Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

That message on Facebook could have been better worded, I think.
A more diplomatic approach would have been just to say "whilst rare, some exceptional noble daughters can be inducted into the ranks of the Ten Thousand" or something like that.
That way it would not directly contradict that bit of fluff about noble families and come across as a 1984 esque rewrite.

I think if they wanted more women in the Talons of the Emperor they should have focused more on the Sisters of the Silence fluff, really. I don't think there's much about them, is there?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

I think if they wanted more women in the Talons of the Emperor they should have focused more on the Sisters of the Silence fluff, really. I don't think there's much about them, is there?

There is a good chunk in the Talons of the Emperor novel with Aleya's chapters filling a good third of it. But more on that front would've been nice in any case. That being said, I also don't see how female Custodes preclude that from happening in the future.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Isn't there another bit of fluff that says that the Custodes draws recruits from the sons of nobility?
Though then again, I don't recall it says that it exclusively recruits sons, so maybe that's what GW meant?
That message on Facebook could have been better worded, really.
A more diplomatic approach would have been just to say "whilst rare, some exceptional noble daughters do find themselves in the ranks of the Ten Thousand" or something like that.

I think if they wanted more women in the Talons of the Emperor they should have focused more on the Sisters of the Silence fluff, really. I don't think there's much about them, is there?

They get taken as babies don’t they? So you don’t know how exceptional they’re going to be until they’re already too old to be taken.

Given the new lore that they can be either sex, the preponderance for male Custodes probably has something to do with the biases and marriage politics of the noble houses from which they draw leading to them preferring to donate sons rather than daughters.

 vipoid wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:
I don't think many people would be supporting racial segregation for lore purposes in something like 40k

Why not?

"You're telling me the genocidal space-Nazis who are all about genetic and racial purity might be racist? I'm literally shaking with how triggered I am!"

Racism is a problem in real life, and if it were present in the game most of us never would have stuck around to get to know the lore. The whole point of the 40k satire is to use fake Sci Fi bigotry and religious extremism that lets them comment on real issues without furthering the actual injustices they are lampooning.


Imagine that Star Trek episode where the half black and half white aliens were just a black alien and a white alien (in the human race sense). It wouldn’t work.

If the movie Starship Troopers had the Federation fighting wave after wave of communist Chinese, it wouldn’t work as satire.

Real racism doesn’t belong in a Sci Fi satire of bigotry, and only the kinds of people who want to see that bigotry present in the far future think it does.

Overread wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Overread wrote:We do have racial segregation - Gangs in Necromunda.

That's not the same thing, and you know it. That's factionalism, not racism. Segregation, possibly, but even that isn't segregation as we know it, from a dominant power oppressing others - the Helmawrs' don't care about the underhivers, and certainly aren't saying "Escher can sit at the front of the bus, Goliaths have to sit at the back".

The Helmawrs don't care, but you can bet a regular Escher Ganger is not going to join the Orlocks or vis versa. In fact males from anywhere outside of Escher aren't getting in.
The Gangs themselves segregate themselves and have huge internal political fights over territories.

Yes, agreed - but that is *very* different to the racial segregation which we're talking about in the real world, where racial segregation is a result of *dominant socio-political groups enforcing those divides over marginalised groups*.

Or, to put another way: would you call gang wars IRL a case of "segregation"? No - they're gang wars.

They are as segregated and as racist to each other as nations are in the real world. I'm fairly sure in many of the books there's even terms they use as slurs against each other

Still not racism though. Gangs calling eachother slurs isn't inherently racist.

The Helmawrs don't care about that. They DO care about keeping the Gangers and the Middleclasses out of the upper regions of the Hive. It's a whole separate system of class. Heck the upper classes will done powersuits and go hunt the in the Underhive. They will literally use the underhivers for sport like the Upper Classes of old would hunt Foxes*. As I noted many Imperial societies operate a strict hierarchy within society and many of those groups will be insulting, hostile, antagonistic and all to those in different classes.

Yes - that's *classism*. Not racial segregation, which is what I was talking about.

Where the Imperium differs is that things like gender and skin colour appear to have very little meaning; however your social position and class as well as parts of your racial background are very important. Heck how much mutation you have is also another very key element in your social position within many social groupings.

Yes, like I said - that's not RACIAL segregation though, is it? That's social stratification and classism, not racism or sexism.

It's more complex though because each world is a thing unto itself. Some will be insanely tolerant; some will just be hostile to anything; some will be highly class run; some less so; some feudal some class etc...

Hence why I said that the Imperium is not institutionally sexist or racist. Individual Imperial worlds could be anything.

For the people ITT who seem to be deadset against ever seeing female Space Marines - would you still have an issue if it wasn't a retcon?

If GW release a Belisarius Cawl novel where he's managed to create a process so that women can be turned into Space Marines, and from then on marine sprues with bare heads have a few female heads as well, is there anything wrong with that?

It would mean anyone who wants to field female Space Marines has official lore support, but wouldn't invalidate exisiting lore or model collections.

bobthe4th wrote:
For the people ITT who seem to be deadset against ever seeing female Space Marines - would you still have an issue if it wasn't a retcon?

If GW release a Belisarius Cawl novel where he's managed to create a process so that women can be turned into Space Marines, and from then on marine sprues with bare heads have a few female heads as well, is there anything wrong with that?

It would mean anyone who wants to field female Space Marines has official lore support, but wouldn't invalidate exisiting lore or model collections.

As I said earlier, it is never really about the introduction but the result. Female space marines will be a giant topic no matter how you introduce them. All this arguing about the minutiae and plausibility is beating around the bush. Some people just want their dudemans to stay dudemans.

Hd404 wrote:
More consistent with established lore than 40 years and multiple codexes, novels, short stories all saying a faction consists of men and then lazily reconning it so women were actually always there for no ostensible reason, surely?

This is horsecrap. When the HH was at the height of its popularity, the writers carefully avoided stating they were all men specifically to leave open the possibility of female Custodes. The gendered language onky appeared in the very, very early, almost entirely retconned days of the shirtless Custodes and in the most recent codex before this one, and even then it’s only a couple mentions rather than the bombardment of “all men” references in the Soace marine codexes.

Master of mankind has the custodes, refer to 'their brothers' , the codex explicitly calls them a brotherhood recruited entirely from the noble sons of terra.

The Brotherhood of Steel in Fallout is mixed gender. The Brotherhood in Assassins Creed are mixed gender. "Brotherhood" hasn't meant "only men" for some time.

I feel you missed "The Brotherhood of Evil Mutants" which was never all men from the start (and for a while was led by Mistique).

 BertBert wrote:

bobthe4th wrote:
For the people ITT who seem to be deadset against ever seeing female Space Marines - would you still have an issue if it wasn't a retcon?

If GW release a Belisarius Cawl novel where he's managed to create a process so that women can be turned into Space Marines, and from then on marine sprues with bare heads have a few female heads as well, is there anything wrong with that?

It would mean anyone who wants to field female Space Marines has official lore support, but wouldn't invalidate exisiting lore or model collections.

As I said earlier, it is never really about the introduction but the result. Female space marines will be a giant topic no matter how you introduce them. All this arguing about the minutiae and plausibility is beating around the bush. Some people just want their dudemans to stay dudemans.

Good news-someone who wants their Custodes to be all men can still do that.
If female Marines were introduced, someone who wants an all-male force of Marines can still do that.

 odinsgrandson wrote:

Master of mankind has the custodes, refer to 'their brothers' , the codex explicitly calls them a brotherhood recruited entirely from the noble sons of terra.

The Brotherhood of Steel in Fallout is mixed gender. The Brotherhood in Assassins Creed are mixed gender. "Brotherhood" hasn't meant "only men" for some time.

Is there even a neutral equivalent in English? Siblinghood?

And whilst the RT era Custodes were referenced as "men" it was just in the context of military force, and should not be read as gender-exclusive, as that simply is common, if somewhat archaic way referring to the soldiers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Language just is gendered. When John Lennon sang about "a brotherhood of man" in Imagine, I doubt he was meaning to exclude women from his utopian vision!

 BertBert wrote:

 odinsgrandson wrote:

Master of mankind has the custodes, refer to 'their brothers' , the codex explicitly calls them a brotherhood recruited entirely from the noble sons of terra.

The Brotherhood of Steel in Fallout is mixed gender. The Brotherhood in Assassins Creed are mixed gender. "Brotherhood" hasn't meant "only men" for some time.

Is there even a neutral equivalent in English? Siblinghood?

The similar words I come up with are "fraternity" and the like- where they are still very gendered

RT is also so far back that a huge amount of lore from there has changed. It's really worth only mentioning as historical in terms of the history of the game itself and the setting rather than the actual reliable history or narration of the setting itself.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


The Imperium didn't have atmospheric aircraft until the Thunderhawk in Epic.
Space Marines were convicts and unaugmented.
Abaddon failed.
Votaan.
Tau.
Necrons.
Admech not needing transports.

The Argus Flyer, P105 Warhammer 40,000 Rogue Trader October 1987.
Marines were convicts, but their bodies were toughened with bio-chem. i.e, they were always augmented, just not super soldier augmented. (again, RT)
Abaddon is and always has been a failure.
Votaan are squats, squats are in the RT book
Tau are a minor xenos race, xenos races have existed since RT
Necrons are a Xenos race, Xenos races have existed since RT
Admech don't NEED transports, they have legs, or tracks, or whatever.

I didn't respond to others, since i'm not intimate with those tidbits of lore. but your argument seems to be, essentially, that since GW has added things, or clarified things since the very rough outline that RT was in 1987, then any retcon is acceptable, and any retcon should be welcomed. What I would consider instead is whether the change is consistent with the established facts about the Imperium of man, or the universe in general, and if so, how has it been justified.
The Tau being introduced changed nothing about the imperium of man, or the universe, nothing. If the change was. 'The Tau empire is second only in power to the Imperium of man and possess millions of worlds, and they have observed a tense ceasefire for the past 10,000 years' that would be a MAJOR retcon, and challenge all the lore that had come before it. as it stands, Minor xenos race, scheduled for extermination? records lost? perfectly in keeping with what has been established.

With regards to Femstodes, are they something the imperium of man would do? you know, a Reactionary Xenophobic, genocidal, authoritarian dogmatic autocratic theocratic dictatorship?? you think they would be progressive? you think the person proposing a progressive outlook wouldn't find themselves immediately being executed for heresy?? Lack of representation in the imperium is a feature, not a bug, because the imperium of man is just absolutely awful. I mean Left wing diversity politics is bad, but the Imperium makes the end result of left wing ideology, cannibal island, look like a pleasant day in the park.

Lord Zarkov wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Isn't there another bit of fluff that says that the Custodes draws recruits from the sons of nobility?
Though then again, I don't recall it says that it exclusively recruits sons, so maybe that's what GW meant?
That message on Facebook could have been better worded, really.
A more diplomatic approach would have been just to say "whilst rare, some exceptional noble daughters do find themselves in the ranks of the Ten Thousand" or something like that.

I think if they wanted more women in the Talons of the Emperor they should have focused more on the Sisters of the Silence fluff, really. I don't think there's much about them, is there?

They get taken as babies don’t they? So you don’t know how exceptional they’re going to be until they’re already too old to be taken.

Given the new lore that they can be either sex, the preponderance for male Custodes probably has something to do with the biases and marriage politics of the noble houses from which they draw leading to them preferring to donate sons rather than daughters.

They are taken as babies but the child is only the basis as the candidate is wholly remade levning nothing of the original. Every castodes is made to a unique and exact set of specifications, what they want from the candidate is just a little spark of life/psychic essens to start the creation process. Potentially a male chiled could be used as the basis for a female castodes and vice versa.

odinsgrandson wrote:

Master of mankind has the custodes, refer to 'their brothers' , the codex explicitly calls them a brotherhood recruited entirely from the noble sons of terra.

The Brotherhood of Steel in Fallout is mixed gender. The Brotherhood in Assassins Creed are mixed gender. "Brotherhood" hasn't meant "only men" for some time.

I feel you missed "The Brotherhood of Evil Mutants" which was never all men from the start (and for a while was led by Mistique).

Good catch! I would be remiss not to also mention the Dark Brotherhood of the Elder Scrolls, who's founding member was a woman!

BertBert wrote:Is there even a neutral equivalent in English? Siblinghood?

Not really! I don't really think we even have a -hood which is gender neutral - the closest is still "brotherhood", simply because the masculine is considered "neutral" (again, problematic, but that's language for ya!)

madtankbloke wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


The Imperium didn't have atmospheric aircraft until the Thunderhawk in Epic.
Space Marines were convicts and unaugmented.
Abaddon failed.
Votaan.
Tau.
Necrons.
Admech not needing transports.

The Argus Flyer, P105 Warhammer 40,000 Rogue Trader October 1987.
Marines were convicts, but their bodies were toughened with bio-chem. i.e, they were always augmented, just not super soldier augmented. (again, RT)
Abaddon is and always has been a failure.
Votaan are squats, squats are in the RT book
Tau are a minor xenos race, xenos races have existed since RT
Necrons are a Xenos race, Xenos races have existed since RT
Admech don't NEED transports, they have legs, or tracks, or whatever.

I didn't respond to others, since i'm not intimate with those tidbits of lore. but your argument seems to be, essentially, that since GW has added things, or clarified things since the very rough outline that RT was in 1987, then any retcon is acceptable, and any retcon should be welcomed. What I would consider instead is whether the change is consistent with the established facts about the Imperium of man, or the universe in general, and if so, how has it been justified.
The Tau being introduced changed nothing about the imperium of man, or the universe, nothing. If the change was. 'The Tau empire is second only in power to the Imperium of man and possess millions of worlds, and they have observed a tense ceasefire for the past 10,000 years' that would be a MAJOR retcon, and challenge all the lore that had come before it. as it stands, Minor xenos race, scheduled for extermination? records lost? perfectly in keeping with what has been established.

With regards to Femstodes, are they something the imperium of man would do? you know, a Reactionary Xenophobic, genocidal, authoritarian dogmatic autocratic theocratic dictatorship?? you think they would be progressive? you think the person proposing a progressive outlook wouldn't find themselves immediately being executed for heresy?? Lack of representation in the imperium is a feature, not a bug, because the imperium of man is just absolutely awful. I mean Left wing diversity politics is bad, but the Imperium makes the end result of left wing ideology, cannibal island, look like a pleasant day in the park.

The Imperium's bigotry is not modern-day bigotry.

They don't care what color your skin is.
They don't care what you're rocking in your pants.
They don't care if you're trans-there's a trans Sister of Battle in a recent story.

The Imperium is a dystopic hellhole, that's for sure, but they're not terrible in a lot of the ways that modern-day people can be awful.
Some of the High Lords of Terra are women. High-ranking Inquisitors include women, like Greyfax. Custodes including women isn't going against any central themes of the Imperium.

 BertBert wrote:

 odinsgrandson wrote:

Master of mankind has the custodes, refer to 'their brothers' , the codex explicitly calls them a brotherhood recruited entirely from the noble sons of terra.

The Brotherhood of Steel in Fallout is mixed gender. The Brotherhood in Assassins Creed are mixed gender. "Brotherhood" hasn't meant "only men" for some time.

Is there even a neutral equivalent in English? Siblinghood?

No.

But English is the kind of language where you can say “The Sisters of Silence man the Black Ships” without implying the Sisters are an all male organization. We tend to use male-assuming language as the gender neutral often, but almost never female-assuming language as gender neutral.

 odinsgrandson wrote:

Master of mankind has the custodes, refer to 'their brothers' , the codex explicitly calls them a brotherhood recruited entirely from the noble sons of terra.

The Brotherhood of Steel in Fallout is mixed gender. The Brotherhood in Assassins Creed are mixed gender. "Brotherhood" hasn't meant "only men" for some time.

I feel you missed "The Brotherhood of Evil Mutants" which was never all men from the start (and for a while was led by Mistique).

Or Brotherhood of Nod, which very much does have women cultists, several of whom are pretty high ranking.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Overread wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Overread wrote:We do have racial segregation - Gangs in Necromunda.

That's not the same thing, and you know it. That's factionalism, not racism. Segregation, possibly, but even that isn't segregation as we know it, from a dominant power oppressing others - the Helmawrs' don't care about the underhivers, and certainly aren't saying "Escher can sit at the front of the bus, Goliaths have to sit at the back".

The Helmawrs don't care, but you can bet a regular Escher Ganger is not going to join the Orlocks or vis versa. In fact males from anywhere outside of Escher aren't getting in.
The Gangs themselves segregate themselves and have huge internal political fights over territories.

Yes, agreed - but that is *very* different to the racial segregation which we're talking about in the real world, where racial segregation is a result of *dominant socio-political groups enforcing those divides over marginalised groups*.

Or, to put another way: would you call gang wars IRL a case of "segregation"? No - they're gang wars.

They are as segregated and as racist to each other as nations are in the real world. I'm fairly sure in many of the books there's even terms they use as slurs against each other

Still not racism though. Gangs calling eachother slurs isn't inherently racist.

The Helmawrs don't care about that. They DO care about keeping the Gangers and the Middleclasses out of the upper regions of the Hive. It's a whole separate system of class. Heck the upper classes will done powersuits and go hunt the in the Underhive. They will literally use the underhivers for sport like the Upper Classes of old would hunt Foxes*. As I noted many Imperial societies operate a strict hierarchy within society and many of those groups will be insulting, hostile, antagonistic and all to those in different classes.

Yes - that's *classism*. Not racial segregation, which is what I was talking about.

Where the Imperium differs is that things like gender and skin colour appear to have very little meaning; however your social position and class as well as parts of your racial background are very important. Heck how much mutation you have is also another very key element in your social position within many social groupings.

Yes, like I said - that's not RACIAL segregation though, is it? That's social stratification and classism, not racism or sexism.

It's more complex though because each world is a thing unto itself. Some will be insanely tolerant; some will just be hostile to anything; some will be highly class run; some less so; some feudal some class etc...

Hence why I said that the Imperium is not institutionally sexist or racist. Individual Imperial worlds could be anything.

The Clan Houses, especially in modern Necromunda, are very much different ethnic groups though with in some cases radically different phenotypes and each House is very much supremacists for their own ethnicity and absolutely segregate the others. The conflicts very much are ethnic/racial and are comparable to sectarian violence.

Of course the differences between the Clan Houses are not skin tone based and have very different markers from the more visible (to the West) irl racism/segregation (for good meta reasons) and are at a top level battles between peers, not one dominant group oppressing others (though that does very happen at the minor levels (e.g. an individual settlement).

That is one specific world and set of circumstances though. As you say the Imperium at the top level really does not care, individual humans are just parts of the machine, but there’s all sorts of discrimination for every conceivable reason going on within individual sub groups.

I just feel that this change is offending people more because of the political tinderbox of social media than because it is this crazy unprecedented.

I mean, Voltann were introduced as having always been around not too long ago.

madtankbloke wrote:Marines were convicts, but their bodies were toughened with bio-chem. i.e, they were always augmented, just not super soldier augmented. (again, RT)

So, a retcon.

Abaddon is and always has been a failure.

In denial about a retcon.

Votaan are squats, squats are in the RT book

Never been called the Votaan, appearance has changed, their whole lore is different, and the Squats were "killed" by the Tyranids (until that was retconned). So, another series of retcons.

Tau are a minor xenos race, xenos races have existed since RT

And the Tau never had FTL, didn't have the ability to travel through the warp, didn't have Knight or Titan-grade suits because they relied on aircraft for anti-Titan duty. A retcon.

Necrons are a Xenos race, Xenos races have existed since RT

Necrons USED to be Chaos Androids. And then they used to be slaves of the C'tan with no personality beyond "eldritch Terminators". A retcon.

Admech don't NEED transports, they have legs, or tracks, or whatever.

The previous lore stated that the Skitarii had no ground transports, because they had robotic legs. Another retcon.

I didn't respond to others, since i'm not intimate with those tidbits of lore. but your argument seems to be, essentially, that since GW has added things, or clarified things since the very rough outline that RT was in 1987, then any retcon is acceptable, and any retcon should be welcomed.

No, my argument was in response to you claiming that al previous retcons had been consistent with the "previously established rules of the setting".

What a nebulous phrase! Surely, by virtue of being a retcon, a "previously established rule of the setting" is being broken! But, I made that list to showcase a series of retcons that broke "previously established rules".

So, I ask again - what it is about women Custodes that breaks "previously established rules of the setting", but that these others do not?

What I would consider instead is whether the change is consistent with the established facts about the Imperium of man, or the universe in general, and if so, how has it been justified.

Okay, sure - we know that the Imperium is not institutionally sexist. We know that women are called on to serve in all echelons of Imperial life (with the exception of the Astartes, for "reasons"). Women serving in the Custodes changes nothing fundamental about the Custodes, or the Imperium, or the wider universe.

The Tau being introduced changed nothing about the imperium of man, or the universe, nothing. If the change was. 'The Tau empire is second only in power to the Imperium of man and possess millions of worlds, and they have observed a tense ceasefire for the past 10,000 years' that would be a MAJOR retcon, and challenge all the lore that had come before it. as it stands, Minor xenos race, scheduled for extermination? records lost? perfectly in keeping with what has been established.

You misunderstand the Tau retcon - it isn't from them existing, it's what happened after. The Tau were established as only being relegated to a single region of space. Now, they have FTL. The Tau were established as not falling into the trap of building titanic bipedal war machines, and "intelligently" used aircraft like Barracudas to deal with Imperial Titans. Now, they have Riptides and the Ta'unar suit. And we STILL have conflicted sources about what Tau do with their human vassals.

With regards to Femstodes, are they something the imperium of man would do? you know, a Reactionary Xenophobic, genocidal, authoritarian dogmatic autocratic theocratic dictatorship?? you think they would be progressive?

Having women in your army =/= progressive.

I say again - HAVING WOMEN SOLDIERS DOESN'T MAKE YOU THE GOOD GUYS. And NOT having them also doesn't make you the good guys either! The Imperium is awful because it's a xenophobic, genocidal, authoritarian dogmatic theocracy - NOT because it's racist or sexist or transphobic or homphobic. Textually, it is *none of those things*, despite what you might claim.

And they're STILL evil!

you think the person proposing a progressive outlook wouldn't find themselves immediately being executed for heresy??

Having women in your army doesn't make you progressive. Otherwise, someone should be executed for having all those women in the Guard.

Lack of representation in the imperium is a feature, not a bug, because the imperium of man is just absolutely awful.

No, it isn't.

The Imperium is awful, yes. It's awful because of what it does to fictional aliens. It's awful because of the sheer scale of its disregard for ALL human life. It's awful because it is a world which doesn't care about you, or your family, or even your planet.

It is NOT awful because of real world bigotry. Never has been. Textually, the Imperium *is not institutionally sexist/racist/homophobic/transphobic*. You're making up a headcanon here.

madtankbloke wrote:


With regards to Femstodes, are they something the imperium of man would do? you know, a Reactionary Xenophobic, genocidal, authoritarian dogmatic autocratic theocratic dictatorship?? you think they would be progressive? you think the person proposing a progressive outlook wouldn't find themselves immediately being executed for heresy??

Yes, they would because they have. Many military forces in the Imperium are mixed gender, and some are even exclusively female, so women in the military is VERY MUCH in character for the Imperium, and always has been.

Also, the inclusion of women in the military (from the context of Warhammer 40k) is NOT progressive- it is the opposite: ie. The Emperor and the forces charged with executing his will OWN their subjects, and will use any and all of them to perpetuate warfare without any concern for their rights, autonomy or societal value. It does not matter who you are. It does not matter what you are. You will be used and spent by they Imperium as THEY see fit, because the only value your life has in service to them.

Lord Zarkov wrote:
The Clan Houses, especially in modern Necromunda, are very much different ethnic groups though with in some cases radically different phenotypes and each House is very much supremacists for their own ethnicity and absolutely segregate the others. The conflicts very much are ethnic/racial and are comparable to sectarian violence.

Of course the differences between the Clan Houses are not skin tone based and have very different markers from the more visible (to the West) irl racism/segregation (for good meta reasons) and are at a top level battles between peers, not one dominant group oppressing others (though that does very happen at the minor levels (e.g. an individual settlement).

That is one specific world and set of circumstances though. As you say the Imperium at the top level really does not care, individual humans are just parts of the machine, but there’s all sorts of discrimination for every conceivable reason going on within individual sub groups.

I think we're saying the same things here - they're not segregated as a result of a hegemonic power or dominant socio-political power. They are separate groups, and live separately and come into conflict, but... that's just the same as gang warfare on this planet, which isn't always racial.

As you say - they're conflicts from peer against peer. That's not really the same as racial segregation, which is what I was highlighting. And, as you again point out, this is a specific instance on one world - it's not *institutional*.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Lord Zarkov wrote:
The Clan Houses, especially in modern Necromunda, are very much different ethnic groups though with in some cases radically different phenotypes and each House is very much supremacists for their own ethnicity and absolutely segregate the others. The conflicts very much are ethnic/racial and are comparable to sectarian violence.

Of course the differences between the Clan Houses are not skin tone based and have very different markers from the more visible (to the West) irl racism/segregation (for good meta reasons) and are at a top level battles between peers, not one dominant group oppressing others (though that does very happen at the minor levels (e.g. an individual settlement).

That is one specific world and set of circumstances though. As you say the Imperium at the top level really does not care, individual humans are just parts of the machine, but there’s all sorts of discrimination for every conceivable reason going on within individual sub groups.

I think we're saying the same things here - they're not segregated as a result of a hegemonic power or dominant socio-political power. They are separate groups, and live separately and come into conflict, but... that's just the same as gang warfare on this planet, which isn't always racial.

As you say - they're conflicts from peer against peer. That's not really the same as racial segregation, which is what I was highlighting. And, as you again point out, this is a specific instance on one world - it's not *institutional*.

Sort of, it’s institutional within that specific world but not within the Imperium.

The problem with discussing attitudes of ‘The Imperium’ is that it’s so mind bogglingly vast with such vast diversity of different approaches to things amongst its subjects. ‘Imperial’ institutions are a very small proportion of the overall body.

Sectarianism is very much a problem across the Imperium, including ethnic sectarianism like on Necromunda (though GW is generally careful not to write about skin colour racism for obvious and sensible reasons). But the top level institutions are by necessity so large and diverse (not to mention well disconnected from concerns of the people) that any of the things people fight over at the planetary level are just not relevant.

Hence there’s pretty much no discrimination in the actual Imperial institutions, other than a small number of bodies (3?) that are gender-segregated for in-universe historical reasons.

madtankbloke wrote:
Expect said trans person to be swiftly dealt with unless you want a bloodbath on your hands. The author probably didn't think it through.

Oh, hang on, who's arguing against the "established rules of the setting" now?

Lest we remind you, according to the lore, trans folks aren't a problem.

Yes, some of the high lords are women, inquisitors too, well done, your point??

The Imperium is not institutionally sexist. That's the point.

and as to your last point, you phrased it in such a way as to suggest that your stance is that for there to not be women in the custodes would go against the central themes of the imperium. Its clear where you stand on the political spectrum, very clever comrade.

So, hang on, when shown evidence of how the Imperium isn't sexist/racist/transphobic/homophobic, you then claim that it has to do with our own political spectrum?

Sounds like you're just scalp deep in denial that the Imperium isn't what you thought it was. I suggest reading up more of those "established rules of the setting" you mentioned earlier.

madtankbloke wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:


They don't care what color your skin is.
They don't care what you're rocking in your pants.
They don't care if you're trans-there's a trans Sister of Battle in a recent story.

The Imperium is a dystopic hellhole, that's for sure, but they're not terrible in a lot of the ways that modern-day people can be awful.
Some of the High Lords of Terra are women. High-ranking Inquisitors include women, like Greyfax. Custodes including women isn't going against any central themes of the Imperium.

The imperium absolutely cares what colour your skin is. if its luminous purple, you are probably a mutant, or worship the ruinous powers, and therefore, you are dead.
They absolutely care whats in your pants, if its not the correct equipment, you are probably a mutant or worship the ruinous powers, and therefore you are dead.
They absolutely care. you might be a mutant, or a heretic, and thus dead. And the high lords will certainly care. The Ecclesiarchy is expressely forbidden from having any men under arms, and whatever way your politics goes, a DNA test on a Trans woman will read male. so the Ecclesiarchy is in direct contravention of said edict, and thus directly challenging the other high lords. Expect said trans person to be swiftly dealt with unless you want a bloodbath on your hands. The author probably didn't think it through.

You are right they are not terrible in the same way, they are worse.
Yes, some of the high lords are women, inquisitors too, well done, your point??
and as to your last point, you phrased it in such a way as to suggest that your stance is that for there to not be women in the custodes would go against the central themes of the imperium. Its clear where you stand on the political spectrum, very clever comrade.

In an official GW 40k story, you've got a trans Sister of battle. According to GW, at least some of the Ecclesiarchy is fine with trans women. Which makes perfect sense-the Decree Passive isn't designed to actually stop the Ecclesiarchy from having forces, it was designed to mollify the internal strife of the time. A trans Sister is still a woman.

But yes, if you're visibly mutated, then the Imperium cares. If you have bright purple skin with neon polka dots, you're a mutant, not a sanctioned strain of abhuman, and will be killed.
However, if you're black? They don't care. That's a normal skin tone, so into the meat grinder of war you go.

 BertBert wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

I think if they wanted more women in the Talons of the Emperor they should have focused more on the Sisters of the Silence fluff, really. I don't think there's much about them, is there?

There is a good chunk in the Talons of the Emperor novel with Aleya's chapters filling a good third of it. But more on that front would've been nice in any case. That being said, I also don't see how female Custodes preclude that from happening in the future.

Well, did the Sisters of Silence get anything new and noteworthy in the new codex? Because if not, then evidently it does preclude them from getting new stuff, because GW already made that decision.
This is looking awfully like that time the Sisters of Battle were neglected for over a decade.

 odinsgrandson wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Well that's a bit disingenuous. They can own their own lore but also crap all over it too. And there have been major portions of the lore which remained very stable . . . until they decided to throw it in the bin. *Ahem* Primaris introduction and loyalist primarchs rising from the grave.

Just because you own something doesn't mean you can't treat it poorly. Star Wars being a major example.

In what way does it 'disrespect the lore' to allow Custodes to be women?

It changes previously established lore. Not that I feel it's a bad change. I'm just pointing out that merely owning an IP doesn't mean you can't treat it poorly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 odinsgrandson wrote:

Seriously, there was never any definitive lore indication that custodes were exclusively male.

How is this statement a thing this far into the thread? Didn't the "all Custodes are sons of yadda yadda" excerpt appear several times already?

Did we not have the discussion where we contrast that against Sanguinius identifying Custodes as men and women?


(Arguments that these are Sisters of Silence are refuted by the fact that elsewhere in the book, Sanguinius can identify nearby SoS because of his psionic affinity).


Now, I am willing to say that this is "unclear" in that it does not emphasize the point, if you can meet me halfway and accept that the lore talking about the noble families giving their sons away does not indicate that they didn't also give away any of their daughters (or more especially that they could not).

That way we can give equal weight to the contradictory pieces of official lore.


What I think happened is that people simply read Custodes as Astartes (I think it would take a real lore change to make women astartes)


But a bigger deal here- I think this is one if the smallest lore changes that they have just hand-waived away. Mind, I am old enough to remember Tyranid mind slaves, squats, non-fungus ork mating practices, 6' tall marines and primarchs that could pass as normal humans.

I think some of those changes really disrupted the lore, whole this one did not.

I confess I may have missed that argument or citation. But it is interesting. Is that a Black Library thing?

But I would say about the mention of "sons", that "sons" isn't nearly as commonly used in a gender inclusive way as "brotherhood". It's much easier to interpret it as men-only than being inclusive, and clearly, so it was. Saying it was always meant to mean "sons and daughters" feels like a stretch to me. I don't think I've ever seen "sons" to mean both genders, and I wouldn't expect interpreting it that way from readers either.