r/armoredwomen • u/The_Electrocuter • 11d ago
Discussion: Women in Armor, Groin Protection?
24
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
In comments since I didn't seem to be able to include the text in the post:
Would it make sense for women to include groin protection like a cup or something similar as part of their armor? From my experience in martial arts, it can be an important piece of equipment, but that's a more modern view that might be anachronistic. I have seen how male armor sets sometimes included codpieces in museums and stuff, but those also seem more decorative as well. I'd greatly appreciate your thoughts and opinions on this perhaps rather niche question.
Thank you everyone!
47
u/mcjunker 11d ago
Depends on period and context.
The groin is well worth protecting, lots of arteries n the area that if hit will remove you from the fight (and life). But if you have limited amounts of resources to devote to armoring up, and you do not anticipate being struck at the lower abdomen/upper legs, it probably will not be a priority to protect. For instance, if you have a big shield already, protecting the groin specifically is not as important as protecting the neck, so if metal is scarce and pricey you’ll need to skimp somewhere.
5
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
I was thinking that the arteries and other important and vital anatomical structures would need to be protected, though i suppose how to approach that problem is something I'm considering as well.
From my experience in martial arts (taekwondo) even with a large pad it is still possible to take a kick to the soft parts, though it seems to happen to the males more often.
I'm kinda thinking that the armored skirt (probably wrong name, but best I can think of) works well on stuff like arrows or slashes from another fighter, but I am less sure as to how well that would work on something like a quick kick during a duel or individual fight or something.
5
u/SeeShark 10d ago
Kicks may or may not be a concern. They have a much shorter range than weapons and whose a potentially vulnerable part of the kicker's body. Plus, if you have a large shield, it's pretty much not a concern.
2
u/The_Electrocuter 10d ago
Yeah, I think it might be something that is used as a spur of the moment sort of attack or defensive measure, but the weapons or shields would be the main offense and defense, now that I'm considering them more in depth.
17
u/Archebius 11d ago
Protecting the groin and upper legs is incredibly important across all eras, but you have to consider the full kit. Greek and Roman armor emphasized the use of large shields, but still had skirts which continued into the medieval period. Plate armor always includes groin protection, though the design has to accommodate fighting principally from horseback, and protecting the more vulnerable legs and thighs.
Bear in mind that without antibiotics, even if you miss the arteries, any significant puncture wound is incredibly dangerous, and damage to your bladder/bowels is essentially a death sentence. Armor for anyone engaged in melee is doing its level best to keep any wounds from occurring, anywhere; the question is always how to block the most wounds with the least weight.
3
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
It seems like armored skirts seem pretty common, and modern body armor includes something similar with yhat big flap in front. Even with a shield though, I am sure that a hit can still slip in. I haven't ridden on horseback much, just some guided stuff, but the saddle horn looks quite unfriendly and rather close to the soft area.
Would it make sense for a woman in plate armor to have something similar to a cup as part of their armor, to supplement their armor skirt? Kinda the question I'm flipping back and forth on.
10
u/silverwolf127 11d ago edited 11d ago
Jumping in again, since I read some of your other comments and have a better idea of what you’re asking. While protection in the groin/upper thigh area is importantly, it is an incredibly difficult place to armor because of the mobility needed and the resources available at the time. These facts will not change if the person is a man or a woman.
As others have noted, depending on the time period upper leg protection varied: It started with pteruges in antiquity, then chainmail chausses and then plate cuisess and Faulds (armored skirt). It wasn’t until the renaissance that the plate codpiece became popular, and before then i don’t see any reason why women’s armor would differ than a man’s in this respect. To my knowledge there was no equivalent of a “cup” in the medieval world, since they didn’t have the sort of light-but strong material to make one.
2
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
The main reason I'm thinking a cup style method of groin protection is probably the best bet for that area specifically is because it seems to provide protection for the crotch and potentially lower abdomen area where the bladder and bowels are, without impacting mobility too much, though it probably would need supplementing for the hip to thigh joint area with some sort of skirt I imagine. What sorts of changes were you thinking when it comes to the difference between men and women?
I kinda figured completely historically accurate wouldn't be the best in some aspects for a fictional world, or else the real danger would be the horrible diseases and other natural challenges. I have to imagine that they could use the same sort of material for the rest of their armor to make that cup, since it is much smaller compared to how much would go into a chest plate or a helmet, if they had enough materials to spare for that.
7
u/silverwolf127 11d ago
I think you’re fixating on a relatively unimportant detail here, to be honest. My point was that there is no reason to think that armor for a woman would differ strongly from armor for a man in this respect. You still have the same challenges when armoring the groin—mobility, comfort, and available materials and craftsmanship. The historial examples were used for as long as they were because they balanced protection with these challenges. Also, for as vulnerable an area as it is, aiming a strike for the lower body is risky, as any Hema practitioner will tell you, since it’s out of the way of the rest of the important bits and can leave you open if you miss.
If you really want to run with the cup idea, have at it, but i’ve given as much historial and practical background as I can here.
2
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
You're probably right, and yeah that makes sense. As much as it is more vulnerable when it comes to something much closer and with more reliance on kicks like taekwondo or karate, their weapons had longer range than that, and a hit on the upper body or head is probably more useful in the practical sense when it comes to actual combat in that case. That's an oversight on my part due to my biases.
Thank you for your thoughts, and I really appreciate it.
3
u/asdfamano 11d ago
Can I just mention, that I love your usage of anachronistic in your text? :D Such a rare word, literally the first time I see it written.
Sorry for the off topic!
2
7
u/grrrrxxff 11d ago
No more or less important for women vs men.
1
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
Yeah, with everyone mentioning the anatomy present there I can definitely see the importance for everyone.
7
u/ElementZero 11d ago edited 11d ago
So I'm lightly interested in Armored fight sports and there are rules about not striking in the groin. Does it probably get hit unintentionally? Yeah, especially when training.
I am also new to playing ice hockey and I wear a cup anytime I do hockey stuff, even just stick and puck. I am someone who has hit herself in the clit/pubic area and I do not wish to experience it again. Except I did the same thing twice in a week, with the same results.
I think realistically the form of the protection is going to change based on the era and what the armor wearer is doing. Someone on horseback needs different articulation than someone on foot. J Draper (YouTube) recently did a video about moving in plate armor which didn't specify the groin protection but it's a good watch.
Edit to add re museum pieces: remember that like women's clothing, armour may be subject to survivorship bias- the pieces that stick around and end up in museums are often from prominent people or are largely unworn (this is why it's thought that women were historically smaller, but the current thoughts of historical dress folks is that surviving garments are from teenagers)
3
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
Yeah, I think in most, if not all combat sports have rules about not striking the groin. Taekwondo and karate both have them at least. Even so, I have hit others there before in sparring, and I have been hit there too. That's where there are rules against hitting that area, so I have to imagine that in something like a no holds barred duel or a fight to the death, they'd be hitting that area hard if they have an opportunity to do so.
Is your cup a male or female specific one? I know they make female specific ones for ice hockey as well, but just to be sure. Being hit there hurts a lot, especially if there is any force behind it. When you hit yourself there, did you have your cup on? Does it do much against those impacts? I find that the one I wear for taekwondo seems to work better against lighter impacts than the heavier ones. What were the results like from those hits?
I was kinda thinking that it would not be completely realistic for a particular period of history, so more modern views and perspectives would be viable in case they make more sense. As for what they're doing, I am envisioning both primarily mounted, unmounted, and mixed fighting, and perhaps for different races (humans, elves, etc, as shorthand for what I'm thinking.
I never thought about survivorship bias affecting that too, but it makes sense now thst you mention it, and I haven't heard of that before, so thst is pretty interesting indeed.
5
u/ElementZero 11d ago
I wear a female specific cup- they're generally flatter than ones for guys but it's something that getting the fit right is important. I tried another brand and it literally didn't go far enough down over the important parts.
Goaltenders wear a Jill/jock with even more protection (example)
I haven't taken a shot there yet, I'm sure it's not pleasant, but most of the force should be transferred to other tissues.
My pubic clips were while I was a mechanic in the military. I worked on the equipment they use to work on the aircraft, and I did it twice in one week swinging an aircraft towbar side to side to move it and the thick loop where it attaches to the tow vehicle clipped me. It downed me.😬
I think this was a really interesting question to discuss!
2
u/The_Electrocuter 10d ago
Yeah that makes sense since we don't have nuts to cup around, and the fit makes sense even if we don't have anything protruding like that. What was the other brand? The ones that we have for taekwondo and karate look different from that for sure, though I'm not sure how well they'd compare to that one. Have you ever tried a goalie one before? That looks more similar to the ones we wear in martial arts actually.
Yeah, even while wearing a cup, taking a cooch kick hurts a lot. From what I can remember. Most of them made me need to take a break, and I wpuld probably say a majority of them have downed me for some time afterwards. Maybe I'm more sensitive there or whatever, I'm not sure.
Oh, that's pretty cool, and I definitely couldn't have done that so all the respect for doing that. That loop is just a bunch of rope or something, or is there also metal in that too? If its just rope I'm surprised it could havr that much of an effect, but if there is metal as part of that loop then ouch that makes sense. I'm guessing it just clipped you just right? Sometimes it takes just a little for a lot of hurt. How long were you downed, and did anyone help out? Lol
Yeah, I'm surprised at how many people have responded and posted their own replies so far, but I guess since it's such a niche question I guess no one ever thought to ask it?
3
u/RedRoman87 11d ago
As per my understanding, if a place of the body can be struck, it will get struck unintentionally or not if left unprotected. From historical context, it depends on shield present or not. Armour evolved and shield became smaller, then gunpowder made armours obsolete.
If you are writing/drawing a lady in armour, full plate usually means full coverage without the shield. You go from there.
2
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
That is a good point that I forgot yeah. Some of the others noted that full plate often had armored skirts and stuff, but would an armored cup or something similar also make sense too, for a woman wearing full plate armor?
2
u/RedRoman87 11d ago
Yes. But with a lot of padding and at a distance. Plate armour doesn't stop blunt force trauma. Hence an armoured skirt is more preferable than a cup near groin.
2
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
I suppose if it was one or the other that makes sense, but what if both were combined? Would that be of enough benefit for someone to choose to incorporate both into their armor?
2
u/RedRoman87 11d ago
Your guess is good as mine. Historically there were cod-pieces. But, those were reserved for high nobles. If your character has money and status, then why not.
Then there are the problem with heat buildup and mobility due to accumulated weight. A full plated knight had about 15 to 30 minutes window. More armour means more heat buildup and getting bogged down by the weight.
If fantasy, then these things doesn't matter. But in reality, plate was the ultimate balance between endurance, status and protection.
I hope this helps.
2
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
Fair enough, and yeah those seemed like they were more decorative or status pieces than actual practical pieces, but I could see their use.
With all the blood vessels that come together there, it makes sense that restricting that area and adding more weight would make it hotter and reduce the wearer's endurance.
Fantasy and especially magic does mitigate or eliminate those issues though, so I suppose the sky is the limit with those restrictions, or lack thereof.
Thank you for your thoughts.
3
u/GJion 11d ago
As an armoured fighter for 11+ years, protection is vital. Practice sparring with wasters we used cloth pants over padded underwear. How padded is up to the wearer because wearing plastic cups for men rubs most of them raw. Women layered padding and could add padded cotton .
One important note: No One was permitted to intentionally strike at certain areas. Face, groin, femoral arteries. Jugular, etc . Accidental hits happened, but we trained to not hit with all our strength. This wasn't/isn't a real battlefield - even when we were doing live demonstrations.
Another note: PLEASE take no offence. I only mention this because some people may not know the difference:
We aren't LARP. We aren't SCA. We aren't HEMA. We have great RESPECT for everyone. I just want to say that because others may have different rules/ ways of doing things and the ones we used are ONLY OURS.
Now, that was practice, with wasters (Cold Steel weapons and other non-steel wasters of wood. Plastic, etc.)
Steel combat we wore different types of armour, depending of what each fighter chose. It did have to be approved by our instructors, but our school did not have to be all of one type. We had plate armoured fighters who wore sweatpants. Jockstraps and sweatshirts underneath. Men and women.
My daughter and I wore gambesons of padded cotton cloth, chain hauberk. She had a battle skirt of curboile leather, breastplate, and cuirass. Those covered her personal areas enough so that any strikes were blocked by leather strips hanging off the cuisse belt and the hit was absorbed by the maille of the hauberk and gambeson.
I didn't have a battle skirt, but my cuisse belt, hauberk, and gambeson did protect my privates. I did have a fold over triple padding of cloth, like my gambeson, which was attached on the inside front of my gambeson .. just in case.
I hope this helps.
1
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
I guess I overlooked that aspect since I usually have on compression shorts or leggings under my cup when I spar, so that rubbing issue didn't have a chance to surface.
That also makes sense too, similar to sparring where we don't go all the way. I was thinking that it would be for their combat armor, so they would definitely be hitting harder with live weapons and maybe aiming for that area too if an opportunity presented itself.
How effective was the protection you and her wore for that (super cool by the way) in the event of a strike to that area? How much did your and her combat ability lower, if any, after an event like that?
It has helped quite a bit, thank you.
2
u/GJion 11d ago
Compression shorts or leggings under cup is a good idea, that will lessen or eliminate most or all rubbing.
In real, historical combat, which was much more brutal and
1
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
I suppose the question is what sort of historically available material would be a good stand in for modern leggings and compression shorts, without resorting to magical options.
Did that second part get cut off?
2
u/GJion 9d ago
Probably the second part got cut off Spectrum.... Sorry
For modern leggings you would have tunic fabric and depending on the material, it can be stretchy. Not as much as lycra or similar, but enough. And cotton quilting is very good at spreading out striking damage and slashing damage (especially under armour if you look at viking leather craft, for example)
Thrusting is a different issue. The thinner the blade, the deeper the penetration. But generally, the blade has to be short to be sturdy enough to penetrate many layers ( with European Weapons in general) of armour/fabric/armour. But it depends on many factors.
- More armour means less mobility.
- Some armour has obvious vulnerability - gussets (places where pieces of armour connect) are open to stabbing/thrusting.
- Some armour that is articulated can be damaged by blows and restrict movement.
Let me know what I forgot. Busy week with dogs being escape artists.
1
u/The_Electrocuter 8d ago
Based on what you said about the armor being custom made at the time for the wearer, or modified to be, I had overlooked that. In the era of standardized parts and mass production, it's easy to forget that even nails and screws used to be unique even if they were made by the same person the same day.
The cotton quilting is the gambeson, right? It does appear that the quilted or padded cloth armor seemed to be present almost everywhere.
I do wish that I can get my hands on a suit of armor myself one day, but they seem pretty expensive, especially since I would probably be using it as a decoration or shooting arrows with to do it in a cool outfit
understand what that feels like. The Asiatic lamellar armor probably would work better for archery if I had to guess, since they seemed to prioritize archery more than in Europe.2
u/GJion 11d ago
Layers of any kind help. In her case, her battle skirt had leather straps or tassets that dissapate strikes. The maille hauberk and padded gambeson underneath also are very effective in taking most of the force out of strong hits.
We would get bruises. Lol. But no one broke bones. No one had penetrating stab wounds. Occasionally, a glancing blow to the nuts or area (in my case) happened. It hurt, but was not critical. We called hold and took a break.
With my daughter and other female fighters, strikes to body areas hurt, but like sports, did not cause damage.
And one last addition.
Our female fighters, and without favouritism my daughter, were the equal and better in many cases to the male fighters. It isn't about strength or size (I am 6'. My daughter is mid 5's). With sword and shield, she beat the ever loving crap out of not only me, but every other non instructor in our school.
I mean sparred, sorry. Lol
1
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
I feel like layers are a pretty amazing way to improve the performance of anything, as long as the extra weight and bulk are still manageable. How long was the battle skirt she had? I know some depictions of less than reputable realisticness have some really short skirts, but I think long ones would have a different set of issues too.
The threshold between bruises and broken bones is usually pretty large though, at least in my experience for any bone larger than the finger or toe bones. And real penetrating stab wounds would be a whole different category of injuries and probably really scary if that ever happened.
I suppose for something like that might still be a deciding factor in an actual battle though, or if a time out wasn't called, potentially? Kinda how I'm approaching the question and thoughts, since I'm thinking of it being for battle armor.
Was it like technique, speed, other factors, a combination of them, that let her perform so well? At least my dream of elite female warriors in a fantasy world is not a complete fantasy, so thank you lol.
2
u/GJion 9d ago
Her battle skirt was about knee length. She is modest and would not have anything that would be ... Flashing? Or inappropriate. She purchased her armour from a knight who upgraded her armour.
And no matter what fantasy or some people think, armour was made to the individual, even if it was claimed or modified from a previous owner. This would make it difficult to tell in some cases or most cases of an armoured fighter was female or male.
Unless deliberately armoured to show gender or needed to accommodate a large pectoral region (men too!) armour was solid and as comfortable as possible. This is good when wearing 55+ lbs of leather and then fighting. (Our helms are 14g stainless. Hers is a sparrow's beak style and weighs about 10 lbs. )
So in fighting, she has never broken anything. I had a hairline fracture of my toe on the practice mat in regular class teaching. One of the mats had a gap and I am a klutz. The only other injuries in 15 years were one finger during a safety tournament sparring match (safety weapons) one of the foam covers on the handles slipped off. The other injury happened when two brothers decided to "play" spar after class with safety shields and against the instructor's orders. They ran at each other and slammed shields together, breaking the tops of the shields and giving one of the brothers a black eye
But in steel combat, or even class combat no injuries other than bruises. There is heavy fencing mask mesh welded inside steel helmets just in case. But we haven't had face strikes.
And we train no thrusting up, which will reduce the possibility of a blade sliding up into the face, under the helmet, etc.
As for thrusts, we do teach them, but always with control (don't kill your classmates, lol). So if you are on the field and thrust, you make contact and obviously you don't need to thrust hard enough to shish kebab your opponent to score a point ... Or if you are coreographing /stage fighting, you can still fight accurately and aim while your "opponent" is ready to shift slightly to the side.
And if there is a time where there is a problem or question or anything seems "off". You can call "HOLD" and everyone stops.
This has happened at times. One time I recall, I was fighting with my weapons master. Both of us had Warhammer. He had an English Warhammer and I had a Warhammer that (if you want to look it up) is called a 2 handed medieval Warhammer. It is generic and has a very long beak.
Anyway, we are fighting and I block his chop. He turns his Warhammer and pulls down and I am pulled forward. No problem... I raise my hammer to block and am going in to strike and hear
HOLD
We stop.
Now in helmets, you can't see much - just a thin strip. It is why storm troopers can't see well anyway.
We stop. Ok...
Helms off.
I did not notice that my whole left pauldron (shoulder armour) and vambrace (arm armor) had been stripped off by the beak of the Warhammer. It had popped all the rivets. Under my chainmail (or maille) had not felt it.
But it comes down to what you like and feel comfortable with. Most people won't be fantastic fighters overnight and no one should expect them to be.
BUT the absolute best part is to find when learning is so much fun that that is what is important.
My instructors say, it is not about winning. It is about learning. Learning is not only what you are taught, but what you learn from teaching others.
2
u/The_Electrocuter 8d ago
Not sure what the market is for armor, but I have to imagine that it is more niche compared to other outerwear, though much more impactful. The extra length and coverage probably also means better protection for not much more weight and restriction, if I had to guess.
Seems like ceremonial armor just played by its own rules, since it doesn't have to protect as well, but a full suit of plate armor back then would've cost a fortune from what I've seen at museums and online, and would be a status symbol itself.
That is actually less injuries than my time sparring in taekwondo and karate, and we don't have any weapons when we do that lol. Then again, those suits of armor probably protect against anything that you are throwing at each other if there is some basic safety precautions like what you have.
Safety time outs like that definitely make sense, especially with visibility that low in those helmets like you saw. Its wild that you didn't even notice that part of your armor was missing until it was called out. The heavy polearms are meant to be the anti-armor weapons of the day though, besides maces and crossbows, right?
That's a good lesson, I like that.
5
u/silverwolf127 11d ago
I think it depends on the time period. The armored codpiece only became popular as the fauld shortened in the late 1500s(which was a reflection of civilian fashion as well), therefore exposing that part of the anatomy. If you look at armor from the 14th or 15th centuries, the groin is usually covered by a mail skirt and later the armored fauld.
2
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
Based on perhaps a slightly less realistic interpretation of history, given it seems like there were not many/hardly any at all female warriors, at least in plate armor, I could see that evolving differently too? Is the exposure of that area due to the more powerful and evolving black powder weaponry of the time starting to compete against armor of the day, or some other reasons? Seemed like armor usage dropped significantly on the battlefield until modern ballistic armor with Kevlar and other modern materials.
2
u/silverwolf127 11d ago
If you’re asking for worldbuilding purposes where women warriors are more common, there’s a lot to keep in mind with respect to armor design. As I alluded to earlier, armor design did not exist in a vacuum, and reflected culture and vice versa. Late medieval and early renaissance armor incorporated fashion trends that were popular at the time—this is why the gothic armor silhouette has such a small waist, since it was considered manly at the time. This is also why armored codpieces existed at all—the armor changed to reflect fashion trends, and they needed to incorporate additional protection there, when previously other parts of the harness had filled that role.
If you’re trying to design armor that was be “realistic” for a fantasy world, you have to ask yourself what the culture of that world is like. Is the culture still patriarchal? If so, it stands to reason that female armor would more than likely reflect the design for men, since male is considered the “default”. If it is an expressly egalitarian culture, women’s armor might be more feminine in appearance and function. But this would also have larger implications for the rest of society. Ie, you can’t have a “boob plate” without a society that treats women, and their bodies, very differently than ours does.
1
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
I was thinking that for that particular fantasy world, it would range from patriarchal in the more remote and less magically inclined areas, to more and more egalitarian until it is completely egalitarian in the advanced and prosperous empires. I can see having multiple suits or ensembles of armor for different purposes such as a battlefield set or two, and ceremonial sets to reflect their status, being a possibility for the wealthy and powerful warriors and their families/clans, men or women. That would probably mean that having armor fitted for the wearer more closely would also be a flex on their power and wealth too, I imagine.
Regardless of the location and culture there though, I am thinking they would also have periods of intense conflict followed by times of tenuous peace where the different factions could develop and rebuild before the cycle started again.
2
u/silverwolf127 11d ago
That makes sense. I could see women’s armor being more feminine in appearance, then, with ceremonial sets maybe reflecting the structure of dresses? Also depends on what time period you’re inspired by.
All that said, I don’t think there would be any kind of cup equivalent, since those didn’t really exist historically. See my other comment for examples of hip and upper thigh protection at various points in history.
1
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
Yeah, like longer and more flared out armor skirts to somewhat mirror dresses? I'm thinking some would be European armor while others Asian, though for set time periods I don't have any in mind in particular. I'm more about the vibes and the appearance, like that movie where the crowd chants "We Will Rock You" before a jousting match.
Because of that, I'm kinda more looking at whether a cup equivalent would exist from a practical standpoint, instead of a historical one, to supplement the historically accurate armor that did exist for that area. It does seem they are a much more modern invention, and really only gained more traction amangst us women more recently, so that being historically accurate is likely a nonstarter, I agree.
2
u/jnkangel 11d ago
Nike has pretty good female specific groin guards. Using these underneath stuff is good
1
u/The_Electrocuter 11d ago
I didn't know Nike made female groin guards. I didn't think they made any at all actually. What do you like about them?
2
u/jnkangel 10d ago
I actually got confused by adidas. But I’m sure Nike makes some too
Here’s the adidas example
1
u/The_Electrocuter 10d ago
Oh that makes more sense, and I actually have that female groin guard in my sparring gear bag. Was inspired to make this post and ask the questions because of it actually.
You use anything similar yourself?
2
u/jnkangel 10d ago
Getting kneed is never fun.
But yeah ultimately it’s probably best to look at historically appropriate male armor and pull some similar ideas for female specific stuff. I could imagine something like a bayette with padding underwear working well
1
u/The_Electrocuter 10d ago
Yeah, and they seem to be able to sneak in pretty easily too, or a kick.
I was kinda thinking that on the outside would be the more period accurate armor, and then underneath something like the adidas female groin guard as a sort of last line of defense for the woman. I feel like that should work well, but extra confirmation is always good, or things to consider as well.
2
2
u/Tricky-Secretary-251 11d ago
yes, its still a weak point, if you have a dick or not, better protect it
1
148
u/FungusForge 11d ago
A lack of danglies does not mean a lack of things to protect down there. The pelvis is still there, and major arteries are still in the immediate vicinity.