oh, its not the armor that annoys me. I spar with pole arms, so I tend to catch even minor unrealistic aspects. Combat lances that are basically a cone the entire way down, with a diameter of four inches at the hand? Those don't even vaguely resemble anything that would see use. Granted, had I not watched a jousting tournament pretty much annually for the past ten years I probably wouldn't be annoyed by it.

Lunar, thank you for this gem. I think it sums up the "what's wrong with this picture" position perfectly.