>>11338035
>>11338113
>And this "normal human agility" factor is really the main driving force here
>giantesses wouldn't be able to quickly turn their necks or swing their arms as it would tear them off.
Can't they just be a little slower then? I thought the goal of this thought experiment was directly scaling the giantess up with the square cubed law, including their body's strength. If the result of that is they're physically required to be slower to stop from breaking physics, I think that's probably as 'accurate' a giantess model as you're going to get.

I might be completely misunderstanding though. I'm only barely skimming these conversations because blocks of text make head hurty. If you mean that a giantess would be completely unable to move *at all* even if you scaled up her body's strength, then I understand more why giantess would need to be essentially indestructible to work at all, even if that's a little less cool.
Fuck I hate how hard it is to make a 'realistic enough' giantess. Why does fantasy have to be impossible, bros