Note: This came from an online
discussion that I liked and expanded into this blog post.
What’s
telling to me is that there have been, in almost any era, women warriors: Fu
Hao, Tomoe Gozen (of whom I’m writing a book), Boudicca, Arachidamia. They generally stand out as the exception,
rather than the rule, rendering them even more exceptional. For example, Tomoe Gozen was said to have
been incredibly strong, not just carrying a sword, but one that was oversized. But I have to believe that due to social and
cultural constraints and pressures, many women warriors have been relegated to
the back corners of history. In 1997, Jeannine
Davis-Kimball published “Warrior Women of Eurasia” describing a historic analog
of the Greek Amazonians:
“Now
50 ancient burial mounds near the town of Pokrovka, Russia, near the Kazakhstan
border, have yielded skeletons of women buried with weapons, suggesting the
Greek tales may have had some basis in fact.”
That
said, when world building for any fantasy novel, it’s possible to dictate some,
if not all, of those socio-cultural constraints away and make a wholly
believable, strong and capable, female character, even as a main character. Robert Jordan in The Wheel of Time series balanced his male lead characters with
equally (or more) powerful female characters.
Although, his three main characters, around which much of the action and
the entire story are told, were male.
Still, Jordan created some very unique female characters.
But
there are pitfalls. Female characters
should not just be male characters with genitalia swapped. There are considerations in regards to female
versus male characters that should be mentioned and dealt with. I think that’s where character creation
becomes the most interesting. Strength
and speed are, on balance, male dominant traits. They need to be dealt with to have a
character who carries a shield and wields a sword . . . or she doesn’t, and how
and why. Magic and other supernatural
elements can certainly aid the writer in creating a world where a female
character is the match, or the better, of her male counterparts. But other aspects can play in that too.
George
R.R. Martin's Brienne of Tarth is worth mentioning as an excellent example. She was trained as a warrior, achieved the
knighthood, but still takes into consideration her male counterparts in a
fight. Brienne also doesn’t fall into
the two traps that often occur in fantasy female characters: she is not a buxom
babe with a sword, she is “butch” but she is not a “butch” lesbian. There is nothing wrong with either, but they
are too often tropes that writers fall into. Brienne is a woman who has taken control of
her own power and decided her own course within the fantasy world. She is at once a badass, but also a woman who
has loved, a loyal friend who sympathizes with a mother, and a knight who can
fight with the best of them.
Finally,
please, please, please stop putting breasts on breastplates. Whatever these are meant to signify, they're
stupid. I don't just mean that they over
objectify a woman warrior (although they do that). They are anachronistic and even
dangerous. Emily Asher-Perrin does an
excellent job explaining this problem with her post “It’s Time to Retire “BoobPlate” Armor. Because It Would Kill You.”
As does I_Clausewitz in his article “Why Female Breastplates Don't Need Breast-Bulges.” Female
heroes would wear sensible armor, sensible clothing, and sensible undergarments
appropriate to the time and place. They would be
more interested in surviving a battle than looking like an over-sexed and under-clothed
runway model.
If Joan d'Arc didn't do it, then neither should you.
Edited To Add: As you can see, this article generated some interesting comments. Rather than limit the discussion there, I wrote a follow-up article, Why Breasts on Breastplates: Part Two, to address many of the questions regarding the topic of breasts on breastplates and why they're so silly/dangerous. Enjoy — RRAM
Edited To Add: As you can see, this article generated some interesting comments. Rather than limit the discussion there, I wrote a follow-up article, Why Breasts on Breastplates: Part Two, to address many of the questions regarding the topic of breasts on breastplates and why they're so silly/dangerous. Enjoy — RRAM
This may seem pithy, perhaps even smarmy (for that I apologize in advance) but how does one have a well fitting armor in a female if you do not make certain allowances for differences in "architecture". An ill fitting piece of armor is almost as dangerous as not wearing any at all. Unless you wish to advance the somewhat curious theory that all female warriors are "flat chested". It's not like we had gaffer's or duct tape back in those days?
ReplyDeleteYou can take into account difference in body type without resorting to "BoobPlate."
DeleteIf an overweight male warrior put on plate armor, he wouldn't have two separate and defined bulges for his man-boobs.
And they did have padding, string and cloth back then. That is all that girdles are made from and can be used to minimize the chest as much as minimize the waist, if it is necessary.
In short, there are many ways to address that issue without resorting to "Breast-bulges."
Hi deaconks! Thanks for the comment. It's interesting to me how many people focused on that aspect of my article, which was really meant to be about world and character building, especially female characters.
DeleteHowever, your question is a good one, because it would seem (culturally at least) that armorers should make such an allowance. However, since we're so far removed from the society where armor meant the difference between life and death, it's understandable.
First, plate armor was never worn by itself. Unless you were very rich, most armor wasn't custom tailored, which meant it was generally bigger than the average man-at-arms (bigger being preferable to smaller, which would cause all kinds of mobility issues). To compensate for this layers of clothing would be worn, usually a padded leather jacket or gambeson (rich, customized armor would have already taken these layers into account). Once that was in place, unless the lady in question was extremely busty, all chests are essentially rendered equal.
The other thought toward breast compensation (as you can read from either of the links I provided) is that breasts on a breast plate negate the entire point of the armor. Instead of shearing off the force of a weapon to either side, away from the vital central region, those lovely metal spheres create a wedge pointed straight at the center of the wearer's chest. Any force that hits the breasts will now smash that wedge into the chest, damaging the very area it’s supposed to protect.
Notice in the first and third pictures I provided how the plate armor bulges out at the center line. Most (good) armor does this. Reversing that is like putting a spear at your most vital spots.