Swastakowey wrote: sisters of battle hardly even fight real battles anyway , unless some poor family has a kid with 6 toes counts.
Let's see, off the top of my head...
- Took part in the third Armageddon War - Successfully held out against 4 Space Marine Chapters and Mechanicus Tech Guard during a siege - Fought off a Red Corsairs invasion - Took part in a Crusade alongside the Black Templars - Successfully raided a Daemon world for lost relics - Have the duty of wiping out rogue Marine Chapters, which they have done successfully multiple times
So yeah, they're as hardcore and as capable as any other fighting force. And one of their main jobs is defending Ecclesiarchy worlds, which are as open to attack and invasion from any sort of enemy as any other Imperial world.
I'd say that the Sisters having AoFs and the SoF puts them above Stormtroopers. And if we're factoring in equipment, then the Sisters have the edge there too.
If being called out on being lazy is insulting, then stop being lazy.
I have pointed out, several times by now, that there in fact were "male Sisters of Battle" in the lore. With remarkably few exceptions, no one cares, and no one wants to play as the Frateris Templar. Your "male Sisters of Battle" objections are, essentially, a solution to a non-existent problem.
That you continuously ignore the discussion and then pretend to act like you've responded, even when you haven't-- now THAT is insulting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Troike wrote: So yeah, they're as hardcore and as capable as any other fighting force.
They also participated in fighting against Abbadon's Black Crusades. IIRC they had forces on Cadia?
Though admittedly, fighting Chaos Space MArines isn't a "real battle", since CSMs... well, you know... suck
I'd say that the Sisters having AoFs and the SoF puts them above Stormtroopers. And if we're factoring in equipment, then the Sisters have the edge there too.
Mind you, I did not talk about rules or equipment.
I talked about personal skill in fluff.
Gamewise Stormtroopers beat Sisters, so if you want to make it a rule discussion, it's a moot point.
That you continuously ignore the discussion and then pretend to act like you've responded, even when you haven't-- now THAT is insulting.
I am sorry, I am trying to keep myself out of this tarpit, but this is such a steaming piece of hypocrisy that I just can't help pointing it out. You can wave your once-there-were-male-SoBs anecdote as much as you like, but both you and I know that what he is talking about is making male SoBs now. Which, honestly, was more than obvious to me. Pulling up a historical footnote is not equivalent to something like GW introducing actual male SoB models now, and you know that too.
Melissia wrote: Though admittedly, fighting Chaos Space MArines isn't a "real battle", since CSMs... well, you know... suck
Wow, Melissia reminds everyone about how much she hates CSM/SM in case anyone forgot (As if anyone could, you throw it out all the time.) in a 40K discussion.
What a surprise.
Wow, I am so shocked.
How extraordinarily unpredictable.
What next, will you praise a discussion-relevant weapon, strategy or similar with 'It's also really good at killing Marines!'? Will you throw out some not-very-obscure praise for IG, SoB or Orks, your beloved factions (Often combined with the former praise)? Or maybe something even more surprising, like dismissing someone's argument that effectively refutes yours by simply flat out ignoring it and accusing them of not reading the thread?!
The above is sarcasm, just so you know.
No but really... I find myself just answering this to your words about Astartes.
Yes, Melly. We get that you don't like them. There is no need to ram it into the face of everyone at every opportunity. A little mention here and there about how they are not your favourite faction suffices, and is a great deal less inflammatory to boot.
At this point, things like what I quoted just comes across as flamebait.
I'd say that the Sisters having AoFs and the SoF puts them above Stormtroopers. And if we're factoring in equipment, then the Sisters have the edge there too.
Mind you, I did not talk about rules or equipment.
I talked about personal skill in fluff.
Gamewise Stormtroopers beat Sisters, so if you want to make it a rule discussion, it's a moot point.
That you continuously ignore the discussion and then pretend to act like you've responded, even when you haven't-- now THAT is insulting.
I am sorry, I am trying to keep myself out of this tarpit, but this is such a steaming piece of hypocrisy that I just can't help pointing it out. You can wave your once-there-were-male-SoBs anecdote as much as you like, but both you and I know that what he is talking about is making male SoBs now. Which, honestly, was more than obvious to me. Pulling up a historical footnote is not equivalent to something like GW introducing actual male SoB models now, and you know that too.
Melissia wrote: Though admittedly, fighting Chaos Space MArines isn't a "real battle", since CSMs... well, you know... suck
Wow, Melissia reminds everyone about how much she hates CSM/SM in case anyone forgot (As if anyone could, you throw it out all the time.) in a 40K discussion.
What a surprise.
Wow, I am so shocked.
How extraordinarily unpredictable.
What next, will you praise a discussion-relevant weapon, strategy or similar with 'It's also really good at killing Marines!'? Will you throw out some not-very-obscure praise for IG, SoB or Orks, your beloved factions (Often combined with the former praise)? Or maybe something even more surprising, like dismissing someone's argument that effectively refutes yours by simply flat out ignoring it and accusing them of not reading the thread?!
The above is sarcasm, just so you know.
No but really... I find myself just answering this to your words about Astartes.
Yes, Melly. We get that you don't like them. There is no need to ram it into the face of everyone at every opportunity. A little mention here and there about how they are not your favourite faction suffices, and is a great deal less inflammatory to boot.
At this point, things like what I quoted just comes across as flamebait.
She's just a troll. I have her on ignore but sometimes engage with her for my own amusement.
Although if she actually believes the stuff she posts (which is hard unless she quaritines herself from the Black Library) that CSM's are among the most powerful factions, considering well, that a fair amount of their number are invincible and immortal, and can spread diseases like doubworm, which kill entire planets in a month or less. There's a reason why the IOM refers to the Chaos Gods and the CSM's that serve as their will outside the materium as the 'Archenemy', and it's not because they often win against them without crippling losses.
Melissia wrote:Even if you only recruit "the best" of these people, you're still missing out on the non-bald, non-white, non-men, who are taller or shorter than 5'10", and whom have no familial relationship to you, many of whom could very well be far better applicants than the ones you did accept.
Melissia wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm not sure what chapter only recruits people with a family relation to them.
All of them do; they require genetic similarity to the gene-seed. If you aren't genetically compatible enough, the gene-seed rejects you and you die a horrible and painful death.
See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing. Or why you took issue with my comment rather. Marines take the best applicants that will work for them. Now if you want to claim that women shouldn't be excluded from that pool feel free but I'd like to see some evidence that the process for males- which we know isn't perfect- is just as viable for females. I'd be willing to wager the lack of a Y chromosome will complicate matters and that that complication doesn't warrant the effort of solving it.
Melissia wrote:Even if you only recruit "the best" of these people, you're still missing out on the non-bald, non-white, non-men, who are taller or shorter than 5'10", and whom have no familial relationship to you, many of whom could very well be far better applicants than the ones you did accept.
Melissia wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm not sure what chapter only recruits people with a family relation to them.
All of them do; they require genetic similarity to the gene-seed. If you aren't genetically compatible enough, the gene-seed rejects you and you die a horrible and painful death.
See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing. Or why you took issue with my comment rather. Marines take the best applicants that will work for them. Now if you want to claim that women shouldn't be excluded from that pool feel free but I'd like to see some evidence that the process for males- which we know isn't perfect- is just as viable for females. I'd be willing to wager the lack of a Y chromosome will complicate matters and that that complication doesn't warrant the effort of solving it.
Goes back to what I said, fixing that issue to create female space marines will take more time and effort that could be spent just simply making more marines. Rather than spend extra time and resources creating them, they can spend less for more, by using males.
I just gave up because that other person is just a pain to read and type too.
Kojiro wrote: See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing.
A brother and sister have closer genetics than two boys from different families. Thus, the genetic similarities requirement would not be reasonably expected to exclude women.
Thus, while genetic compatibility is an issue that would limit the number of candidates, it's not the issue that restricts marines from recruiting women, and this is also backed up by GW's lore anyway, which states something vague about male hormones (never mind that there's not really such a thing, and both men and women use "male hormones" and "female hormones", but GW's ignorance of biochemistry aside...).
I agree with all that brother heraluse has said,
and add that chaos is certainly more powerful (x about 6) then SOB. if it came to a fight between space marines and the same number of SODB, space marines would quite literally rip them to pieces. as in rip them In half. as in marines = win.
am I done yet? yes, yes I am.
Kojiro wrote: See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing.
A brother and sister have closer genetics than two boys from different families. Thus, the genetic similarities requirement would not be reasonably expected to exclude women.
Thus, while genetic compatibility is an issue that would limit the number of candidates, it's not the issue that restricts marines from recruiting women, and this is also backed up by GW's lore anyway, which states something vague about male hormones (never mind that there's not really such a thing, and both men and women use "male hormones" and "female hormones", but GW's ignorance of biochemistry aside...).
I have to be polite. I am not getting suspended from dakka dakka over this.
but, you are wrong again.
a brother and sister are GENETICALLY closer, but they have different CROMOZONES and this means that males are TECHNICALLY closer in that respect.
and your male hormones argument,
look at a man,
look at a woman, notice a difference?
if yes, you are seeing the work of male testosterone and hormones having different effects to female ones. they may be the same thing, but they are REACTING DIFFERENTLY.
the shrouded lord wrote: a brother and sister are GENETICALLY closer, but they have different CROMOZONES and this means that males are TECHNICALLY closer in that respect.
Nope.
The genetic (and biological) difference between male and female is very slight; the Y chromosome codes for essentially nothing.
As for the first part, I'm not interested in an "X is better than Y" argument. I only brought Sisters up simply to show that, in 40k, the Imperium produces women soldiers of unparalleled competence and ability, meaning that obviously in 40k it is not that the girl recruits are not capable of meeting hte Astartes standard in combat competency. There are no female Astartes for a different reason.
Kojiro wrote: See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing.
A brother and sister have closer genetics than two boys from different families. Thus, the genetic similarities requirement would not be reasonably expected to exclude women.
Thus, while genetic compatibility is an issue that would limit the number of candidates, it's not the issue that restricts marines from recruiting women, and this is also backed up by GW's lore anyway, which states something vague about male hormones (never mind that there's not really such a thing, and both men and women use "male hormones" and "female hormones", but GW's ignorance of biochemistry aside...).
Then why not promote the idea of pig marines or monkey marines while you are at it.
Of course we arent too different genetically, we still need to mate, we still have 2 legs, 10 fingers, hair and so forth. We are all mostly the same with enough minor differences to be hugely noticeable. That does not mean that a "minor difference" is nothing in terms of genetics. Its huge, thats why assuming (and you are assuming, by the way) that women and men react to hormones in the same manner is a huge flaw in the argument. Because we dont. A girl wanted to be a boy when I was kid, from age 13 she took pills to make her more "boy like", guess what, she didnt naturally grow buff like the boys did, her voice only wen slightly deeper after she spent years practicing yo lower it and so on, but more importantly he physical make up didnt change. If she stopped taking the pills shed very quickly turn back to a typical everyday girl.
We share hormones yes but we react differently and one of the hormones is more prominent in each gender.
Genders are different, thats fine, and yes they could probably find a way to make female marines, but as it stands currently it is not possible as women lack the basics to become one before any change happens.
Swastakowey wrote: Then why not promote the idea of pig marines or monkey marines while you are at it.
I will assume you are not a jackass who is intending to say that women are pigs and monkeys; because that is effectively what you just said. With that said, this statement is nothing more than a nonsensical strawman argument. Let's move on.
As a general rule, yes, we do. For example, with higher than average levels of testosterone, a woman grows body hair and facial hair. With higher than average levels of estrogen, a boy develops "feminine" breasts and a higher voice. These changes are especially noticeable during the onset of puberty.
In truth, a marked excess of testosterone over a long period of time would create a poorly disciplined soldier that is unfit for duty anyway, regardless of gender. Plenty of people have had their bodies destroyed by this, both male and female. So I am MUCH more willing to believe that none of the treatments that are given to Astartes have anything to do with actual testosterone.
Swastakowey wrote: Then why not promote the idea of pig marines or monkey marines while you are at it.
I will assume you are not a jackass who is intending to say that women are pigs and monkeys; because that is effectively what you just said. With that said, this statement is nothing more than a nonsensical strawman argument. Let's move on.
As a general rule, yes, we do. For example, with higher than average levels of testosterone, a woman grows body hair and facial hair. With higher than average levels of estrogen, a boy develops "feminine" breasts and a higher voice. These changes are especially noticeable during the onset of puberty.
What!? Jump the gun,
Pigs and apes have close genetics to us (not extremely cclose but close) so I was making a joke... typical of someone of your demenour, assuming males as sexist.. (another joke... dont throw a fit(i didnt say that because you are a women(another joke)another joke)
Seriously jeeze.
And its not a higher voice, its a voice that breaks into highs more frequently when a man takes estrogen. and the breasts are nothing like a womens when you compare them. I have seen it happen during my college (12-19 years old in NZ) and its not as extreme as its made out to be. Their choice of clothing hides their gender better than any pills they take.
I said I assumed that was not your intent, even if it was what you communicated. That's assuming you AREN'T being sexist.
Or perhaps you'd prefer me to stop doing that, and to instead assume you are being sexist by default?
I was merely communicating to you the unfortunate implications in your previous post. Not making any accusations.
Swastakowey wrote: and the breasts are nothing like a womens when you compare them.
I think I'm going to stop here before someone's tempted to post an image (including myself, as I had an image from a clinical study ready to post even) Hypo/Hyper-androgenism/estrogenism have all been studied extensively.
Actually, now that I think of it, unless they're using an entirely artificial hormone, Space Marines would need higher than normal estrogen in order to promote the bone density they require (low estrogen ratings in men result in low bone density). Really, it'd only require a very slight change in the ratios of hormones to have female Space Marines, the more I think about it.
In the end, it really just comes down to it being an aesthetic choice by Games Workshop.
Melissia wrote: I said I assumed that was not your intent, even if it was what you communicated. That's assuming you AREN'T being sexist.
Or perhaps you'd prefer me to stop doing that, and to instead assume you are being sexist by default?
Swastakowey wrote: and the breasts are nothing like a womens when you compare them.
I think I'm going to stop here before someone's tempted to post an image (including myself, as I had an image from a clinical study ready to post even) Hypo/Hyper-androgenism/estrogenism have all been studied extensively.
Actually, now that I think of it, unless they're using an entirely artificial hormone, Space Marines would need higher than normal estrogen in order to promote the bone density they require (low estrogen ratings in men result in low bone density). Really, it'd only require a very slight change in the ratios of hormones to have female Space Marines, the more I think about it.
No I was seriously not being sexist, I literally was making a joke about you arguing that genetic difference is minor enough for it not to matter and the fact that great apes and unconfirmedably pigs have similar genes to us, therefore you should be argueing they can be made into marines too. But whatever. Vilify me for a joke with nothing to do with sexism.
And im going buy my experience with watching a few people who took hormones to try change who they are grow and develop during my time at college. Since I have witnessed those changes over five years those are what I based my knowledge on. After all I watched it happen. There is also a limit on how far those changes go too.
I have had enough arguing because I think you are just some guy being a troll. I will be apart of a long list of people that have ignored you. Good bye (simple because you assumed me sexist, which I take offense to)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Just realized she said she assumed me not sexist... big mistake haha, slight over reaction. Oh well ignored anyways.
But I will apologize for that, its monthly banking day. Im tired.
I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?)
More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.)
More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.)
We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!)
Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot.
Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope off furies and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
Edit: Forgot tau and kroot. They are awsome, but Tau could do with more female model/markers. The kroot are not veyr masculine and gender netral for the most part.
Niiai wrote: I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?)
More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.)
More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.)
We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!)
Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot.
Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope of the harpy and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
I have never heard a single women ever say they will do wargaming if they could use more female models. Its all fine and good to want it, but all it will do is cost GW more money (unless the women have big boobs and so forth, which isnt what you want) because nobody will buy them. Otherwise they would have done so already. Its also pretty rare to have women in the army actually there to fight rather than desk jobs and so forth. its a touchy subject but if there was a need GW would have done it by now in my opinion.
Of course at the end of the day they can try but its not a big deal overall in my opinion.
As I said im not against it but im not for it as I see at as a futile attempt really. Plus there are millions of big breasted models from other companies (an example of what to expect 99% of the time when females are presented as models). But look at victoria miniatures. Some female models to your liking will come out soon.
It seems more males want it than females. I dont know why this is the case but at the end of the day, remember GW isnt the only one that makes models. I urge you to try other companies because you will find models of your liking (especially for humans) and it also broadens your hobby. But yea victoria miniatures is doing some like you describe so check them out in a few months.
Niiai wrote: I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?)
More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.)
More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.)
We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!)
Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot.
Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope of the harpy and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
I have never heard a single women ever say they will do wargaming if they could use more female models. Its all fine and good to want it, but all it will do is cost GW more money (unless the women have big boobs and so forth, which isnt what you want) because nobody will buy them. Otherwise they would have done so already. Its also pretty rare to have women in the army actually there to fight rather than desk jobs and so forth. its a touchy subject but if there was a need GW would have done it by now in my opinion.
Of course at the end of the day they can try but its not a big deal overall in my opinion.
As I said im not against it but im not for it as I see at as a futile attempt really. Plus there are millions of big breasted models from other companies (an example of what to expect 99% of the time when females are presented as models). But look at victoria miniatures. Some female models to your liking will come out soon.
It seems more males want it than females. I dont know why this is the case but at the end of the day, remember GW isnt the only one that makes models. I urge you to try other companies because you will find models of your liking (especially for humans) and it also broadens your hobby. But yea victoria miniatures is doing some like you describe so check them out in a few months.
because some men (commonly those who don't know what the son is and have decided there basement is the only universe) like plastic bewbs.
Swastakowy I think you are a bit of mark. While you have no personal experience with women saying they would play wargames if there where female models I do have it. I work in a store that sells GW products among other merchandise. I have had severl female custemors that ask me if I can find them some female models because they want to start playing warhammer. When I do not find some that are sutable for them they often say they will think about it and they never come back.
You say that it is prety rare to have women in the army for duties other then desk jobs. I do not agree, it just depends on what countries you are looking at. Israel has a LOT of women in their army. Norway, my country, also have hat female volenters for the army for quite some time and the debate of having gender neutral army recruitment for the interactively has been discussed a lot.
If your oponion on a female model is a big brested model then this is a clear indication that you would be well served to have more female models in your game. There are a lot of ways to do this. As GW seems to work on very gender conserveative representation a headswap would probably suffice for space marines and tau. It would be really easy, and it would not make sense that a female SM would look much different then a male marine as they have grown so much during the procedure.
I do not know the gender balance of players, but I know so many male players vs the female players I know. This could come from a lot of factors, not an unrepresentative of female models. You state that you see more males complain about this then females, do you think this is because more males are engaged in the hobby?
Niiai wrote: I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?) More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.) More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.) We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!) Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot. Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope off furies and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
Edit: Forgot tau and kroot. They are awsome, but Tau could do with more female model/markers. The kroot are not veyr masculine and gender netral for the most part.
You see, these are the kinds of players I absolutely despise. This would involve a massive and pointless retcon for every single race across the board, despite every woman I know who plays W40K doesn't give a flying gak about female models for Astartes (CSM or SM), and instead typically play either Nids or CSM's. The fluff is currently fine as it is, if not largely perfect for stability and ripe for ever moving the plot forward. There's no reason to actually add female models at all besides a cheap attempt at pandering for more sales that are unlikely to even work in the first place (and from a marketing perspective, neckbeard rage can actually hurt, take a look at EA and stupidly getting voted worst company in America) that simply destroys the story and slaughters key tropes that have been in place for over a decade. Political correctness is quite simply annoying as feth. Not to mention all of your ideas are completely ignorant of the fluff.
Although you already made a topic on this... and ridiculed because most of your thoughts are completely pointless, coupled with how you always backpedal on this subject. "Female Daemons", do you even know how daemons work?
Changing things simply for the sake of changing them/political correctness and aiming for marketing minorities simply leads to things like Ultimate Spider-Man being killed off and being replaced by a black-hispanic guy. Minority superheroes are great. Killing/destroying a story just to justify a marketing move? Any rage directed on the subject is completely justified.
The only faction that needs females models is the Guard, as canonically there are female guardsmen.
Niiai wrote: I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?)
More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.)
More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.)
We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!)
Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot.
Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope of the harpy and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
I have never heard a single women ever say they will do wargaming if they could use more female models. Its all fine and good to want it, but all it will do is cost GW more money (unless the women have big boobs and so forth, which isnt what you want) because nobody will buy them. Otherwise they would have done so already. Its also pretty rare to have women in the army actually there to fight rather than desk jobs and so forth. its a touchy subject but if there was a need GW would have done it by now in my opinion.
Of course at the end of the day they can try but its not a big deal overall in my opinion.
As I said im not against it but im not for it as I see at as a futile attempt really. Plus there are millions of big breasted models from other companies (an example of what to expect 99% of the time when females are presented as models). But look at victoria miniatures. Some female models to your liking will come out soon.
It seems more males want it than females. I dont know why this is the case but at the end of the day, remember GW isnt the only one that makes models. I urge you to try other companies because you will find models of your liking (especially for humans) and it also broadens your hobby. But yea victoria miniatures is doing some like you describe so check them out in a few months.
because some men (commonly those who don't know what the son is and have decided there basement is the only universe) like plastic bewbs.
While I dont doubt that this is true in some cases you may wanna be careful, someone might feel a little bad about reading that haha.
But yea I think its an exaggerated problem. (or is it? dun dun dun dunnnnn).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Niiai wrote: Swastakowy I think you are a bit of mark. While you have no personal experience with women saying they would play wargames if there where female models I do have it. I work in a store that sells GW products among other merchandise. I have had severl female custemors that ask me if I can find them some female models because they want to start playing warhammer. When I do not find some that are sutable for them they often say they will think about it and they never come back.
You say that it is prety rare to have women in the army for duties other then desk jobs. I do not agree, it just depends on what countries you are looking at. Israel has a LOT of women in their army. Norway, my country, also have hat female volenters for the army for quite some time and the debate of having gender neutral army recruitment for the interactively has been discussed a lot.
If your oponion on a female model is a big brested model then this is a clear indication that you would be well served to have more female models in your game. There are a lot of ways to do this. As GW seems to work on very gender conserveative representation a headswap would probably suffice for space marines and tau. It would be really easy, and it would not make sense that a female SM would look much different then a male marine as they have grown so much during the procedure.
I do not know the gender balance of players, but I know so many male players vs the female players I know. This could come from a lot of factors, not an unrepresentative of female models. You state that you see more males complain about this then females, do you think this is because more males are engaged in the hobby?
No I think im on the mark, its an exaggerated problem. People bring up Israel a lot but I have read a lot to the contrary. When you say a lot are we talking like what? 20 females over the years? Because I have (in a tiny town) met 3 female players who dont care, none that want to start playing if females models are available and one that travels the world teaching people how to paint.
I agree things may be different where you are but like you said, your country is not the world, GW needs to think of the bigger picture, and that bigger picture is a largely male audience who couldnt care less on the subject. thats all im saying. And for every non big boobed female model you find im sure I can double that figure with small boob models. Its just how it is. If you truly feel its a problem why not promote a new game system or actively try fix it? Seems better than waiting for change, because that solves nothing at the end of the day.
Im not putting you down or being mean, im just stating my reasoning behind why its the way it is (in my opinion) and why change is not necessary. I dont buy from GW personally so I have no reason to argue that it should be male only. Just remember there are worse things in the world that need to be changed.
Remember that radical change is a regular killer of anything popular (bands, shows, artists well anything). People dont like it. and you will have many reactions from viewers and posters that will suggest the same thing.
Why do you keep asking women who play warhammer if they think it isn't a problem. While there is some merit in it, would it not better to ask women who do not play warhammer?
I do agree that warhammer probably have other things it should adress first, and I do not think it would generate a lot or revenue for GW and quite frankly I am not so conserned with GW's revenue.
I do agree that there are worse things in the world that needs to change, but how we represent ourselves through culture is a big part of who we are. I would like warhammer to be more female representative.
Edited in isn't in the first sentence. A dyslexcia mistake. :-(
Niiai wrote: Why do you keep asking women who play warhammer if they think it is a problem. While there is some merit in it, would it not better to ask women who do not play warhammer?
I do agree that warhammer probably have other things it should adress first, and I do not think it would generate a lot or revenue for GW and quite frankly I am not so conserned with GW's revenue.
I do agree that there are worse things in the world that needs to change, but how we represent ourselves through culture is a big part of who we are. I would like warhammer to be more female representative. I
No I said women who play it dont think its a problem, and women who dont play it simply dont care. (in my experience)
If GW didnt have their revenue then not only would we not bother talking about this (as it would be dead) you would also notice your business hurt by a loss of the No 1 game at the moment.
I can see what you are trying to do but I think its a bit wasteful of time and resources for anyone to commit too. Id rather more male guardsmen as GW ones are limited and lackluster, but I use 3rd party models to counter this. You should try do the same. look for some alternatives and stock them in your store. It may bring in those female would be players you missed out on.
Then there would be little to complain about as you are doing your bit and making a change.
Well I would like to keep the discussion away from how much the store I am working at is generating in income. I do not think I am allowed to discuss the income of the store. For me personaly I would probably pick up another game where I can paint models as I enjoy that part of the hobby a lot. As for the store I think we would survive the loss of GW finansialy, althought I would miss it. We are also selling fantasy/sci-fi books, comics, board games, card games, lego, roleplay games and other things. We would probably excnange that part of the store with another thing, porbably some sort of miniature game. Probably one of the many competative GW games that have a good representive of female models and is selling well, witch there are a few of.
As for the discussion in general. Why does this subject generate so much feelings? I do not net see people saying "not this AGAIN" when they discuss what primarc was the coolest or what not. What is it about this subject you object so much against being discussed on the forums?
Niiai wrote: Well I would like to keep the discussion away from how much the store I am working at is generating in income. I do not think I am allowed to discuss the income of the store. For me personaly I would probably pick up another game where I can paint models as I enjoy that part of the hobby a lot. As for the store I think we would survive the loss of GW finansialy, althought I would miss it. We are also selling fantasy/sci-fi books, comics, board games, card games, lego, roleplay games and other things. We would probably excnange that part of the store with another thing, porbably some sort of miniature game. Probably one of the many competative GW games that have a good representive of female models and is selling well, witch there are a few of.
As for the discussion in general. Why does this subject generate so much feelings? I do not net see people saying "not this AGAIN" when they discuss what primarc was the coolest or what not. What is it about this subject you object so much against being discussed on the forums?
I wasnt asking about that sort of thing dont worry, and people get sick of it because its a pain to hear about topics like this when nobody cares but a select few people who think its a problem. If I started a GW sucks thread id have people flocking to agree while a few say other wise. If I started a GW is sexist thread people will not flock there to agree but to state how its not a problem. It gives you a gauge on how much of a problem it really is at the end of the day.
Actualy I think it gives me a gauge of what people who play warhammer and attend these forums, while this would also reflect how much of a problem it is, it also says more about the people playing this game.
One thing is to not care about these topics any more than caring about the fluff and fan fiction based threads. This is fine.
But the times I have seen this come up some people acknowledge it but does not concern themselves with it. This is great. However the people who do not acknowledge and downright disagree and get agree for bringing it up bothers me. I am alarm for what demographic I am sharing my hobby with.
Niiai wrote: Actualy I think it gives me a gauge of what people who play warhammer and attend these forums, while this would also reflect how much of a problem it is, it also says more about the people playing this game.
One thing is to not care about these topics any more than caring about the fluff and fan fiction based threads. This is fine.
But the times I have seen this come up some people acknowledge it but does not concern themselves with it. This is great. However the people who do not acknowledge and downright disagree and get agree for bringing it up bothers me. I am alarm for what demographic I am sharing my hobby with.
Why though? I mean, I treat my fiance and all women just like anybody else. Im in no way sexist etc, I just dont see the point in changing models to be more inclusive of female physical form when it equates to nothing. When women start buying and getting into it things will change (much like video games has changed, even though its still male dominant, but the female audience is growing) just let it go on its due course and you will find after a few generations it'll get more female popular and things will go on like nothing happened.
Saying that nobody cares but a select few is rather silly I find, there is a lot written about it and to think it doesn't effect girls and younger girls much more is nieve.
For myself, I never talk about it at a club or a store. It's simply far to threatening in such a male dominated hobby.
But for me, as a female a lack of female models does cost GW money.
At the topic at hand, as before I don't think 40k needs female space marines, it could show something interesting about them, but in the end it's just a male power fantasy.
Men get to be cool and awsome and the asumed default.
Women are second best.
Actualy the division between female and male players is 50%/50% in the audience department. (Although it does wary between induvidual games.) You say games are male dominated, only the representation is male dominated, not the actual players.
I never expet Gw to do anything about this, but I would like to see it.
Niiai wrote: Actualy the division between female and male players is 50%/50% in the audience department. (Although it does wary between induvidual games.) You say games are male dominated, only the representation is male dominated, not the actual players.
I never expet Gw to do anything about this, but I would like to see it.
So all the women are playing in basements together alone? (ignore my humour its not meant to be offensive) It does vary from game to game so see below.
And to apple fox women get the most powerful positions available to them (commissars, storm troopers, inquisitors and so forth) and there are models to represent them. And saying its a power fantasy is kinda weird, I have never heard anyone talk about space marines that way. I would also call you a minority (in my opinion based on the area I am in) and if you look at fantasy (where a lot of female players are) there are female models to represent this. You could argue this is proof that female models attract females but I think its more females on average prefer fantasy over sci fi and as a result many female models where added as a result. When women start to play 40k in numbers then female models will come just like in fantasy and especially in RPG models (which there are a lot of models that are female) because there are a lot of women who do role plays. Its all to do with target audiences and for 40k women arent large enough of a group to make box sets for specifically.
Niiai wrote: I never expet Gw to do anything about this, but I would like to see it.
I would only like to see it if it doesn't come across as forced PCness.
Personally, what I'd like to see, if women get in to table top gaming more, I'd like to see more women getting in to the design phase of games and create what THEY want to see rather than trying to force someone to come up with what they think someone else wants to see. That's what I think of the videogame industry and I think the same is true of the table top scene as well.
Niiai wrote: I never expet Gw to do anything about this, but I would like to see it.
I would only like to see it if it doesn't come across as forced PCness.
Personally, what I'd like to see, if women get in to table top gaming more, I'd like to see more women getting in to the design phase of games and create what THEY want to see rather than trying to force someone to come up with what they think someone else wants to see. That's what I think of the videogame industry and I think the same is true of the table top scene as well.
That actually is a much more reasonable way of doing it. I would be all for that as it makes sense and doesnt feel crammed in as a desperate attempt to include people sorta thing. Sums it up well and I dont think people would complain if they did that.
EXCEPT that they dont do that to their main target audience so id be annoyed at the exception made but it would be a start.
Niiai wrote: I never expet Gw to do anything about this, but I would like to see it.
I would only like to see it if it doesn't come across as forced PCness.
Personally, what I'd like to see, if women get in to table top gaming more, I'd like to see more women getting in to the design phase of games and create what THEY want to see rather than trying to force someone to come up with what they think someone else wants to see. That's what I think of the videogame industry and I think the same is true of the table top scene as well.
That actually is a much more reasonable way of doing it. I would be all for that as it makes sense and doesnt feel crammed in as a desperate attempt to include people sorta thing. Sums it up well and I dont think people would complain if they did that.
EXCEPT that they dont do that to their main target audience so id be annoyed at the exception made but it would be a start.
Yeah, I was going to mention that GW already have issues with a skewed vision but didn't want to get in to that discussion, LOL.
I think the best thing is when people create what they want to create, what is their own vision, and then like minded people can enjoy it. It's often obvious (and not in a good way) when someone is trying to create a product they obviously don't have vision for but are trying to concoct a vision to appeal to someone else.
Niiai wrote: Actualy the division between female and male players is 50%/50% in the audience department. (Although it does wary between induvidual games.) You say games are male dominated, only the representation is male dominated, not the actual players.
I never expet Gw to do anything about this, but I would like to see it.
So all the women are playing in basements together alone? (ignore my humour its not meant to be offensive) It does vary from game to game so see below.
And to apple fox women get the most powerful positions available to them (commissars, storm troopers, inquisitors and so forth) and there are models to represent them. And saying its a power fantasy is kinda weird, I have never heard anyone talk about space marines that way. I would also call you a minority (in my opinion based on the area I am in) and if you look at fantasy (where a lot of female players are) there are female models to represent this. You could argue this is proof that female models attract females but I think its more females on average prefer fantasy over sci fi and as a result many female models where added as a result. When women start to play 40k in numbers then female models will come just like in fantasy and especially in RPG models (which there are a lot of models that are female) because there are a lot of women who do role plays. Its all to do with target audiences and for 40k women arent large enough of a group to make box sets for specifically.
There is still far to little female representation in 40k, fantasy also has issues with this. And I do think it makes a difference with other games.
GW is just behind the times. And I think it's getting less likly that girls will get into GW now, in a sense they may have lost that market :p
When other games are providing gender diversity in such a great way comparatively now.
No other major system played here has ever made me go, which faction can I play so I can get a single female model in it.
Realy both eldar and IG needs more diversity, and it couldn't hurt GW to put some females in none form fitting armor. As far as I can off my head. There is a single one D:
Representation means meaningfull representation on the table.
Many people are missing the point- it's toy soldiers. It's dolls playing at war. It's pure fantasy, there is 0% science in any of this, so any argument that mentions genetics or technology is more than a bit pointless. If they release a toy soldier with a female head, cool beans. I think there'd be a market for it, personally, and that it would widen participation. If female heads aren't to your taste in toy soldiers, well cool beans too, fortunately for you no one is forced to use particular toy soldiers if they don't like them.
Mind you, I did not talk about rules or equipment.
I talked about personal skill in fluff.
SoF and AoFs are fluff too.
...And?
That is a mental thing. I was talking about combat skill.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and arguing genetics to prove why Femarines would work is a moot point. Marines are created using science that we don't understand. For all we know, that Y chromosome might be very important indeed, even if it is rather unimportant to us.
Swastakowey wrote: Then why not promote the idea of pig marines or monkey marines while you are at it.
Of course we arent too different genetically, we still need to mate, we still have 2 legs, 10 fingers, hair and so forth. We are all mostly the same with enough minor differences to be hugely noticeable. That does not mean that a "minor difference" is nothing in terms of genetics. Its huge, thats why assuming (and you are assuming, by the way) that women and men react to hormones in the same manner is a huge flaw in the argument. Because we dont. A girl wanted to be a boy when I was kid, from age 13 she took pills to make her more "boy like", guess what, she didnt naturally grow buff like the boys did, her voice only wen slightly deeper after she spent years practicing yo lower it and so on, but more importantly he physical make up didnt change. If she stopped taking the pills shed very quickly turn back to a typical everyday girl.
We share hormones yes but we react differently and one of the hormones is more prominent in each gender.
Genders are different, thats fine, and yes they could probably find a way to make female marines, but as it stands currently it is not possible as women lack the basics to become one before any change happens.
Boys do not naturally 'grow buff', they have to work at it. So do girls. The same equally applies to transboys and cisboys equally.
If this boy you knew when you were younger was not a transperson, he would never have been given access to hormone pills. Referring to him as a girl despite his evident diagnosis is not only disrespectful, it's downright insulting to people who have to go through the horror that is gender dysphoria.
You're basically saying he's not a real boy, he's just pretending. How would you like it if someone told you that you weren't really straight, you were just pretending to like girls? (or whatever variant actually applies to you. I don't know you, so I went with the default assumptions).
Oh, and arguing genetics to prove why Femarines would work is a moot point. Marines are created using science that we don't understand. For all we know, that Y chromosome might be very important indeed, even if it is rather unimportant to us.
One of the few actually intelligent posts in this horrible thread.
The fluff is (thankfully) not specific enough to allow us to discuss whether female Space Marines would be possible or not. Most of the arguments I've read here are based on nothing more than personal opinion/bias.
Now there are some good RL reasons why GW does not have female SM. If we really have to discuss this issue, let us focus on those instead of the fluff.
I especially think that making actual female Space Marine models (totally ignoring the fluff issue for this point) is more work than reward, unless you want them to be oversexed. Which works against female players even worse, I think.
Look at the female Guardian models for Eldar. If you use the female torsos (which are very tastefully proportioned, I think) with the helmeted heads, you literally have to search through the squad to find the ones that have breasts. Which really strikes me as the perfect representation of female figures in that army. Other than if possible less-armored figures like Warlocks gained female models, it is very hard for a layman to pick out the female models at tabletop inspection distance. Even Howling Banshees are the same way unless you over-emphasize the breasts.
Space Marines would be the same way. Unless you give them "huge bewbs" on their armor, they would really be nothing more than throwing a bone in the fluff to a very small minority of players of that faction, with little to no payoff on the side of the miniatures for those players to be proud of.
It would be far and above better served to make more female models for the Imperial Guard, where the effect could actually be seen and appreciated when looking at the models.
Totaly agree , no idea why people think that female space marines would have to look like some sort of roid monsters. There is more then enough very fit females , that could be scaled up .
Furyou Miko wrote:Boys do not naturally 'grow buff', they have to work at it. So do girls. The same equally applies to transboys and cisboys equally.
Well they kind of do. I have 3 older sisters, as a teenager I had health problems and ended up doing almost no exercise, sports, etc. My sisters weren't body builders or anything, but they all played sports and went to the gym regularly. I could still beat them in an arm wrestle or move heavier furniture or punch a bag harder (though they were a million times fitter and could just run away if they wanted ).
God In Action wrote:Many people are missing the point- it's toy soldiers. It's dolls playing at war. It's pure fantasy, there is 0% science in any of this, so any argument that mentions genetics or technology is more than a bit pointless.
Yeah, it's science fiction, they can do whatever they want. But that doesn't mean they have to. It swings both ways. It's a universe created in someone's (or a group's) mind, if they don't want to include female marines because they either don't want to change the aesthetic, don't want to have uber-buff-dude-like-females or simply prefer the idea of a bit group of guys fighting side by side, that's up to them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Makumba wrote: Totaly agree , no idea why people think that female space marines would have to look like some sort of roid monsters. There is more then enough very fit females , that could be scaled up .
Personally I don't want feminine looking marines. I like the big buff aesthetic. You could have big buff females... that looked exactly like the male ones, that wouldn't really bother me... it also wouldn't require any new models, just call the current marines girly names, lol. Just don't particularly want slender feminine looking marines.
Now, if someone else wants them, sure, go for it, I'm not going to refuse to play against you because of it, if you come in to my club with such and army I won't spend any time what so ever arguing that they shouldn't exist. Your own army is your own fantasy world as far as I'm concerned and if they look cool, I will compliment you on it to.
But since I personally don't want them, I can't say I want them mixed in to a box of my big buff marines. If they were a separate box, ok, whatever, but again, since I personally don't want them, there's a heap of things I'd rather see GW do first. If GW made plastic DKoK I'd wet myself with excitement, I want that approximately a million times more than femarines.
The thread has moved on a bit, but I feel compelled to explain some things about the way sex and gender (which is a physical part of the brain with social convention attached, rather than purely a social construct) actually work, as most people in here seem to have no idea.
The Y chromosome's input into developing as a man is contained almost entirely within the SRY gene, which, when expressed properly causes the gonads to develop as testes. After that the Y chromosome is pretty much done. Sometimes someone with 2 X chromosomes will have an SRY gene that expresses itself on one of the X's. These people grow up male, and unless they get checked, may never know that they have 2 x chromosomes.
After the testes develop, they pretty much take over the job of masculinizing, the rest of the body. (Note: default is female, and without intervention, both genitals and brain will develop as female.) Assuming things go right, the testosterone created by the body will cause the labia to fuse and clitoris to develop into a penis (everyone starts off with female genitals) after the genitals differentiate, the brain goes through a similar process. The wrong hormones levels or hormone sensitivity at the wrong place at the wrong time can either leave someone with an Intersex condition (which happens about 1% of the time) or someone with a brain that doesn't match their body either partially or completely switched (about 0.5% of the time) people with intersex brains are typically known as trans people.
Caught early, trans men (male brain, appear female) can take testosterone which overrides estrogen and have an entirely male puberty, never developing breasts or starting periods. The reverse is true for trans women (not starting periods, but rest of the development is identical). It should be noted that in today's society many pre-transition trans women join the military in an attempt to 'man up' and suppress their urge to be female and/or feminine.
Why is this relevant? A few reasons. The first is that it means that hormone therapy, especially early, can entirely override the body's inherent biology, two it shows that the presence of an x chromosome doesn't interfere with masculine development on several levels. This essentially means that barring women from the Marines because of hormones of genetics is not only nonsense, but has no basis in reality (which is evidence of the 'no-gurls allowed' mentality so prevalent in much of gaming culture). It has larger implications though, in that it suggests that ~5000 space marines are already female (as gender trumps sex), in spite of what they look like.
The process of turning someone into a Space Marine probably lacks the massive levels of testosterone that most people assume, some space steroid is more likely, as testosterone isn't powerful enough to do the things needed for even a fraction of what marines are capable of. As it's a magical space steroid, there is no reason that it should have the masculinizing effects of testosterone, and female recruits could continue to appear feminine, never developing male bone structures in the face, or growing a beard, or developing a deep voice. Or the space steroid could be just as masculinizing, and then no new models would have to be created.
Do I think female Space Marines should be created? Not necessarily. Do I think that the lack of decent female models in the 40k product line hurts GW? Almost certainly. By fluff 50% of Cadians should be female. There are zero Cadian females. IG is the perfect place for female models, as they are supposed to be humanity holding the line. Instead female IG are super rare and scantily clad.
Weight lifter Samantha Wright could be what a feminine Space Marine might look like:
Weight lifter Samantha Wright could be what a feminine Space Marine might look like:
Spoiler:
The rest of your post seemed reasonable, but I feel the need to repeat that Marines are based on science we do not understand. What pitiful knowledge we have today is irrelevant in the context of 40K genetics.
Also, I doubt that your picture is accurate. A female Marine would be far more bulky and muscular.
Paimon wrote: The thread has moved on a bit, but I feel compelled to explain some things about the way sex and gender (which is a physical part of the brain with social convention attached, rather than purely a social construct) actually work, as most people in here seem to have no idea.
The Y chromosome's input into developing as a man is contained almost entirely within the SRY gene, which, when expressed properly causes the gonads to develop as testes. After that the Y chromosome is pretty much done. Sometimes someone with 2 X chromosomes will have an SRY gene that expresses itself on one of the X's. These people grow up male, and unless they get checked, may never know that they have 2 x chromosomes.
After the testes develop, they pretty much take over the job of masculinizing, the rest of the body. (Note: default is female, and without intervention, both genitals and brain will develop as female.) Assuming things go right, the testosterone created by the body will cause the labia to fuse and clitoris to develop into a penis (everyone starts off with female genitals) after the genitals differentiate, the brain goes through a similar process. The wrong hormones levels or hormone sensitivity at the wrong place at the wrong time can either leave someone with an Intersex condition (which happens about 1% of the time) or someone with a brain that doesn't match their body either partially or completely switched (about 0.5% of the time) people with intersex brains are typically known as trans people.
Caught early, trans men (male brain, appear female) can take testosterone which overrides estrogen and have an entirely male puberty, never developing breasts or starting periods. The reverse is true for trans women (not starting periods, but rest of the development is identical). It should be noted that in today's society many pre-transition trans women join the military in an attempt to 'man up' and suppress their urge to be female and/or feminine.
Why is this relevant? A few reasons. The first is that it means that hormone therapy, especially early, can entirely override the body's inherent biology, two it shows that the presence of an x chromosome doesn't interfere with masculine development on several levels. This essentially means that barring women from the Marines because of hormones of genetics is not only nonsense, but has no basis in reality (which is evidence of the 'no-gurls allowed' mentality so prevalent in much of gaming culture). It has larger implications though, in that it suggests that ~5000 space marines are already female (as gender trumps sex), in spite of what they look like.
The process of turning someone into a Space Marine probably lacks the massive levels of testosterone that most people assume, some space steroid is more likely, as testosterone isn't powerful enough to do the things needed for even a fraction of what marines are capable of. As it's a magical space steroid, there is no reason that it should have the masculinizing effects of testosterone, and female recruits could continue to appear feminine, never developing male bone structures in the face, or growing a beard, or developing a deep voice. Or the space steroid could be just as masculinizing, and then no new models would have to be created.
Do I think female Space Marines should be created? Not necessarily. Do I think that the lack of decent female models in the 40k product line hurts GW? Almost certainly. By fluff 50% of Cadians should be female. There are zero Cadian females. IG is the perfect place for female models, as they are supposed to be humanity holding the line. Instead female IG are super rare and scantily clad.
Weight lifter Samantha Wright could be what a feminine Space Marine might look like:
Spoiler:
I don't think you really changed the discussion other than adding some more technical reasons for things. That is, you could...
1. have big buff females that look like dudes anyway
2. have some magic space juju that makes them strong without making them big and man-like.
3. You could also just say Power Armour, being powered and all, could do all the heavy lifting so the physique of the wearer is irrelevant (though there's rules-based reasons for not doing that, some Space Marines are S5 due to their size and strength).
I personally don't like options 2 and 3, but I'm not going to hang someone who does.
Also, Samantha Wright, I'm sure she's very strong for her height, weight and being female, but googling what she can lift, I think that's still only average or slightly above average for a 6' male. So you need plenty of that Space Juju to defy physics, I guess you could say that in females it makes their bones and muscles super dense so they are equally strong without being as large... personally I don't like that solution. But hey, if you do like that solution, I won't stop you from rolling with it.... still won't make me want GW to make femarines though
Weight lifter Samantha Wright could be what a feminine Space Marine might look like:
Spoiler:
A cute athlete for sure, and easily outdoes a lazy old man like me. But she's a light-weight compared to the big girls in that sport. When you see the top female weight classes competing it's a lot harder to decide if it's a woman you're looking at.
The whole point of my post was that femarines clearly don't exist because GW doesn't want them to exist, and no amount of pseudo-sciencey hand waving can prove otherwise. The current fan base is fine with that in spite of the unfortunate implications. Female Guard would go a long way to assuaging the sting of obvious sexism, but that's a whole different thread.
Paimon wrote: The whole point of my post was that femarines clearly don't exist because GW doesn't want them to exist, and no amount of pseudo-sciencey hand waving can prove otherwise. The current fan base is fine with that in spite of the unfortunate implications. Female Guard would go a long way to assuaging the sting of obvious sexism, but that's a whole different thread.
Some one actually answered the original question! Thank you!
BrotherHaraldus wrote: And who is best at stealth, or leaping off a speeding Valkyrie without ending up face down in the mud?
In order to gain something, you need to lose something.
A difference I see here is that Sisters could also do those things, just perhaps not as well as a Stormtrooper, as its not a focus of their training. But AoFs and the SoF are things unique to the Sisters, and quite potent skills to apply on the battlefield
BrotherHaraldus wrote: And who is best at stealth, or leaping off a speeding Valkyrie without ending up face down in the mud?
In order to gain something, you need to lose something.
A difference I see here is that Sisters could also do those things, just perhaps not as well as a Stormtrooper, as its not a focus of their training. But AoFs and the SoF are things unique to the Sisters, and quite potent skills to apply on the battlefield
Well, I'd imagine Sisters could barely sneak at all. They likely recieve 0 training in it (What's the point when you have Laud Hailers and stuff?), PA is supposedly noisy unless you are specialists like Raven Guard, and all this assumes SoB would ever want to sneak in the first place.
If a Battle Sister squad reach a squadron of renegade Armoured Sentinels with Plasma Cannons, for example (Or Autocannons, or whatever) Stormtroopers would more likely do the job better.
AoF and SoF are useful but does not make them 'pinnacle of human soldiery', the Imperium is too large has too much variety to make such a blanket assumption.
I swear, if you want to know what the relationship between the Astartes and the Sororitas is, just look at Melissia and Brother Haraldus. If you two weren't halfway across the world, I'd swear you really were siblings.
I swear, if you want to know what the relationship between the Astartes and the Sororitas is, just look at Melissia and Brother Haraldus. If you two weren't halfway across the world, I'd swear you really were siblings.
Sometimes I don't know myself if Melissia is serious or just trolling, but in the end, it doesn't really matter and I find our discussions enjoyable. I suppose this 'not-sure-if-trolling-but-I'll-bite' attitude is a healthy one, and I have yet to succumb to the corruption of actual flaming.
There are so many holes to poke in them posts. I love it.
If someone is your enemy and friend, then who is your enemy's enemy and is the enemy's enemy your friend?
BrotherHaraldus wrote: Well, I'd imagine Sisters could barely sneak at all. They likely recieve 0 training in it (What's the point when you have Laud Hailers and stuff?), PA is supposedly noisy unless you are specialists like Raven Guard, and all this assumes SoB would ever want to sneak in the first place.
If a Battle Sister squad reach a squadron of renegade Armoured Sentinels with Plasma Cannons, for example (Or Autocannons, or whatever) Stormtroopers would more likely do the job better.
Sure, I'm not saying that the Sisters are superior in all areas. Just that, it's my view that they're the best overall when it comes to human soldiers.
One could view the scouting rule of the Dominions as stealth of a sort, but the fluff seems to just talk about how Dominions aggressively charge at the enemy to shoot them, so perhaps not.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: AoF and SoF are useful but does not make them 'pinnacle of human soldiery', the Imperium is too large has too much variety to make such a blanket assumption.
Wouldn't we have heard of any human forces that were unquestionably superior to both the SoB and Stormtroopers? Both of these groups are coming from the Schola, the place where the Imperium's best are trained. I don't know of any other human forces that go beyond that. But anyway, I would say that AoFs and SoFs put them on top because they're augmenting already top-tier training (AS codex notes that the Sisters are "trained to the peak of human ability").
BrotherHaraldus wrote: Well, I'd imagine Sisters could barely sneak at all. They likely recieve 0 training in it (What's the point when you have Laud Hailers and stuff?), PA is supposedly noisy unless you are specialists like Raven Guard, and all this assumes SoB would ever want to sneak in the first place.
If a Battle Sister squad reach a squadron of renegade Armoured Sentinels with Plasma Cannons, for example (Or Autocannons, or whatever) Stormtroopers would more likely do the job better.
Sure, I'm not saying that the Sisters are superior in all areas. Just that, it's my view that they're the best overall when it comes to human soldiers.
One could view the scouting rule of the Dominions as stealth of a sort, but the fluff seems to just talk about how Dominions aggressively charge at the enemy to shoot them, so perhaps not.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: AoF and SoF are useful but does not make them 'pinnacle of human soldiery', the Imperium is too large has too much variety to make such a blanket assumption.
Wouldn't we have heard of any human forces that were unquestionably superior to both the SoB and Stormtroopers? Both of these groups are coming from the Schola, the place where the Imperium's best are trained. I don't know of any other human forces that go beyond that. But anyway, I would say that AoFs and SoFs put them on top because they're augmenting already top-tier training (AS codex notes that the Sisters are "trained to the peak of human ability").
The whole thing about who is the 'best human soldiers' is not a big deal anyway to me. ^^ I'll happily concede the point.
I can't see how a female Astertes would be anything like a modern female weightlifter. If male Space marines are turned into large hulking beings compared to a normal human male, then females would logically follow the same comparison when compared to a normal human female. They would be just as much a caricature of the human body
It's true, actual good soldiers are people that are athletic enough to work hard manual labor for 20 hours a day and then hike 50 miles the next. Physical Fitness is infinitely more important than raw strength in fighting a war. Which means that the ridiculous hulking caricatures that are the marines are probably not much more effective than the Sisters anyways. I'd be willing to bet that with access to the Black Carapace and Terminator Armor they'd be nearly indistinguishable, in spite of the nonsense augments that the Marines are implanted with.
Paimon wrote: It's true, actual good soldiers are people that are athletic enough to work hard manual labor for 20 hours a day and then hike 50 miles the next. Physical Fitness is infinitely more important than raw strength in fighting a war. Which means that the ridiculous hulking caricatures that are the marines are probably not much more effective than the Sisters anyways. I'd be willing to bet that with access to the Black Carapace and Terminator Armor they'd be nearly indistinguishable, in spite of the nonsense augments that the Marines are implanted with.
To be fair, strength is more important for Marines than for today's soldiers. 40K is science fantasy, hence it ends up in melee quite often, where strength is very useful especially when you are tough (And armoured) enough to actually shrug off close range small arms fire.
Supposedly the +1 strength that the Marines have is from their augments rather than their suits, but that seems like obvious propaganda to me. If anyone could be as strong as a marine with power armor, the Marines wouldn't seem as special, so they probably fib quite a bit with regards to what they are capable of compared with their suits. Even regular power armor adds some strength, just not enough to bump up the number to whatever arbitrary difference between 3 and 4 is.
True. Modern soldiers would need more body strength if they were regularly needed to use chainswords, or the other actions that represent 40K close combat. Power armor probably doesn't need to work as hard if it isn't amplifying body strength as much, or maybe even actually works better in such circumstances, if any reality at all can be applied to 40K physics (which is to say not much).
Given the lightweight future materials that the weapons are made out of, I'd be surprised if chainswords were much heavier than regular swords, and, balanced at the hilt, with power assisted cutting, they probably wouldn't need as much strength as a knight of old would have required trying to pierce plate.
Paimon wrote: Given the lightweight future materials that the weapons are made out of, I'd be surprised if chainswords were much heavier than regular swords, and, balanced at the hilt, with power assisted cutting, they probably wouldn't need as much strength as a knight of old would have required trying to pierce plate.
Considering that knights of old never pierced plate in general, and aimed at the weaker sections in between. That didn't matter unless they were using mauls or the various 'hammer/mace' sort of style weapon (Which directed weapon impact through the armor).
However considering that trying to cut through an Ork Nob or some serious Necron Necrodemis, which WOULD be like cutting through plate...
Yeah yeah, they actually whacked at each other until one could knock the other over and stab them in the eye. Or the smashed joints with maces so that the limb couldn't move right with the armor all bent up, or they used the dull part of the blade as a handle to spread their hands apart and use the sword as a spike to attack seams in the plate.
The point was armor was so much better than weapons that for a while combat was rather strength intensive, though more about endurance.
Paimon wrote: Supposedly the +1 strength that the Marines have is from their augments rather than their suits, but that seems like obvious propaganda to me.
Scouts have S4 too so it's not propaganda, it's pretty much fact.
Makumba wrote: So does an ogryn and its arm is the size of a scouts torso.
Hive Warriors are str 4 and in fluff they turn over tanks .
Ogyrn are S5 without furious charge. S6 with.
They are also T5 with 3 base attacks. Needless to say where Nork actually carried a Chimera full of medicine to save his commander isn't so farfetched.
Also it's not that hard to turn over tanks, if what I seen is true half the time, people have lifted cars under extreme duress (Though the muscles ripped after).
BrotherHaraldus wrote: The strength also reduces the effect of the massive Astartes Bolter's kickback
Whether or not that even exists is not really confirmed.
Well... It's mostly sourced to things like Dark Heresy. The thing with RPGs is that some accept them and some not and it can get rather messy rather fast.
But I reason that they use bigger weapons because, they themselves and their armour are bigger than Sororitas, and it would be sort of a waste if their ranged damage output was equal (Other than the difference in marksmanship skills, and stronger hands & arms making a more stable firing platform) when Astartes are physically capable of carrying bigger guns? It'd be sorta like putting a Heavy Stubber as the turret weapon of a Leman Russ, as a (admittedly somewhat hyperbolic) comparison. Sure, they survive enemy fire better and get better damage output that way, but still.
But then, that is just my own reason and there is no real official fluff that clarifies it to be one way or another.
I think there may be some fluff that talks about the armour and/or weapons of SoB and Marines being equal... But that fluff is so old so I am taking it with a pinch of salt.
Let's get some on in there. Ogryn females for equality there, I mean they grew up in the same settings, they should be about right when it comes to bashing skulls in for the Emperor.
I think there may be some fluff that talks about the armour and/or weapons of SoB and Marines being equal... But that fluff is so old so I am taking it with a pinch of salt.
Oh, and Ogryns are S5.
It's in the Sisters' codex.
Also, I just had that argument on the Bolter and Chainsword last week, and it pretty much devolved into me giving sources and citations, and the Marine fanboys telling me I was attacking them personally and that Marines had better stuff and had to win the argument because it was the B&C.
Let's get some on in there. Ogryn females for equality there, I mean they grew up in the same settings, they should be about right when it comes to bashing skulls in for the Emperor.
Ogryns are about as human as Astartes too, so it even has relevance.
I think there may be some fluff that talks about the armour and/or weapons of SoB and Marines being equal... But that fluff is so old so I am taking it with a pinch of salt.
Oh, and Ogryns are S5.
It's in the Sisters' codex.
Also, I just had that argument on the Bolter and Chainsword last week, and it pretty much devolved into me giving sources and citations, and the Marine fanboys telling me I was attacking them personally and that Marines had better stuff and had to win the argument because it was the B&C.
Ehm... Flamebait anecdote?
And fair enough... I do not have the SoB codex, but then, I suspect it might a bit of codex bias having sneaked its way in there.
But then, GW has a tendency of shattering logic with a quick quote like that.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: I think there may be some fluff that talks about the armour and/or weapons of SoB and Marines being equal... But that fluff is so old so I am taking it with a pinch of salt.
The Witch Hunters codex says that SoB armour equally protective as Marine armour, but lacks some of the additional functions. But then, we've had that conversation before.
As for the bolters, I don't think there's been an outright answer on that. What I do know it that the Witch Hunters codex calls Sororitas the Godwyn-De'az Pattern bolter superior to nearly all other bolter types, and the AS codex says that the SoB get the best wargear the Imperium has to offer. So the SoB bolter may or may not be as effective as the Astartes bolter, but it's still one of the best bolters out there.
As for older sources, I'd say that you only really need to apply that RT, since it was quite different in fluff and tone. From 2E onwards, I think you're pretty safe to accept studio fluff unless a subsequent studio publication retcons it. I'd also say that this applies especially to the SoB, since their fluff hasn't ben as developed as others, since their last two codexes were a WD and then a Digital Codex which recycled a lot of fluff.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: And fair enough... I do not have the SoB codex, but then, I suspect it might a bit of codex bias having sneaked its way in there.
Oh course most codexes talk up their respective armies, but I think it's better if we avoid trying to handwave things away as bias or propaganda too much. Especially when it's referring to more tangible things like equipment and such.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: I think there may be some fluff that talks about the armour and/or weapons of SoB and Marines being equal... But that fluff is so old so I am taking it with a pinch of salt.
The Witch Hunters codex says that SoB armour equally protective as Marine armour, but lacks some of the additional functions. But then, we've had that conversation before.
As for the bolters, I don't think there's been an outright answer on that. What I do know it that the Witch Hunters codex calls Sororitas the Godwyn-De'az Pattern bolter superior to nearly all other bolter types, and the AS codex says that the SoB get the best wargear the Imperium has to offer. So the SoB bolter may or may not be as effective as the Astartes bolter, but it's still one of the best bolters out there.
As for older sources, I'd say that you only really need to apply that RT, since it was quite different in fluff and tone. From 2E onwards, I think you're pretty safe to accept studio fluff unless a subsequent studio publication retcons it. I'd also say that this applies especially to the SoB, since their fluff hasn't ben as developed as others, since their last two codexes were a WD and then a Digital Codex which recycled a lot of fluff.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: And fair enough... I do not have the SoB codex, but then, I suspect it might a bit of codex bias having sneaked its way in there.
Oh course most codexes talk up their respective armies, but I think it's better if we avoid trying to handwave things away as bias or propaganda too much. Especially when it's referring to more tangible things like equipment and such.
Well, it might be a good bolter, but it might still be smaller.
I agree that handwaving it might be excessive, but it is something to keep in mind. This is not 100% reliable.
As for age, I remain with my stance that it loses reliability the older it gets. There were still a lot of crazy stuff in 2nd ed.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: I think there may be some fluff that talks about the armour and/or weapons of SoB and Marines being equal... But that fluff is so old so I am taking it with a pinch of salt.
The Witch Hunters codex says that SoB armour equally protective as Marine armour, but lacks some of the additional functions. But then, we've had that conversation before.
As for the bolters, I don't think there's been an outright answer on that. What I do know it that the Witch Hunters codex calls Sororitas the Godwyn-De'az Pattern bolter superior to nearly all other bolter types, and the AS codex says that the SoB get the best wargear the Imperium has to offer. So the SoB bolter may or may not be as effective as the Astartes bolter, but it's still one of the best bolters out there.
As for older sources, I'd say that you only really need to apply that RT, since it was quite different in fluff and tone. From 2E onwards, I think you're pretty safe to accept studio fluff unless a subsequent studio publication retcons it. I'd also say that this applies especially to the SoB, since their fluff hasn't ben as developed as others, since their last two codexes were a WD and then a Digital Codex which recycled a lot of fluff.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: And fair enough... I do not have the SoB codex, but then, I suspect it might a bit of codex bias having sneaked its way in there.
Oh course most codexes talk up their respective armies, but I think it's better if we avoid trying to handwave things away as bias or propaganda too much. Especially when it's referring to more tangible things like equipment and such.
I've always found it hilarious how the Space Marine Codex actually doesn't oversell Space Marines compared to their fluff like with the other factions. The worst is probably Chaos, claiming the Chaos Gods are omnipotent, although with Chaos, nobody really has a clear idea on their power.
Well, both forces have S4 Bolters and PA with a 3+ save - but as stats are only 1-10 and saves 2-6 it could be one or the other is on the lower end of that particular number. Same as a normal IG soldier and an Ork boy both have S3 while the ork is considerably bulkier and noted for his brute strength.
Well, it might be a good bolter, but it might still be smaller.
I agree that handwaving it might be excessive, but it is something to keep in mind. This is not 100% reliable.
As for age, I remain with my stance that it loses reliability the older it gets. There were still a lot of crazy stuff in 2nd ed.
Smaller, but explicitly the same caliber - from which we can infer that Marine gear is bulked up to fit in their hands. Old bolters still look silly-small though. The 2e box set push-fit Marines were only a little smaller than the current plastic Marines, but their bolters look more like bolt pistols held two-handed!
Spetulhu wrote: Well, both forces have S4 Bolters and PA with a 3+ save - but as stats are only 1-10 and saves 2-6 it could be one or the other is on the lower end of that particular number. Same as a normal IG soldier and an Ork boy both have S3 while the ork is considerably bulkier and noted for his brute strength.
Game mechanics should be taken with at least fifty pinches of salt.
Otherwise, you are free to explain why Straken has magical bionics that make him stronger than a Warboss while other equally augmetic characters are not.
Or how a Grot parries every third attack made by the Avatar of Khaine.
Or, indeed, how the Orks are worse at aim than most other races, yet are just as capable of hitting aircraft...
And so on, I can make like a hundred examples like this.
Just going to add this, since I edited it into my previous post while you were replying;
- from which we can infer that Marine gear is bulked up to fit in their hands. Old bolters still look silly-small though. The 2e box set push-fit Marines were only a little smaller than the current plastic Marines, but their bolters look more like bolt pistols held two-handed!
Furyou Miko wrote: Just going to add this, since I edited it into my previous post while you were replying;
- from which we can infer that Marine gear is bulked up to fit in their hands. Old bolters still look silly-small though. The 2e box set push-fit Marines were only a little smaller than the current plastic Marines, but their bolters look more like bolt pistols held two-handed!
It's a commonly known fact that the scale in 40K is all the way to hell and back. I see Guardsmen models taller than Space Marines and you try to fit 10 Marines, even non-truescaled ones, inside of a Rhino!
I have my own amusing little conceits, and Marines going into battle armed with RPGs the relative size of submachineguns is one of them. What can I say? I like silly.
You can shoot bolts from a shotgun (see Necromunda) so really, the boltgun itself isn't that special, it is the bolt round itself that is important. Even in Inquisitor where we had different types of boltgun there was no distinction made for an Astartes scale weapon.
If I were to go through the background then making Astartes gear unique to them and virtually unusable by anyone other than them is the first thing I would correct.
For that matter, in DoWII, the scaled Marines look quite nice. They do not quite match my headcanon, but they still look quite nice. (But I won't scare you with the headcanon, it's a mess of fangirlness and my love for OP things, and won't impress anyone)
Here, a size comparison of a DoWII Plague Marine, a Plague Champion to be specific, and a big, strong Catachan Devil.
To insert a little bit of real life stuff in the bolter discussion;
A heavier weapon leads to less felt recoil. If we assume that all the bolters with the same profile fire the same projectile using the same propellant as they have identical performance;
we can suggest that it's less that the marine bolter is bigger and more powerful; It's that the sub-marine bolters (glub!) have lighter and smaller build around their workings to be operated by smaller people, making their felt recoil and stability far, FAR harder to control.
On the flipside a very heavy weapon is also harder to control and hold up in general. Lower strength units would find it much harder to hold up a bolter.
I think there may be some fluff that talks about the armour and/or weapons of SoB and Marines being equal... But that fluff is so old so I am taking it with a pinch of salt.
Oh, and Ogryns are S5.
It's in the Sisters' codex.
Also, I just had that argument on the Bolter and Chainsword last week, and it pretty much devolved into me giving sources and citations, and the Marine fanboys telling me I was attacking them personally and that Marines had better stuff and had to win the argument because it was the B&C.
Let's get some on in there. Ogryn females for equality there, I mean they grew up in the same settings, they should be about right when it comes to bashing skulls in for the Emperor.
Ogryns are about as human as Astartes too, so it even has relevance.
Er actually, not about as human. They are exactly humans who have grown up in certain low gravity (or high gravity, forget) worlds.
Astartes are so full of artificial things, specifically grown organs, they eat brains and gain knowledge, spit acid and other weird things.
Ogryns just grew up on planets with specific gravity that changed them over time.
... No, Ogryns are abhumans, like Ratlings, Squats and Navigators.
They are stable, true-breeding mutants.
Low gravity worlds would produce humans more the shape of Eldar - tall and skinny. High gravity worlds would produce humans more the shape of Squats - short and broad. Ogryns suit neither of these profiles.
I swear, if you want to know what the relationship between the Astartes and the Sororitas is, just look at Melissia and Brother Haraldus. If you two weren't halfway across the world, I'd swear you really were siblings.
Sometimes I don't know myself if Melissia is serious or just trolling, but in the end, it doesn't really matter and I find our discussions enjoyable. I suppose this 'not-sure-if-trolling-but-I'll-bite' attitude is a healthy one, and I have yet to succumb to the corruption of actual flaming.
There are so many holes to poke in them posts. I love it.
If someone is your enemy and friend, then who is your enemy's enemy and is the enemy's enemy your friend?
Furyou Miko wrote: ... No, Ogryns are abhumans, like Ratlings, Squats and Navigators.
They are stable, true-breeding mutants.
Low gravity worlds would produce humans more the shape of Eldar - tall and skinny. High gravity worlds would produce humans more the shape of Squats - short and broad. Ogryns suit neither of these profiles.
This. High gravity does not make you grow massive.
Furyou Miko wrote: ... No, Ogryns are abhumans, like Ratlings, Squats and Navigators.
They are stable, true-breeding mutants.
Low gravity worlds would produce humans more the shape of Eldar - tall and skinny. High gravity worlds would produce humans more the shape of Squats - short and broad. Ogryns suit neither of these profiles.
This. High gravity does not make you grow massive.
Whoops, it's been a while since I checked their fluff (Despite wanting to add some to my CSM army so badly, but they are worse then possessed!)
I think there may be some fluff that talks about the armour and/or weapons of SoB and Marines being equal... But that fluff is so old so I am taking it with a pinch of salt.
Oh, and Ogryns are S5.
It's in the Sisters' codex.
Also, I just had that argument on the Bolter and Chainsword last week, and it pretty much devolved into me giving sources and citations, and the Marine fanboys telling me I was attacking them personally and that Marines had better stuff and had to win the argument because it was the B&C.
Let's get some on in there. Ogryn females for equality there, I mean they grew up in the same settings, they should be about right when it comes to bashing skulls in for the Emperor.
Ogryns are about as human as Astartes too, so it even has relevance.
Er actually, not about as human. They are exactly humans who have grown up in certain low gravity (or high gravity, forget) worlds.
Astartes are so full of artificial things, specifically grown organs, they eat brains and gain knowledge, spit acid and other weird things.
Ogryns just grew up on planets with specific gravity that changed them over time.
By definition, Ogryn are actually a separate species from humans.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: I agree that handwaving it might be excessive, but it is something to keep in mind. This is not 100% reliable.
Why not? I don't see why they'd lie about how good SoB equipment is. IMO, what they'll generally "talk up" is the army's characterisation and effectiveness, but I don't see why we should regard fluff on standard equipment as unreliable.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: I agree that handwaving it might be excessive, but it is something to keep in mind. This is not 100% reliable.
Why not? I don't see why they'd lie about how good SoB equipment is. IMO, what they'll generally "talk up" is the army's characterisation and effectiveness, but I don't see why we should regard fluff on standard equipment as unreliable.
Because SM are described (In the 6th ed rulebook afaik) as having the best equipment available in the Imperium.
You can't have two different factions who both have the best gear.
And it would also absorb more heat through having more material in it to do so, making it slower to overheat.
But all that does is make the Sisters seem even better shots - they get the same BS4 as marines with none of their physical upgrades and less of the fancy PA-boltgun interfaced targeting systems. I guess marines sacrifice a lot of hand-eye coordination for their durability and enhanced strength.
And it would also absorb more heat through having more material in it to do so, making it slower to overheat.
But all that does is make the Sisters seem even better shots - they get the same BS4 as marines with none of their physical upgrades and less of the fancy PA-boltgun interfaced targeting systems. I guess marines sacrifice a lot of hand-eye coordination for their durability and enhanced strength.
Or they are just victims of the extremely inprecise stat system.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: I agree that handwaving it might be excessive, but it is something to keep in mind. This is not 100% reliable.
Why not? I don't see why they'd lie about how good SoB equipment is. IMO, what they'll generally "talk up" is the army's characterisation and effectiveness, but I don't see why we should regard fluff on standard equipment as unreliable.
Because SM are described (In the 6th ed rulebook afaik) as having the best equipment available in the Imperium.
You can't have two different factions who both have the best gear.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: I agree that handwaving it might be excessive, but it is something to keep in mind. This is not 100% reliable.
Why not? I don't see why they'd lie about how good SoB equipment is. IMO, what they'll generally "talk up" is the army's characterisation and effectiveness, but I don't see why we should regard fluff on standard equipment as unreliable.
Because SM are described (In the 6th ed rulebook afaik) as having the best equipment available in the Imperium.
And yet they don't have infantry autocannons and other fun, effective stuff Both a subjective opinion, and inconsistent.
Meanwhile, Sororitas power armor is stated to provide equal protection, and it does in the game. That's not subjective, and it's consistent.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: I agree that handwaving it might be excessive, but it is something to keep in mind. This is not 100% reliable.
Why not? I don't see why they'd lie about how good SoB equipment is. IMO, what they'll generally "talk up" is the army's characterisation and effectiveness, but I don't see why we should regard fluff on standard equipment as unreliable.
Because SM are described (In the 6th ed rulebook afaik) as having the best equipment available in the Imperium.
And yet they don't have infantry autocannons and other fun, effective stuff Both a subjective opinion, and inconsistent.
Meanwhile, Sororitas power armor is stated to provide equal protection, and it does in the game. That's not subjective, and it's consistent.
Spoiler:
You sure about that? Or did you happen to forget that assault cannons are gatling full-auto autocannons?
You sure about that? Or did you happen to forget that assault cannons are gatling full-auto autocannons?
No, they aren't. Autocannons fire shells. Assault Cannons fire bullets.
As evidenced by the difference in Strength in-game.
Fluff wise, the Assault Cannon was an evolution of the Rotor Cannon, taking advantage of the additional bracing available to the newly developed Terminator Armour to increase the ruggedness of the mechanisms and allow for heavier-caliber shells. It only replaced the Autocannon in the tactical sense, and even that was only the Reaper Autocannon, which was a halfway house "stand in" while the Assault Cannon technology was being developed - much like the Sea Venom was rolled out quickly and cheaply to fill in while the Sea Vixen was being worked on.
You sure about that? Or did you happen to forget that assault cannons are gatling full-auto autocannons?
No, they aren't. Autocannons fire shells. Assault Cannons fire bullets.
As evidenced by the difference in Strength in-game.
Fluff wise, the Assault Cannon was an evolution of the Rotor Cannon, taking advantage of the additional bracing available to the newly developed Terminator Armour to increase the ruggedness of the mechanisms and allow for heavier-caliber shells. It only replaced the Autocannon in the tactical sense, and even that was only the Reaper Autocannon, which was a halfway house "stand in" while the Assault Cannon technology was being developed - much like the Sea Venom was rolled out quickly and cheaply to fill in while the Sea Vixen was being worked on.
Hm, it appears I have a wiki to fix in that case. This really is why these things can never be used as a quick reference.
I wrote that from memory, so you should probably double check in the Horus Heresy: Betrayal book and Codex: Chaos Space Marines, since that's where most of the AC/ASC fluff is codified most recently.
Furyou Miko wrote: I wrote that from memory, so you should probably double check in the Horus Heresy: Betrayal book and Codex: Chaos Space Marines, since that's where most of the AC/ASC fluff is codified most recently.
Already before that, checked my rulebook, C:SM, C:CSM, and Horus Heresy 1, assault cannons fire a maeltrom of heavy stubber rounds that turn things like tryanids into paste. Autocannons are completely different, and, once again, the W40K is just utter trash not worth even looking up. The best thing is that they even have the page locked, so I can't correct it!
Check the references for the page on Miriael Sabathiel. It quotes Codex: Sisters of Battle 2e as a source on her. She isn't mentioned anywhere (because she wasn't created until years after it was published, and even then it was by a third party for a TCG), but the reference is still there. Incidentally, it points at a full-page image.
Check the references for the page on Miriael Sabathiel. It quotes Codex: Sisters of Battle 2e as a source on her. She isn't mentioned anywhere (because she wasn't created until years after it was published, and even then it was by a third party for a TCG), but the reference is still there. Incidentally, it points at a full-page image.
Oh, and that reminds me of the number one reason why I hate the W40K wiki for anything but grabbing pictures. No citations.
Wyzilla wrote: You sure about that? Or did you happen to forget that assault cannons are gatling full-auto autocannons?
Tacticals can't use assault cannons OR autocannons. Nor can scouts.
A lot of the "best equipment" isn't available to Marines. Thus, my statement about that being subjective and inconsistent between tabletop and lore. It's just a cool-sounding statement, not really a statement of fact. They have better equipment than most of the Imperium, but not necessarily always the best. Meanwhile, Sisters' armor having equal protection isn't subjective, and it's very consistent between tabletop and lore. So that's a more reliable statement. While Sisters' armor is smaller and doesn't have all the features of Astartes armor, it DOES protect equivalently.
Wyzilla wrote: You sure about that? Or did you happen to forget that assault cannons are gatling full-auto autocannons?
Tacticals can't use assault cannons OR autocannons. Nor can scouts.
A lot of the "best equipment" isn't available to Marines. Thus, my statement about that being subjective and inconsistent between tabletop and lore. It's just a cool-sounding statement, not really a statement of fact. They have better equipment than most of the Imperium, but not necessarily always the best. Meanwhile, Sisters' armor having equal protection isn't subjective, and it's very consistent between tabletop and lore. So that's a more reliable statement. While Sisters' armor is smaller and doesn't have all the features of Astartes armor, it DOES protect equivalently.
But really, aren't we getting off topic here?
You're late to the party. Wyzilla and Miko already cleared that out in the last page.
As for the tabletop, just... No. It should never be used as an example of anything and you know it. At best, you can argue that the shared 3+ means that the two different armours are reasonably close to the same ballpark but anything more is definitely stretching it. As for equal quality stated in lore, now that's another thing. It settles the deal, supposedly.
You're not reading what is being posted, yet again. This is not using tabletop as the sole source of evidence, but as merely a corroboration of other evidence.
You're not reading what I posted. I said that using lore sources are fine, but tabletop rules should never be used as an evidence of anything, corroboration or no.
Otherwise, please, go ahead and explain how a supersonic flyer is exactly 4 times faster than a Chaos Spawn, for example.
You are free to use gameplay anecdotes as much as you like, but until they start actually matching the fluff overall I won't see them as more than footnotes in fluff discussions.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: You're not reading what I posted. I said that using lore sources are fine, but tabletop rules should never be used as an evidence of anything, corroboration or no.
That's silly. The lore is created to sell the tabletop and vice versa. They're never in perfect alignment, but they are also never perfectly disconnected like you claim.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: You're not reading what I posted. I said that using lore sources are fine, but tabletop rules should never be used as an evidence of anything, corroboration or no.
That's silly. The lore is created to sell the tabletop and vice versa. They're never in perfect alignment, but they are also never perfectly disconnected like you claim.
They are not entirely disconnected, that I never said. But they are inconsistent enough to make me dispute claims like yours of one proving the other.
If a man is right 50% of the time in his predictions, does that make the man's predictions reliable?
No, it doesn't.
In exactly the same way, while rules and fluff may match some times, it is not often enough for me to take one as evidence in a discussion of the other.
BrotherHaraldus wrote: You're not reading what I posted. I said that using lore sources are fine, but tabletop rules should never be used as an evidence of anything, corroboration or no.
That's silly. The lore is created to sell the tabletop and vice versa. They're never in perfect alignment, but they are also never perfectly disconnected like you claim.
No, they're completely disconnected, as they are with all games, tabletop or virtual, and this is pretty damn clear if you've read any of the Black Library. The only resemblance between them is that they happen to both involve the same names and factions, but how each functions is completely different. Game mechanics being used for anything is simply moronic when we have a flood of feats available to us.
SOB are in the Inquisition, not the Astartes. The closet thing to a Space marine in the Inquisition is the Grey Knights, who even have a Literal space marine counterpart *Cough* Exorcists *Cough*.
The Ordo Malleus (The Threat Beyond) - Destroys daemonic threats and investigates the nature of the Daemon. The Ordo came into being immediately after the Horus Heresy, and therefore has been a part of the Inquisition from the beginning.
The Ordo Hereticus (The Threat Within) - Investigates and roots out heresy, mutation, and rogue psykers from humanity, and polices the Ecclesiarchy. The Ordo Hereticus was founded following the events of the Age of Apostasy.
The Ordo Xenos (The Threat Without) - Investigates and eliminates alien influence and plots against the Imperium. It is not known when the Ordo Xenos was founded, however it is believed to be of a similar age to the Ordo Malleus.
And the SOB and Grey Knights haven't really gotten along...Khornate knights.
Back on topic.
Female Space marines I'm not sure about, hey I'm all for it. But I'm not sure the IOM would be.
The IG are rarely seen with females too, but there are examples. Such as Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine.
Other than I've only seen women used for erotic 40K drawings unfortunately.
But theres hope in the Lore, research and look it up. Then write your own story. Its bound to work.
SOB are in the Inquisition, not the Astartes. The closet thing to a Space marine in the Inquisition is the Grey Knights, who even have a Literal space marine counterpart *Cough* Exorcists *Cough*.
They are not that either. They are the Militant arm of the Church, the Ordo Hereticus usually calls upon them, but they aren't fully interlinked as ordo mallus and Grey Knights.
SOB are in the Inquisition, not the Astartes. The closet thing to a Space marine in the Inquisition is the Grey Knights, who even have a Literal space marine counterpart *Cough* Exorcists *Cough*.
They are not that either. They are the Militant arm of the Church, the Ordo Hereticus usually calls upon them, but they aren't fully interlinked as ordo mallus and Grey Knights.
Oh right.
Forgot about that, your totally right. I remember reading that most SOB are Orphans raised by the church. Makes sense.
SOB are in the Inquisition, not the Astartes. The closet thing to a Space marine in the Inquisition is the Grey Knights, who even have a Literal space marine counterpart *Cough* Exorcists *Cough*.
They are not that either. They are the Militant arm of the Church, the Ordo Hereticus usually calls upon them, but they aren't fully interlinked as ordo mallus and Grey Knights.
Oh right.
Forgot about that, your totally right. I remember reading that most SOB are Orphans raised by the church. Makes sense.
I..Honestly cannot tell if this is Sarcasm or not.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: the Ordo Hereticus usually calls upon them, but they aren't fully interlinked as ordo mallus and Grey Knights.
Even that's been retconned. The Inquisition codex made no mention of the Sisters and Ordo Hereticus having any special relationship.
To be fair, the way I've always looked at it?
It's not so much that the Ordo Hereticus and the Sisters had a "superspecial working relationship"--but rather that some of the Ordo Hereticus Inquisitors themselves built up their ties with the Sisters.
The rulebook states that they "maintain close alliances", which kind of makes sense.
The Adepta Sororitas and the Ordo Hereticus were both founded to do the same job, after all - to watch the Ecclesiarchy for heresy and secession.
Much as I love Sisters, I have always struggled to reconcile their presence on the battlefield and role as the militant arm of the Ecclesiarchy with their actual stated raison d'etre of being the Ecclesiarchy's Internal Affairs division.
Realistically, Battle Sisters would only take part in battles very occasionally so the examples we have in the background, and the ability to field them as a playable army, really only show very specific instances where the Sisters actually got to kick butt. The same is almost as true for the Astartes of course.
The next problem is that the background has been altered in patches which causes these inconsistencies. The Ordo Malleus for example, as well as being the Inquisition's daemon hunters, is/was the Inquisition's internal police force too and was an organisation as unknown to most Inquisitors as the Inquisition was to most Imperial citizens. That really can't be said to be true anymore given all the additional material we have for the Inquisition and its current portrayal.
Which also leads to problems with saying the Sisters have a relationship with the Ordo Hereticus. The affiliation an Inquisitor has with the Ordo should really only be a matter for other Inquisitors and even then, not much of one. It shows a preference in threat assessment and the circles, both Inquisitorial and general with other Imperial bodies, that the Inquisitor moves in, but really, to a Sister of Battle and Inquisitor is an Inquisitor is an Inquisitor or should be. Obviously those individuals that associate with the Ordo Hereticus are culturally more likely to seek assistance from the Sisters but from the Sisters perspective they should be assisting an Inquisitor as a matter of course if asked to do so and perhaps based on their own judgement of the Inquisitor's character and faith. Really though, if an Inquisitor turns up and tells them their aide is required they should hop to it and see it as doing the Emperor's bidding.
Melissia wrote: Even if youonly recruit "the best" of these people, you're still missing out on the non-bald, non-white, non-men, who are taller or shorter than 5'10", and whom have no familial relationship to you, many of whom could very well be far better applicants than the ones you did accept.
In 40k, big white bald men are the best. Deal with it.
But seriously, it's just a nod to certain historic armies, and it works. There were no knightly orders made of black guys, also how do you show a racist xenophobic facist whatever empire when it's full of accepted minorities? Of course black people can be racist too but it's not associeted with them.
Also, are you suggesting that applying racial political correctness would be good for 40k? Do you also have issue with Japanesse sf worlds where there are only Japanesse people. Seriously almost every American sf portrays multicultural, multiracial future societies, do we really have to make everything the same? You know the big part of the world did not enslave black people and we don't have to apologise and educate all the time with everything.
look at a man,
look at a woman, notice a difference?
Apple fox wrote: At the topic at hand, as before I don't think 40k needs female space marines, it could show something interesting about them, but in the end it's just a male power fantasy.
Men get to be cool and awsome and the asumed default.
I don't think so, no. I find SoB just as "cool" as SM if not more, space nuns purging everyone with fire, I buy a full army as soon as they go plastic. Helmets are better too, ripoff of Deadlock from ABC Warriors but still better than variation on Darth Vader like SM ones.
I personally think the best theory is that once you take a woman, chemically castrate her, load her up with implants/genetic modifications, growth hormones, excessive musculature and the like, then encase her in six-inch-thick ceramite, it'd be hard to tell she's a woman.
More seriously there are strong arguments for both sides, but ultimately it comes down to personal preference. Some central authority trying to tell me how to run my Chapter doesn't sit well with me; I'm not going to listen to the 'official' fluff-writers telling me all my Space Marines must be men any more than I'm going to listen to Matt Ward telling me that my Space Marines consider Robute Gulliman their "spiritual leige" or my Grey Knights are fine with massacring uncorrupted servants of the Emperor to paint their armour red with. My Dark Angels successor Chapter doesn't include any women because the Chapter Master is a hard-headed staunch traditionalist and there's been no pressing need to change the recruiting practices that have been in place for millennia.(more practically because I haven't had the occasion to try and convert any), but that's no reason a Chapter with a shortage of recruits couldn't decide to let women try out, or that a Chapter that recruits from a Death World where the challenges of the environment don't lend themselves to the luxury of defined gender roles (which might also push natural selection over ten thousand years to produce beefier women). Hell, there's no good reason an isolated planet couldn't end up with a female-dominant culture where men aren't allowed to join the local Space Marine Chapter.
Bottom line: The Imperium isn't a monolithic entity with a single unified culture, and as much as the Administratum would like to be able to look over everyone's shoulders and make sure they comply with the rules it's not physically possible for them to do so; as long as the tithes keep rolling in on time they've got a very live and let live policy for outlying systems. Just because Games Workshop has never put female Space Marines into the dozen or so Chapters they've fleshed out in great detail doesn't mean it's impossible for them to exist.
AnomanderRake wrote: I personally think the best theory is that once you take a woman, chemically castrate her, load her up with implants/genetic modifications, growth hormones, excessive musculature and the like, then encase her in six-inch-thick ceramite, it'd be hard to tell she's a woman.
More seriously there are strong arguments for both sides, but ultimately it comes down to personal preference. Some central authority trying to tell me how to run my Chapter doesn't sit well with me; I'm not going to listen to the 'official' fluff-writers telling me all my Space Marines must be men any more than I'm going to listen to Matt Ward telling me that my Space Marines consider Robute Gulliman their "spiritual leige" or my Grey Knights are fine with massacring uncorrupted servants of the Emperor to paint their armour red with. My Dark Angels successor Chapter doesn't include any women because the Chapter Master is a hard-headed staunch traditionalist and there's been no pressing need to change the recruiting practices that have been in place for millennia.(more practically because I haven't had the occasion to try and convert any), but that's no reason a Chapter with a shortage of recruits couldn't decide to let women try out, or that a Chapter that recruits from a Death World where the challenges of the environment don't lend themselves to the luxury of defined gender roles (which might also push natural selection over ten thousand years to produce beefier women). Hell, there's no good reason an isolated planet couldn't end up with a female-dominant culture where men aren't allowed to join the local Space Marine Chapter.
Bottom line: The Imperium isn't a monolithic entity with a single unified culture, and as much as the Administratum would like to be able to look over everyone's shoulders and make sure they comply with the rules it's not physically possible for them to do so; as long as the tithes keep rolling in on time they've got a very live and let live policy for outlying systems. Just because Games Workshop has never put female Space Marines into the dozen or so Chapters they've fleshed out in great detail doesn't mean it's impossible for them to exist.
Except that Female Astartes are explicitly impossible in the fluff.
AnomanderRake wrote: I personally think the best theory is that once you take a woman, chemically castrate her, load her up with implants/genetic modifications, growth hormones, excessive musculature and the like, then encase her in six-inch-thick ceramite, it'd be hard to tell she's a woman.
More seriously there are strong arguments for both sides, but ultimately it comes down to personal preference. Some central authority trying to tell me how to run my Chapter doesn't sit well with me; I'm not going to listen to the 'official' fluff-writers telling me all my Space Marines must be men any more than I'm going to listen to Matt Ward telling me that my Space Marines consider Robute Gulliman their "spiritual leige" or my Grey Knights are fine with massacring uncorrupted servants of the Emperor to paint their armour red with. My Dark Angels successor Chapter doesn't include any women because the Chapter Master is a hard-headed staunch traditionalist and there's been no pressing need to change the recruiting practices that have been in place for millennia.(more practically because I haven't had the occasion to try and convert any), but that's no reason a Chapter with a shortage of recruits couldn't decide to let women try out, or that a Chapter that recruits from a Death World where the challenges of the environment don't lend themselves to the luxury of defined gender roles (which might also push natural selection over ten thousand years to produce beefier women). Hell, there's no good reason an isolated planet couldn't end up with a female-dominant culture where men aren't allowed to join the local Space Marine Chapter.
Bottom line: The Imperium isn't a monolithic entity with a single unified culture, and as much as the Administratum would like to be able to look over everyone's shoulders and make sure they comply with the rules it's not physically possible for them to do so; as long as the tithes keep rolling in on time they've got a very live and let live policy for outlying systems. Just because Games Workshop has never put female Space Marines into the dozen or so Chapters they've fleshed out in great detail doesn't mean it's impossible for them to exist.
Except that Female Astartes are explicitly impossible in the fluff.
If someone wants to put female Marines in their own army, it really doesn't bother me if it's against the fluff, it's their army, their time, their money. As long as when I play against them it's obvious what is what. Doesn't mean I want female marines, but if someone else wants to break the (flimsy) fluff to do it themselves, so be it.
Hell, if someone wants to say their IG army is actually a WW1 German army that got teleported through time and space in to the Imperium, I have no problems with that either.
Swastakowey wrote: Then why not promote the idea of pig marines or monkey marines while you are at it.
Of course we arent too different genetically, we still need to mate, we still have 2 legs, 10 fingers, hair and so forth. We are all mostly the same with enough minor differences to be hugely noticeable. That does not mean that a "minor difference" is nothing in terms of genetics. Its huge, thats why assuming (and you are assuming, by the way) that women and men react to hormones in the same manner is a huge flaw in the argument. Because we dont. A girl wanted to be a boy when I was kid, from age 13 she took pills to make her more "boy like", guess what, she didnt naturally grow buff like the boys did, her voice only wen slightly deeper after she spent years practicing yo lower it and so on, but more importantly he physical make up didnt change. If she stopped taking the pills shed very quickly turn back to a typical everyday girl.
We share hormones yes but we react differently and one of the hormones is more prominent in each gender.
Genders are different, thats fine, and yes they could probably find a way to make female marines, but as it stands currently it is not possible as women lack the basics to become one before any change happens.
Boys do not naturally 'grow buff', they have to work at it. So do girls. The same equally applies to transboys and cisboys equally.
If this boy you knew when you were younger was not a transperson, he would never have been given access to hormone pills. Referring to him as a girl despite his evident diagnosis is not only disrespectful, it's downright insulting to people who have to go through the horror that is gender dysphoria.
You're basically saying he's not a real boy, he's just pretending. How would you like it if someone told you that you weren't really straight, you were just pretending to like girls? (or whatever variant actually applies to you. I don't know you, so I went with the default assumptions).
Well I guess people with that disorder suffer greatly but what I think about physical "treatment" of it was best summed up by this:
I was going to come out with a rather scathing retort, but to be honest, it's easy to think that way. I used to share your opinion, although I wish I never had.
There is no 'perfect solution' to gender dysphoria. Sadly, there is no way to give a transwoman the ability to conceive. There is no morphing ray, no genie in a bottle, no jusenkyo.
GRS isn't about fixing the problem. It's about making it manageable.
I was going to come out with a rather scathing retort, but to be honest, it's easy to think that way. I used to share your opinion, although I wish I never had.
There is no 'perfect solution' to gender dysphoria. Sadly, there is no way to give a transwoman the ability to conceive. There is no morphing ray, no genie in a bottle, no jusenkyo.
GRS isn't about fixing the problem. It's about making it manageable.
Check out the recent womb transplant experiment in Europe, 9 women with non-functioning/missing wombs recently had transplant from relative donors with the goal of possibly conceiving and baring a child to term. With the current trend of 3 D printing organs, an artificial womb is very likely.
On subject, there have been a number of all female military combat units throughout history, the most infamous of which being disbanded due to their sheer ruthlessness in combat and flagrant violation of their captives' human rights. There is a reason for the phrase, "leave them to the women." Modern day warfare has seen a recent move back to women in combat, despite western and middle-eastern fundamentalist views to the contrary. Biologically speaking, there is no difference between a man, woman, or child pulling a trigger, as the bullet is doing the final work. As to 40k, I like to think the main reason for the exclusion of females from most of the Imperial Warmachine is that Humanity has designated 100% of it population to the war effort, and men are less useful at baring to term the next generation of fighters. That might not be PC, but neither is war.
I was going to come out with a rather scathing retort, but to be honest, it's easy to think that way. I used to share your opinion, although I wish I never had.
There is no 'perfect solution' to gender dysphoria. Sadly, there is no way to give a transwoman the ability to conceive. There is no morphing ray, no genie in a bottle, no jusenkyo.
GRS isn't about fixing the problem. It's about making it manageable.
Nice that you didn't because I don't look down at people suffering from it. It's imo fact that their urge to be a different gender is a bit unrealistic and there are more important health problems than theirs but that is ofc a cold observation, it doesn't make it easier for them obviously. The treatment ideas are nuts though imo and 13 years old girl who wants to be a boy being fed with heavy hormones and undergoing serious surgeries is shooting flies with rockets, wait for 18 at least ffs. It's just like daily Aderall for ADHD kids (not to mention Desoxyn) to make them behave, complete madness.
Educate others, get psychological treatment for a kid, maybe find some special school or teach him/her yourself and see what happens, the issue may be gone 2 years later.
Cadians are the 'standard' to which many other guard groups hold themselves, up to copying their gear and practices. Cadians also train every person on the planet, of which ~50% are female. In the first Caphias Cain book, it is claimed that the Guard is about 10% female. There might be a cultural idea that men are warriors, that makes women less likely to enlist in the PDF, but I haven't noticed any specific discrimination against them being combat troops in fluff.
I bet that if female Space Marines existed, women in the Imperium would be more likely to join up, having poster girls that aren't Sisters would probably be inspiring. (Nothing against Sisters, but you can't really choose to join them.)
26FireGuy0369 wrote: I know we are all really busy hurting each others feelings and trying to be clever.
But would anyone actually refuse to play with/against someone who had Female Space Marines?
Couldn't care less as long as they tell me what chapter rules they are using and the models are equipped and WYSIWYG I really don't care if their marines have lady bumps or if they just leave the models as is and call them females with a few female heads on the character/leader models. Not my minis so none of my concern. I know the codex and the chapter being used and can tell the weapons. Time to just play the game.
Female space marines would be giant brainwashed genetically-altered monster people exactly like their male counterparts, and you probably couldn't tell them apart without a long hard look at their horrible naked bodies side by side.
Big flopping titties would serve no wartime purpose and would be chemically or genetically removed. They'd probably shave their heads as well, don't need a big perm squished under that helmet getting in your eyes. No makeup, deep bellowing voices, and negligent differences in combat strength. A superhuman is a superhuman regardless of gender.
They'd be just as incapable of reproduction as the males, mostly due to all that genetic tinkering. The womb would probably regress to something like an appendix with no purpose. No menstruation, no ovaries, no sex drive, and no hormones other than the artificial hormones that make space marines fearless killing machines. No greater compassion, just an unrelenting drive to murder the enemies of the Emperor and bring glory to their Chapter.
A big barrel-chested humanoid brute in the same armor as every other space marine, with the same doctrines, the same brutal fighting ability, and the same warrior traditions.
Maybe the chapter master would be called a chapter mistress. I'd concede that one.
Plumbumbarum wrote: But seriously, it's just a nod to certain historic armies, and it works
History can kiss my ass. This is sci-fantasy. It's boring to just blatantly copy history when you can do better instead.
"It's history" is a lazy, boring excuse that I simply don't buy It's also frequently an excuse given to justify ahistorical things.
Well to be honest the usage of history in 40k is pretty is pretty bad and ahistorical at times but that's not the point. It's all about visual conotations, you can read fluff explanations all day of how let's say Imperium of Man is a racist and facist empire but if what you see next is a picture of multiracial soldiers, it just will not fit and screaming bald white men send the message best. 40k is first and foremost about visual mood so yes, Black Templars are not as much like Knights Templar as Dark Angels are but that is an omissible detail and spoils nothing exactly because it's sci-fi fantasy. Giving them black or Arabic faces on the pictures would ruin the crusader connotation in an instant, it's deep down in your brain.
I could picture for example a high horse, high tech and enlighted faction made entirely of black people, fighting IoM but that would work on a strong connotation too, only in reverse. IoM with its screaming white bald men with occasional Mongol are good as they are, imo, racist or not.
btw if that offends someone, let me tell that one of my grandfathers spend half of WWII hiding in a basement because "Polnische Schwein, Polnische Hund" and a second half fighting, Germans took his parents property. The other grandfather was forcibly enlisted by Wermacht and got into Soviet concentration camp, upon return he was below 40 kg of weight and very sick. Now, Imperial guard is full of nods to Soviets and Nazis but I don't cry that 40k makes commisars look cool, despite their vital role in executing 15000 - 20000 Polish officers, war prisoners, one by one, point blank to the back of the head as part of the organised plan to destroy Polish elites:
"Those who died at Katyn included an admiral, two generals, 24 colonels, 79 lieutenant colonels, 258 majors, 654 captains, 17 naval captains, 3,420 Non-commissioned officers, seven chaplains, three landowners, a prince, 43 officials, 85 privates, 131 refugees, 20 university professors, 300 physicians; several hundred lawyers, engineers, and teachers; and more than 100 writers and journalists as well as about 200 pilots.[23] In all, the NKVD executed almost half the Polish officer corps.[23] Altogether, during the massacre the NKVD executed 14 Polish generals"
I don't cry, bacause it's a sci fi fantasy about shades of evil and how evil fights more evil for evil and has written offensive all over it. You either accept it or walk away.
btw 2 I'm curious what do you mean by better, regarding other races and Imperium of Man.
Badablack wrote: Female space marines would be giant brainwashed genetically-altered monster people exactly like their male counterparts, and you probably couldn't tell them apart without a long hard look at their horrible naked bodies side by side.
Big flopping titties would serve no wartime purpose and would be chemically or genetically removed. They'd probably shave their heads as well, don't need a big perm squished under that helmet getting in your eyes. No makeup, deep bellowing voices, and negligent differences in combat strength. A superhuman is a superhuman regardless of gender.
They'd be just as incapable of reproduction as the males, mostly due to all that genetic tinkering. The womb would probably regress to something like an appendix with no purpose. No menstruation, no ovaries, no sex drive, and no hormones other than the artificial hormones that make space marines fearless killing machines. No greater compassion, just an unrelenting drive to murder the enemies of the Emperor and bring glory to their Chapter.
A big barrel-chested humanoid brute in the same armor as every other space marine, with the same doctrines, the same brutal fighting ability, and the same warrior traditions.
Maybe the chapter master would be called a chapter mistress. I'd concede that one.
The sex drive bit is a bit confusing though, old (old fluff) states Salamanders had families (biological), but with the new fluff, their views seem suppressed to the point that Emperor's Children didn't even really think about women at all until exposure to Slaanesh. It's a bit convoluted.
The sex drive bit is a bit confusing though, old (old fluff) states Salamanders had families (biological), but with the new fluff, their views seem suppressed to the point that Emperor's Children didn't even really think about women at all until exposure to Slaanesh. It's a bit convoluted.
IIRC the Salamanders still have families, but not in the sense that they have children of their own. They retain most or all of their memories from before they became a marine and still visit their parents, siblings, children of siblings and so on.
The sex drive bit is a bit confusing though, old (old fluff) states Salamanders had families (biological), but with the new fluff, their views seem suppressed to the point that Emperor's Children didn't even really think about women at all until exposure to Slaanesh. It's a bit convoluted.
IIRC the Salamanders still have families, but not in the sense that they have children of their own. They retain most or all of their memories from before they became a marine and still visit their parents, siblings, children of siblings and so on.
Ultramarines do as well, heck, the Primarch for them still viewed his 'mother' with care, along with those who he grew up with.
Several of the other Primarchs as well, though I don't know if it was different for them from standard space marines.
Paimon wrote: Cadians are the 'standard' to which many other guard groups hold themselves, up to copying their gear and practices. Cadians also train every person on the planet, of which ~50% are female. In the first Caphias Cain book, it is claimed that the Guard is about 10% female. There might be a cultural idea that men are warriors, that makes women less likely to enlist in the PDF, but I haven't noticed any specific discrimination against them being combat troops in fluff.
I bet that if female Space Marines existed, women in the Imperium would be more likely to join up, having poster girls that aren't Sisters would probably be inspiring. (Nothing against Sisters, but you can't really choose to join them.)
You don't really 'sign up' for the most part. The Imperium practices conscription.
, unless some poor family has a kid with 6 toes counts.
What does that come from?
