It's like when people rant about how '' boobplate is oversexualized '', like how easily aroused do you have to be to think that's arousing? I don't even think that it's sexy either it's just an aesthetic.
Why do you think that calling a boob plate oversexualized means someone finds it arousing? I'd expect armor to serve to protect the character, not only by providing a physical barrier, but also by redirecting the force of the blows. With the boob plate, a sword hit would likely end up redirected towards the sternum. So what is the purpose of this design, other than to accentuate the shape and size of the breasts?
For me the "boob plate" simply exemplifies the attitude towards breasts in real life, and how they are sexualized regardless of the context and situation. I've gotten plenty of unwanted comments over the years, in random situations like jogging even, while wearing a ratty sweatshirt. If the boob plate is just "an aesthetics", then I wonder whose point of view it reflects.
I am not saying that everyone says that but it's what I usually see people say. I also reject this notion that '' boobplate '' would be dangerous... Unless we're talking about VERY extreme examples and only under very specific circumstances. And I also think that asking that kind of a question is dumb in fantasy armor in general and is never consistently applied, if you're going to ask questions like these then most fantasy armor falls apart and even a lot of irl armor that was worn in combat. Our ancestors didn't obsess so much about '' maximizing practicality '' as people think that they did, because in truth plate armor was incredibly resistant and there were liberties you could take in style and self-expression. They literally used to wear breastplates shaped as corsets and other crazy concave shapes.
Also, accentuating masculinity was at the core of armor design historically. Armor constantly changed with the times to accentuate masculinity based on what was considered masculine at the point of time, if women wore armor to the extent that they'd even be taken into consideration at all in the process of developing armor then armor would've adapted to accentuate femininity all the same. The same argument that you're making against '' boobplate '' is precisely the mentality that actually did go into armor design historically. And the mentality was very much that the male body was the peak of beauty and '' sexy '' by those standards, it's why naked male statues and in art were so common and if you read historical documentations of men especially kings and nobles the writers and their descriptions are incredibly thirsty. The mentality going into developing armor historically was essentially the '' sexy armor '' mentality if you take the context of the times into consideration. It's not like today, back then masculinity was the most beautiful thing.
What I am saying too is that the sexual nature of breasts is severely overblown and that it's absurd to think that a piece of metal curved after a womans chest is sexualized. The more extreme cases of '' boobplate '' too where it's literally two rounded individual cups only tend to exist in very heavily fantastical settings where people run around with gigantic Dragonslayer from Berserk style swords and helmets that have lighting shooting out of them. And it being an aesthetic is my pov and I think any person that is in actual control of their own sexuality ( regardless of that, sexy is an aesthetic too ). I am well aware that men can be creepy and make unwanted comments, but those same types of men are the ones that do look at this kind of armor as '' oversexualized ''.
'' Boobplate '' only exemplifies that attitude if you actually share that mentality, my point is that you don't know that. It's unfair to assume that just because someone likes it or an artist designs it then it means that they did it for '' horny reasons ''. That was my whole point. I don't think that I've ever interacted with an artist before that actually thought that way, it's a mentality I only ever see from people who don't like it just like how probably these same exact people believe that sex scene in games exist for fap material. It's such an insanely narrow-minded view and I also think is indicative of some weird sexual issues irl. Like I dunno where you're from but where I am from people aren't that easily aroused and breasts aren't a big deal and I also don't believe in allowing the most sensitive people to set the standards on behalf of everyone else.
Edit: Just for interests sake ( video ). Ultimately I think that arguments about what is and isn't '' realistic and practical '' in a fantasy setting that isn't a simulator are kinda silly unless we're talking about extreme cases. I mean even with '' chain bikinis '', loincloths warriors are still a thing in Baldur's Gate. But thematically I can at least understand the argument against '' chain bikinis '' in a setting like Baldur's Gate. Even if the equivelant but in leather still exists and uh, there's plenty of male NPC's already in loincloths and random pieces of plate the equivelant of '' chain bikinis ''...
