I foresee that there will come female space marines with the end times. That the Emperor finally have figured out how to make them and Rowboat will execute the vision that he was given when meeting with his father.
(GW smelled the coffee at long last and found a pretext how to implement females to the chapters)
I would rather not. If GW truly wants to deal with the 'sexism' part of 40k, turn to Guard. Or better yet, Sisters.
SM are male. End of story. I could see that they could do it with this whole new project, but I'd not like it. SM are male. SoB are female. Guard are both (kind of)
Here is how I'd add more girls to the lot.
- Plastic sisters
- Female Guard
- Female Guard leaders (Emperor knows the Guard have a lack of heroes)
- Female Chaos Cultists
- Female Inquistionarial Agents (Tempestus, and such)
Orks are a fungi
Tau were body suits
Necrons are dead
Eldar were suits but perhaps could have more female. Same with DE and that new one
I am not wrapped up in the 40K lore nearly enough to care either way.
I can see the tough bind Games Workshop is in there. One the hand, there is a very vocal minority saying there needs to be female space marines or 40K is sexist.
The problem I see is that even if GW does bend to this, the female space marines are going to sell that great. Smaller numbers that plastic Sisters of Battle which I also don't really think are going to sell that well. Note: those wanting these things, even if it is really, really, really bad, doesn't translate into huge profits, but I do think plastic SoB would be profitable, just not as much as a bunch of other 40K stuff would.
On the other hand, there are dyed-in-the-wool, hardcore fans that don't want to see female space marines as it breaks on of the longest lasting immutable pieces of 40K. I can see how that really breaks their immersion with the game as it feels like a chance just to appease some people without any real substance to the actual setting or game.
Me, I ultimately come down on the side of keeping the boy's only space marine club. Right or wrong, that is how 40K was written. It goes along with the whole the Imperium of Man is most authoritarian, worst government regime humanity has ever suffer because without it mankind is doomed. Which I think is as equally as dumb as a concept, but that's the setting. I also don't really see how gender could help me better identify with magic superhuman brainwashed space warrior-monks some 30,000 plus years in the future.
But like I said, I don't really care either way. I actually am more upset that I can paint American WWII infantry squads in darker tones (and be historically accurate) as the army wasn't integrated at that point.
I can see the tough bind Games Workshop is in there. One the hand, there is a very vocal minority saying there needs to be female space marines or 40K is sexist.
The problem I see is that even if GW does bend to this, the female space marines are going to sell that great. Smaller numbers that plastic Sisters of Battle which I also don't really think are going to sell that well. Note: those wanting these things, even if it is really, really, really bad, doesn't translate into huge profits, but I do think plastic SoB would be profitable, just not as much as a bunch of other 40K stuff would.
On the other hand, there are dyed-in-the-wool, hardcore fans that don't want to see female space marines as it breaks on of the longest lasting immutable pieces of 40K. I can see how that really breaks their immersion with the game as it feels like a chance just to appease some people without any real substance to the actual setting or game.
Me, I ultimately come down on the side of keeping the boy's only space marine club. Right or wrong, that is how 40K was written. It goes along with the whole the Imperium of Man is most authoritarian, worst government regime humanity has ever suffer because without it mankind is doomed. Which I think is as equally as dumb as a concept, but that's the setting. I also don't really see how gender could help me better identify with magic superhuman brainwashed space warrior-monks some 30,000 plus years in the future.
But like I said, I don't really care either way. I actually am more upset that I can paint American WWII infantry squads in darker tones (and be historically accurate) as the army wasn't integrated at that point.
I disagree about plastic sisters of battle. The thing about SoB is that only 2 companies on the planet make models that follow even close to that 'gothic nuns with guns' aesthetic and one of those companies chose to make them look more like call girls than either nuns or soldiers.
Combine that with 20 years of pent up demand, the potential draw to minority player groups like females and the circumstantial evidence that Celestine sold amazingly well and the Resin Canoness has been going out of stock every 3 days or so since they released her and I think you have a case for something that would sell as well or better than niche armies like Dark Eldar or Harlequins or even possibly Grey Knights.
I would buy plastic SoB no question. Female SM, not so much. I don't care whose feelings are hurt by one faction in a niche sci-fi IP not having female members, for reasons which are fully supported by internal narrative logic. The only reason to press the issue is to use 40k as a wedge issue in cultural warfare, and anyone who has that kind of motivation can go... entertain themselves somewhere else.
ERJAK wrote: I disagree about plastic sisters of battle. The thing about SoB is that only 2 companies on the planet make models that follow even close to that 'gothic nuns with guns' aesthetic and one of those companies chose to make them look more like call girls than either nuns or soldiers.
Combine that with 20 years of pent up demand, the potential draw to minority player groups like females and the circumstantial evidence that Celestine sold amazingly well and the Resin Canoness has been going out of stock every 3 days or so since they released her and I think you have a case for something that would sell as well or better than niche armies like Dark Eldar or Harlequins or even possibly Grey Knights.
That's what I was getting at. I think there isn't actually that large of a number of people that want plastic Sisters of Battle. However, most of those that do want them really, really want them. I mean way more than just about any player wants anything for their favorite faction. I also believe that this reasoning is shared by GW and why they haven't bothered with Plastic Sisters of Battle yet. Sure, they would make these people really, really happy, but ultimately GW could make more money just releasing space marines with a new hat.
However-However-However, this is neither here nor there for this thread and has a high chance of de-railing an already unstable topic with a very high chance (like a 2+ or something) of being locked. I know you (and many like you) disagree. I know you really want those plastic Sisters of Battle. I want you to have them. But wanting something doesn't equal it happening. If it did, I would be enjoying watching the 4th season of Firefly tonight.
Saturmorn Carvilli wrote: hardcore fans that don't want to see female space marines as it breaks on of the longest lasting immutable pieces of 40K. I can see how that really breaks their immersion with the game as it feels like a chance just to appease some people without any real substance to the actual setting or game.
Me, I ultimately come down on the side of keeping the boy's only space marine club. Right or wrong, that is how 40K was written.
Not quite there are already semi female SM, in Dawn of War 3 there are female Imperial Knight pilot, and GW has to approve of all changes to lore that Relic the game dev makes, else the lawyers will mercilessly hammer them ..till they fall!
ERJAK wrote: I disagree about plastic sisters of battle. The thing about SoB is that only 2 companies on the planet make models that follow even close to that 'gothic nuns with guns' aesthetic and one of those companies chose to make them look more like call girls than either nuns or soldiers.
Combine that with 20 years of pent up demand, the potential draw to minority player groups like females and the circumstantial evidence that Celestine sold amazingly well and the Resin Canoness has been going out of stock every 3 days or so since they released her and I think you have a case for something that would sell as well or better than niche armies like Dark Eldar or Harlequins or even possibly Grey Knights.
That's what I was getting at. I think there isn't actually that large of a number of people that want plastic Sisters of Battle. However, most of those that do want them really, really want them. I mean way more than just about any player wants anything for their favorite faction. I also believe that this reasoning is shared by GW and why they haven't bothered with Plastic Sisters of Battle yet. Sure, they would make these people really, really happy, but ultimately GW could make more money just releasing space marines with a new hat.
However-However-However, this is neither here nor there for this thread and has a high chance of de-railing an already unstable topic with a very high chance (like a 2+ or something) of being locked. I know you (and many like you) disagree. I know you really want those plastic Sisters of Battle. I want you to have them. But wanting something doesn't equal it happening. If it did, I would be enjoying watching the 4th season of Firefly tonight.
The succes of Shieldwolf Kickstarter featuring female barbarians and the gigantic success of Raging Heroes with all of their "Toughtess Girls in the Galaxy" KS should prove that theres market for female models. And not small.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/loudnraging/tgg2-light-and-darkness
But I agree. I don't want female space marines. I want female Imperial Troopers, I want female Imperial Guard heroes, plastic Sisters of Battle, female Tau heads, etc... in general, I want a correct representation of the fluff in the models. If something is of mixed gender in the fluff, make it mixed gender in the miniatures. Is that easy.
Female miniatures can be buyed by both male and female customers. Just like male miniatures can be buyed by female and male customers. The "Girls don't buy miniatures" is a sell fullfilling circle of logic thinking. Is just like Space Marines. "Space Marines are the biggest sellers, so they give them all the attention, so they sell more, etc. etc..."
Plastic Sisters of battle, if they someday do it, will sell like hotcackes. If only by the hype they will cause about it.
Luciferian wrote: Nope, Imperial Knights come from houses of nobles within the Imperium and are independent of the Astartes. They even go over that in the game itself
Fiiineeee ..I've edited my ignorant post!! ............sob!!!
ERJAK wrote: I disagree about plastic sisters of battle. The thing about SoB is that only 2 companies on the planet make models that follow even close to that 'gothic nuns with guns' aesthetic and one of those companies chose to make them look more like call girls than either nuns or soldiers.
Combine that with 20 years of pent up demand, the potential draw to minority player groups like females and the circumstantial evidence that Celestine sold amazingly well and the Resin Canoness has been going out of stock every 3 days or so since they released her and I think you have a case for something that would sell as well or better than niche armies like Dark Eldar or Harlequins or even possibly Grey Knights.
That's what I was getting at. I think there isn't actually that large of a number of people that want plastic Sisters of Battle. However, most of those that do want them really, really want them. I mean way more than just about any player wants anything for their favorite faction. I also believe that this reasoning is shared by GW and why they haven't bothered with Plastic Sisters of Battle yet. Sure, they would make these people really, really happy, but ultimately GW could make more money just releasing space marines with a new hat.
However-However-However, this is neither here nor there for this thread and has a high chance of de-railing an already unstable topic with a very high chance (like a 2+ or something) of being locked. I know you (and many like you) disagree. I know you really want those plastic Sisters of Battle. I want you to have them. But wanting something doesn't equal it happening. If it did, I would be enjoying watching the 4th season of Firefly tonight.
That's true of every faction though. Why come out with new nids, or eldar, or tau, or chaos, or admech, or orks, or or or or or or or or or oror...when making new marines with a new hat is more profitable.
And no, wanting things doesn't make them happen...always but it sure did make Genestealer Cult happen didn't it?
HexHammer wrote: Fiiineeee ..I've edited my ignorant post!! ............sob!!!
There, there. I didn't mean to snap at you.
But still even it's not acceptance females into the chapters it's still acceptance into the army with these female Imperial Knights, there's not real difference.
HexHammer wrote: Fiiineeee ..I've edited my ignorant post!! ............sob!!!
There, there. I didn't mean to snap at you.
But still even it's not acceptance females into the chapters it's still acceptance into the army with these female Imperial Knights, there's not real difference.
The Imperium of Man is no sexist. The number of females in the Imperial Guard has no indication in the lore to assume that is lower that the one of males. Space Marines are a different matter. I'm not gonna explain the reasons they can't be female because they didn't matter really. They just are writted to don't exist. And thats all.
As I said, the biggest problem if the failure to represent correctly the fluff of armies with female units in the model range: Imperial Guard, Taus, Eldar, etc...
I think the best one are the Dark Eldar, they have a good mix in practically every unit.
HexHammer wrote: But still even it's not acceptance females into the chapters it's still acceptance into the army with these female Imperial Knights, there's not real difference.
Sure there's a real difference. A female member of a noble house that pilots Knights in service of the Imperium may be a very well respected and critical member of the Imperial forces, but they're still not a Space Marine.
HexHammer wrote: I foresee that there will come female space marines with the end times. That the Emperor finally have figured out how to make them and Rowboat will execute the vision that he was given when meeting with his father.
(GW smelled the coffee at long last and found a pretext how to implement females to the chapters)
I really, REALLY, hope not.
On the other hand, new sisters of battle would be ace
HexHammer wrote: But still even it's not acceptance females into the chapters it's still acceptance into the army with these female Imperial Knights, there's not real difference.
Sure there's a real difference. A female member of a noble house that pilots Knights in service of the Imperium may be a very well respected and critical member of the Imperial forces, but they're still not a Space Marine.
But I'm sure this will be a pretext to introduce females into the SM army with vehicles, Landspeeders and tanks ..etc.
I do think that from a story standpoint, that it would be an interesting thought exercise to examine the great crusade and Horus Heresy if the two missing legions were instead helmed by female primarchs.
If I remember correctly empy's main advisor once suggested that having a sister would diffuse tentions or something similar. Would it? Would it have been any different at all? What would a female primarch act like? It shouldn't be something included in the fluff but it's interesting to think about.
I'm not sure what you people are talking about, all of the Armageddon Steel Legion, Death Korps of Krieg and most of the Militarum Tempestus Scions models are female.
Yeah, I'm mostly kidding. Although I do think that if you take a human and load them up with gear and armor it's not necessarily easy to determine their gender from a distance as far as I can tell. If we then shrink said individual down to be a little over 1" tall I think it would be nearly impossible to tell their gender.
I do think it would be good to see more female IG, I just hope that GW doesn't resort to using exaggerated proportions, revealing clothing and/or silly things like high heels and boob plates to do so.* I think that the quality of sculpts is now to the point where they don't have to resort to those measures. Having more named female IG characters seems like it would be a pretty easy way to go about it.
*On the other hand, stomping around an alien hellscape in high heels and a ridiculous armored bra torching daemons with a flamethrower is Metal AF, and that's kind of what 40k is all about, so I can see the appeal. It would just be nice for there to be plenty of "normal" women. Normal being a relative term in 40k.
As far as the new Space Marines being female, if they did that it wouldn't necessarily be bad if they were truly a new type of Space Marine and not just a new type of armor. I wouldn't necessarily want them just getting rid of all the previous fluff and being like"there were female Space Marines all along!", but on the other hand there were the two redacted Legions.
Dakka Flakka Flame wrote: I'm not sure what you people are talking about, all of the Armageddon Steel Legion, Death Korps of Krieg and most of the Militarum Tempestus Scions models are female.
Yeah, I'm mostly kidding. Although I do think that if you take a human and load them up with gear and armor it's not necessarily easy to determine their gender from a distance as far as I can tell. If we then shrink said individual down to be a little over 1" tall I think it would be nearly impossible to tell their gender.
I do think it would be good to see more female IG, I just hope that GW doesn't resort to using exaggerated proportions, revealing clothing and/or silly things like high heels and boob plates to do so.* I think that the quality of sculpts is now to the point where they don't have to resort to those measures. Having more named female IG characters seems like it would be a pretty easy way to go about it.
*On the other hand, stomping around an alien hellscape in high heels and a ridiculous armored bra torching daemons with a flamethrower is Metal AF, and that's kind of what 40k is all about, so I can see the appeal. It would just be nice for there to be plenty of "normal" women. Normal being a relative term in 40k.
As far as the new Space Marines being female, if they did that it wouldn't necessarily be bad if they were truly a new type of Space Marine and not just a new type of armor. I wouldn't necessarily want them just getting rid of all the previous fluff and being like"there were female Space Marines all along!", but on the other hand there were the two redacted Legions.
That argumment of "If they do female troopers they can't be different if you dont' sexualice them" is just wrong! You can totally make visible female models in practical armour. And even more with untis like the Cadian troopers that dont' have helmets covering their faces. You are totally correct, GW CAN do it if they want. And I'll proof it.
I will spoiler the gallery because it is gonna be big enough to eliminate one and for all the "In this scale female models just appear male!" if someone reading this think that.
Spoiler:
"Cadian" Female Trooper
A full squad
More Sci-fi girls in practical armour
Just on the face you see is a woman
A Imperial Guard female general
Another Caidan trooper
And I want to post this outside the Spoiler, so everyone can see it. This is a squad of Pathfinders of Mantic's Deadzone. They are great miniatures, and you know what? They come in a mixed-gender box. And you know how they achieve that withot forcing you to anything? The "female bodies" are slightly more slim than the male ones. And you have enough faces to personalice your squad if you want, even a full male squad. But they armours are just the same. Ok, this works better with more realistic proportions like Deadzone or Infinity. But GW does the "best miniatures in the industries", no? They can DO this if they want. Just look at the Stormcast Eternal. One of the best female miniatures in practical armour I have seen. Without boob widow in the pectoral armour, and with a feminine face in the helmet.
(If it is not clear, the female is the second from the left)
Saturmorn Carvilli wrote: That's what I was getting at. I think there isn't actually that large of a number of people that want plastic Sisters of Battle. However, most of those that do want them really, really want them. I mean way more than just about any player wants anything for their favorite faction. I also believe that this reasoning is shared by GW and why they haven't bothered with Plastic Sisters of Battle yet. Sure, they would make these people really, really happy, but ultimately GW could make more money just releasing space marines with a new hat.
New SoB they released being regularly out of stock would indicate either there ARE many who want to buy or GW is very cautious about level stocks. Neither of those models is something one player is likely be buying in multiples after all. Especially the canoness.
Galas wrote: That argumment of "If they do female troopers they can't be different if you dont' sexualice them" is just wrong! You can totally make visible female models in practical armour. And even more with untis like the Cadian troopers that dont' have helmets covering their faces.
You're right, but at the same time I don't think I was wrong, I think I was just unclear.
In most of the pictures you post the models that look obviously female are either not wearing lots of armor or have unhelmeted heads. However, wearing 19th/early 20th Century style uniforms and not wearing helmets is pretty common in 40k so that's not a problem. The ones that have hard armor plates on could probably pass for either male or female if they had helmeted heads.
I'm not saying that 28mm models look male, just that they look human. I think they totally could make 28mm models that were more obviously female, just probably not ones with bulky armor and helmeted heads. I don't think we're necessarily in disagreement.
I foresee that female Space Marines will get casually referenced before getting deleted forever as a giant middle finger to all the speculation. The way they're releasing 7e rules for Marbo mere months before they nuke 7e, and the way they tried teasing plastic Battle Sisters in a troll post right before the Sisters of Silence appeared.
Galas wrote: That argumment of "If they do female troopers they can't be different if you dont' sexualice them" is just wrong! You can totally make visible female models in practical armour. And even more with untis like the Cadian troopers that dont' have helmets covering their faces.
You're right, but at the same time I don't think I was wrong, I think I was just unclear.
In most of the pictures you post the models that look obviously female are either not wearing lots of armor or have unhelmeted heads. However, wearing 19th/early 20th Century style uniforms and not wearing helmets is pretty common in 40k so that's not a problem. The ones that have hard armor plates on could probably pass for either male or female if they had helmeted heads.
I'm not saying that 28mm models look male, just that they look human. I think they totally could make 28mm models that were more obviously female, just probably not ones with bulky armor and helmeted heads. I don't think we're necessarily in disagreement.
Obviously, making models with bulky armour and and helmeted healms will make them appear female more difficult. They are gonna be more in the genderless side, but even those you can make them slighly more slim/small/etc... but as I said, thats not the problem really. The problem is with units that you can make them female models without any trouble. Imperial Guard Characters, basically every Imperial Guard type of regiment and troop, Tau Firewarriors (Yeah they all look the same, but female Tau's have a Y in the head that the males don't have, and you don't have female bare heads in the kit), etc...
To me, the three Eldar range are a good mix of female and male model, at least in the troop section. The only problem I see is in the special characters. Even the Eldar, being space Elves, where you normally find more females in fantasy/sci-fi, haven't many female characters, even generic ones. Today I saw a female Eldar Seer that was pretty cool for example.
The difference is very subtle, but it is here. And this miniature is from Juan Diaz, from the 1999 you know? 18 years ago.
I have to agree with Dakka Flakka, it's pretty difficult to tell which gender IG style models are unless you can clearly see some kind of defining feminine feature like hair or face and body structure. Some of the ones that Galas provided do a good job, but models like the ones in the first couple of pictures might as well be unisex. I do think it would be cool if GW mixed up a lot of IG boxes with female figures, though, or even just more variation in general. More female characters would probably be best, though.
I don't get what the hub-bub is about Space Marines not being women. The way I see it, once you undergo all the surgeries and gene-editing, you're a Space Marine. These new ones could be both men an women, but once inside the armour you wouldn't be able to tell them apart like that.
As such, it'd be like Sigmarines, where they say that there are both men and women, but the changes done to them make them beyond each.
Yarium wrote: I don't get what the hub-bub is about Space Marines not being women. The way I see it, once you undergo all the surgeries and gene-editing, you're a Space Marine. These new ones could be both men an women, but once inside the armour you wouldn't be able to tell them apart like that.
As such, it'd be like Sigmarines, where they say that there are both men and women, but the changes done to them make them beyond each.
Actually...
Spoiler:
This is a typical and totally normal miss conception, if you don't follow the lore of AoS. Stormcast Eternal are magical empowered humans, but humans afterall. Much more than Space Marines.
Personally, I prefer it this way. The "They are woman inside that totally-male shape armour!" is pretty boring. They have done a good job doing a reasonable female armour, very bulky, without the typical boob-shape in the armour. (You know, like they do two balls. Here it jus has space)
I think they did a decent job with the female Stormcast. My understanding is that with IRL breastplates most women need little, if any, extra accommodation. That might be mostly with late Medieval/Renaissance era European breastplates, though, which curve away from the body. A lot of sci-fi breastplates lay flatter across the chest so I could see it being more plausible that some women might require more room.
I agree that it's better they went with the "extra-room" implementation rather than the "two balls tacked on" implementation.
Dakka Flakka Flame wrote: I think they did a decent job with the female Stormcast. My understanding is that with IRL breastplates most women need little, if any, extra accommodation. That might be mostly with late Medieval/Renaissance era European breastplates, though, which curve away from the body. A lot of sci-fi breastplates lay flatter across the chest so I could see it being more plausible that some women might require more room.
I agree that it's better they went with the "extra-room" implementation rather than the "two balls tacked on" implementation.
You are right, normally womens don't need space. But just like the normal male Stormcast Eternal armour don't need those pectorals. They are going with the late-roman Empire, Greek/Macedonian aesthetic with the Stormcast Eternals. Just like the Sanguinar Guard of the Blood Angels having nipples, is just ornament, I don't think is for practical reasons.
Dakka Wolf wrote: Youtube skallagrim female body armour.
You might find it amusing and a bit surprising in regards to the breastplate.
Were you thinking of the Metatron video? I didn't think that Skallagrim had done one, but he's made so many that I can't keep track.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: You are right, normally womens don't need space. But just like the normal male Stormcast Eternal armour don't need those pectorals. They are going with the late-roman Empire, Greek/Macedonian aesthetic with the Stormcast Eternals. Just like the Sanguinar Guard of the Blood Angels having nipples, is just ornament, I don't think is for practical reasons.
I hadn't looked too closely at the male Stormcast models, but it looks like you're right.
HexHammer wrote: I foresee that there will come female space marines with the end times. That the Emperor finally have figured out how to make them and Rowboat will execute the vision that he was given when meeting with his father.
(GW smelled the coffee at long last and found a pretext how to implement females to the chapters)
The God Emperor specifically didn't make female Primarchs or Marines because he didn't want them breeding. Not only would this be completely against his wishes, it would be against everything the Emperor ever stood for as it would create a replacement of humanity.
Nevermind that female marines is a terrible idea and will not only cause major fan backlash.
Dakka Flakka Flame wrote: I think they did a decent job with the female Stormcast. My understanding is that with IRL breastplates most women need little, if any, extra accommodation. That might be mostly with late Medieval/Renaissance era European breastplates, though, which curve away from the body. A lot of sci-fi breastplates lay flatter across the chest so I could see it being more plausible that some women might require more room.
I agree that it's better they went with the "extra-room" implementation rather than the "two balls tacked on" implementation.
You are right, normally womens don't need space. But just like the normal male Stormcast Eternal armour don't need those pectorals. They are going with the late-roman Empire, Greek/Macedonian aesthetic with the Stormcast Eternals. Just like the Sanguinar Guard of the Blood Angels having nipples, is just ornament, I don't think is for practical reasons.
Spoiler:
Romans never wore muscle-plate. "Late Roman" armor is a maille hauberk.
Yarium wrote: I don't get what the hub-bub is about Space Marines not being women. The way I see it, once you undergo all the surgeries and gene-editing, you're a Space Marine. These new ones could be both men an women, but once inside the armour you wouldn't be able to tell them apart like that.
As such, it'd be like Sigmarines, where they say that there are both men and women, but the changes done to them make them beyond each.
Why stop here guys, what if the only way to save the Emperor is to give him gender reassignment surgery and allow his body to match the woman he really was inside for those tens of thousands of years?
Romans never wore muscle-plate. "Late Roman" armor is a maille hauberk.
Romans used muscle cuirass as symbol of status and rank, for emperors, legates etc. Though to what degree they were used in real life is debatable. They've seen plenty in statues:
I've seen speculated that Roman "muscle cuirass" was actually shaped leather, and mostly for show.
I'm cool with new plastic sisters and new female plastic imperial guard and honestly I don't care if they make female space marines. However the reason why I say no to female marines is because the people who complain and say 40k is sexist are people who are just looking to complain and start crap. There's no reason to listen to them because most likely they don't play the game or have any interest in the hobby at all. And even if you catered to them they'll just find something else to complain about.
A good example would be Marvel's comic book industry. They tried to cater to the diversity crowd and there sales have dropped. Marvel mentioned this and now they're getting crapped on for saying it's not getting them any new fans by the same professional complainers who don't read there comics anyway.
TL;DR cater to what you fan base wants not to people who don't give a hoot about you.
Romans never wore muscle-plate. "Late Roman" armor is a maille hauberk.
Romans used muscle cuirass as symbol of status and rank, for emperors, legates etc. Though to what degree they were used in real life is debatable. They've seen plenty in statues:
I've seen speculated that Roman "muscle cuirass" was actually shaped leather, and mostly for show.
Exactly, and it almost certainly was not armor used in war except by high-status individuals. It's an artist article of clothing, not true armor.
(Especially not when Segmentata is also available, and vastly more protective)
For too long wargaming, and Games Workshop in particular, has been a boys-only club. The material was designed and marketed in ways that targeted only boys and it shows in the diversity present in most gaming stores. The image of the stereotypical gamer as a man with no social skills and raging misogynistic tendencies is one that we have to fight off constantly and one that pushes many people (both men and women) away from the hobby. A desire for a more diverse playerbase makes sense because it means a larger playerbase (females do make up ~50% of the population), but in order to achieve that there need to be some alterations to make them welcome, such as the production of more female models.
As the current posterboys of the hobby and the army that is most supported, Space Marines just catch the most flack from people that desire this diversity. Most of the xenos are designed such that it would make no sense to include overtly female models as Orks are asexual and Tau have no recognisable sexual differences. Within the Imperium however, there is a glaring lack of representation with next to no female models outside of a very limited Sisters of Silence range. The Space Marines are currently the epitome of this percieved sexism as they are presented as being the best of the best and an in-universe boys-only exclusive club while being the most supported faction with the most lore written about them. These ranges make it clear that GW is and intends to remain the boys-only club and pushes people towards hobbies with better representation. For this reason, people latch onto the female Space Marine idea as a way of attacking the single biggest source of the problem. I believe that if GW actually bothered to make their guard and AdMech ranges more diverse and representative, they could do real work in overturning the assumptions about the hobby. After these changes, and if the new female models are actually supported in models and fluff, then people will stop caring as much about there being a canonical male-only faction within the universe as there would be other avenues into the hobby.
Sensual_T_Rex wrote: A good example would be Marvel's comic book industry. They tried to cater to the diversity crowd and there sales have dropped. Marvel mentioned this and now they're getting crapped on for saying it's not getting them any new fans by the same professional complainers who don't read there comics anyway.
TL;DR cater to what you fan base wants not to people who don't give a hoot about you.
That is total hogwash (whatever that expression means) and has been called that by writers within and outside of Marvel. The Marvel comics are suffering because they constantly churn out reboots and deboots of the same tired old characters. There is increased competition in terms of pricing from DC and other companies compared to Marvel's static prices. People are also dissatisfied with the mindbogglingly dumb Secret Empire arc for Cap'. This has nothing to do with any perceived catering to diversity, and indeed Ms. Marvel, a female Muslim superhero, continues to enjoy good sales numbers.
That is total hogwash (whatever that expression means) and has been called that by writers within and outside of Marvel. The Marvel comics are suffering because they constantly churn out reboots and deboots of the same tired old characters. There is increased competition in terms of pricing from DC and other companies compared to Marvel's static prices. People are also dissatisfied with the mindbogglingly dumb Secret Empire arc for Cap'. This has nothing to do with any perceived catering to diversity, and indeed Ms. Marvel, a female Muslim superhero, continues to enjoy good sales numbers.
Diversity, like anything, is just one tool in storytelling which can be used well or poorly. If you look at Claremont's X-Men, it could be said to be forced diversity and tokenism at its worst: characters include Russian, mixed race African, German, Japanese, Native American, Canadian and Irish. And led by white American male - of course. Yet it became one of the biggest successes of the comic world because characters were well made, had distinct personalities, histories and abilities. Like in well made sitcom, one doesn't always even need a plot or setting, mere character interaction was often enough to carry the story. Also it made sense that Xavier would discover mutants around the world. Why would all the heroic mutants be American? When I read the original X-Men, it felt boring as heck. Everyone was white American teenager with similar personalities. New X-Men were just so much more exotic.
Sensual_T_Rex wrote: A good example would be Marvel's comic book industry. They tried to cater to the diversity crowd and there sales have dropped. Marvel mentioned this and now they're getting crapped on for saying it's not getting them any new fans by the same professional complainers who don't read there comics anyway.
TL;DR cater to what you fan base wants not to people who don't give a hoot about you.
That is total hogwash (whatever that expression means) and has been called that by writers within and outside of Marvel. The Marvel comics are suffering because they constantly churn out reboots and deboots of the same tired old characters. There is increased competition in terms of pricing from DC and other companies compared to Marvel's static prices. People are also dissatisfied with the mindbogglingly dumb Secret Empire arc for Cap'. This has nothing to do with any perceived catering to diversity, and indeed Ms. Marvel, a female Muslim superhero, continues to enjoy good sales numbers.
Well the way I look at it there's 2 sides to this argument. On one side you have the writers concerned about their jobs which is understandable. On the other you have the corporate head who's only concerned about the bottom line. Between those 2 when it comes to a company's profitability I'll side with the corporate head.
Yarium wrote: I don't get what the hub-bub is about Space Marines not being women. The way I see it, once you undergo all the surgeries and gene-editing, you're a Space Marine. These new ones could be both men an women, but once inside the armour you wouldn't be able to tell them apart like that.
As such, it'd be like Sigmarines, where they say that there are both men and women, but the changes done to them make them beyond each.
This is generally where the argument winds up with me, how exactly are you going to tell that the 28mm miniature of someone encased in inches of power armor was female before being genetically modified to the point they may now have as much resemblance to their primarch as they would have their parents. The only option I generally see presented is giant tits. Which seems counter productive to me most of the time.
That said, the sigmarine did this relatively well compared to most of the conversions I've ever seen. Though just to annoy people I've been seriously considering painting up the raging heroes sisters as dark angels and just playing up the unforgiven aspect as having an entirely different reason.
Frankly what the game needs to appeal to different people is something other than more marines, give some of those other factions some love and perhaps folks who want something other than being superhuman space knights may take some interest. I had a room full of people interested back when the sisters rumor was floating around, and then it came out to be three pieces. Oddly enough no one was real happy about that.
Sensual_T_Rex wrote: A good example would be Marvel's comic book industry. They tried to cater to the diversity crowd and there sales have dropped. Marvel mentioned this and now they're getting crapped on for saying it's not getting them any new fans by the same professional complainers who don't read there comics anyway.
TL;DR cater to what you fan base wants not to people who don't give a hoot about you.
That is total hogwash (whatever that expression means) and has been called that by writers within and outside of Marvel. The Marvel comics are suffering because they constantly churn out reboots and deboots of the same tired old characters. There is increased competition in terms of pricing from DC and other companies compared to Marvel's static prices. People are also dissatisfied with the mindbogglingly dumb Secret Empire arc for Cap'. This has nothing to do with any perceived catering to diversity, and indeed Ms. Marvel, a female Muslim superhero, continues to enjoy good sales numbers.
Well the way I look at it there's 2 sides to this argument. On one side you have the writers concerned about their jobs which is understandable. On the other you have the corporate head who's only concerned about the bottom line. Between those 2 when it comes to a company's profitability I'll side with the corporate head.
Why would you side with the corporate head when they announce they have figured out the reason for their problem, then they continue to have the same problem? It would be like if GW announced the reason for 7th failing was the lack of marshmallow flavoured figurines and just saying "yup, sounds about right."
A lot of the industries that used to be marketed at only men are experiencing growing pains as they are forced to deal with a world where women and men are equally represented. How well companies survive depends on whether they can adapt to these changing conditions. That is one of the reasons why some games, like Overwatch, that work to make sure that they are not viewed as boys-only have become such sensations while games that are sticking to their guns are slowly falling to the wayside. Games Workshop needs to begin including some changes in its lines and fiction or else it will lose its place at the top of the wargaming world to some upstart that actually tries to target people besides men.
CommanderRednaxela wrote: I would rather not. If GW truly wants to deal with the 'sexism' part of 40k, turn to Guard. Or better yet, Sisters.
SM are male. End of story. I could see that they could do it with this whole new project, but I'd not like it. SM are male. SoB are female. Guard are both (kind of)
Here is how I'd add more girls to the lot.
- Plastic sisters
- Female Guard
- Female Guard leaders (Emperor knows the Guard have a lack of heroes)
- Female Chaos Cultists
- Female Inquistionarial Agents (Tempestus, and such)
Orks are a fungi
Tau were body suits
Necrons are dead
Eldar were suits but perhaps could have more female. Same with DE and that new one
Nids are bugs
Lots of my old guardian type eldar seem to be mammary gland endowed ... Either that or gynomastia from too much bourbon. Then of course there are the banshees. And dark eldar are even more likely to be female.
Sjw's have made feminism toxic only 16% of American women and 7% of UK women use the term feminist to describe their stance even though 89% believe in equality.
When your audience is straight white boys and men and you turn around and blame them for everything of course they are going to stop buying your comics.
Same will happen to 40k if you suddenly try to force that rhetoric into it.
You don't have to force the rhetoric to include a female or two. You can just make it a design choice.
Personally couldn't really care less. Technically, GW could just retcon and say "the marines are made from both male and females. They're all hewn to the same form, though and are after treatment genderless."
It's a very interesting debate that goes to a very important issue: world-building. I think about this a lot in my own work (I'm an academic), and I think that the key issue is summarised well in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA6MQHNM2yE
The issue old Nerdwriter1 is focusing on here concerns how 'literally' we should take world-building, and particularly focuses on how map-making attempts to make concrete what is ultimately and originally a creative act. As a creative act, there is some expectation that the audience will do some of the work in 'filling in the gaps' of an imaginary world. Writers are, after all, doing literature, not history. So no description should even try to be exhaustive. But map making enforces the burden of strict consistency on what was a world full of holes. And then, coupled with 'canon' art, models, and miniatures, all of a sudden everything in the world has a definite and canonical form. And then, all of a sudden, it's not about you engaging actively with the world, and filling it out in your imagination; instead, it's about you passively receiving a 'strict truth' that has already been spelled out by others. Now it's just history (and boring history at that, which itself is interesting because it still demands interpretation).
Nerwriter's point, and I agree, is that the joy of literature, and the joy of something like the Warhammer world, for me, is that it provides a firm (but not set) foundation for my imagination, but then my imagination can take me where I want to go. So, because I love ol' Papa Nurgle, but don't like the gross side, I have focused on mutation, kit-smashing possessed kits into normal marines to make my 'commanders'. So my background is that two evil sorcerers have contained the Nurgle diseases in Plague Marines (and soon Plague Terminators and the other soon-to-be released awesome models), while they have immunised other CSM form this, but have localised the mutation strain to 'grow' mutated warriors. Most end up as spawn, but they have had a success and 'grown' one CSM into a Daemon Prince. Following this success they are then confident that they can transform themselves into Daemon Princes with a bit more practice. Canon? Not on your life. But that's what got me back into the hobby after ten years.
So that is what I have to say to people who don't want female Space Marines. And one more thing. Imagine if a friend or play-mate, like me, got some Sisters of Battle Heads, stuck them on Space Marine bodies, and painted their army really well in a cool 'feminine' style, and then called them female Space Marines. Would you care? Would you refuse to play against them? Of course not! But given this, then you're not really against having female Space Marines, you just don't want GW to do it. But then you've fallen into the trap of over-literal world-building. If you don't want female Space Marines in your 40k universe - fine! Good luck to you! Don't build 'em. It's as much your universe as it is GW's. But some people might, and some, like me, may be gak at modelling, and want the amazing miniature builders at GW to give them what they want.
It is, after all, a game. But it isn't just a game. And no game worth its salt is just a game. The best games allow you to let your imagination run away with itself, and encourage you to express yourself onto the game. If you don't want that, play Monopoly.
Why would you side with the corporate head when they announce they have figured out the reason for their problem, then they continue to have the same problem? It would be like if GW announced the reason for 7th failing was the lack of marshmallow flavoured figurines and just saying "yup, sounds about right."
I'll side with the corporate head because they have access to the all numbers and can see where they are and are not making money. As for Marvel's problems still continuing well it hasn't even been a month since the announcement so it's going to take some time before they gather new data on the new direction they plan on going if they even are.And if people were complaining to GW about the lack of marshmallow flavored figurines and they decided to make them only to have their numbers continue to fall I'd say it's pretty obvious that not enough people want them to make them worth selling.
A lot of the industries that used to be marketed at only men are experiencing growing pains as they are forced to deal with a world where women and men are equally represented. How well companies survive depends on whether they can adapt to these changing conditions. That is one of the reasons why some games, like Overwatch, that work to make sure that they are not viewed as boys-only have become such sensations while games that are sticking to their guns are slowly falling to the wayside. Games Workshop needs to begin including some changes in its lines and fiction or else it will lose its place at the top of the wargaming world to some upstart that actually tries to target people besides men.
Agreed a companies survival is based on their ability to anticipate what the consumers want. In GW case there's not much of a fan bases asking for female space marines. Are there some? Of course there are however if a not enough to warrant the investment necessary to turn a good profit. And on the subject of Overwatch it's still your standard online FPS with sexualized women who appeal to a predominantly male dominated fan base. You do remember the hub bub about Tracer showing off her butt and the "controversy " surrounding it.
It wouldn't the end of the world or anything but I really hope they don't make girl marines.
The marines are supposed to be austere warrior brotherhoods much like the Teutonic Knights or the Hospitallers, adding women into the mix takes away from this imagery and puts me more in mind of Hammer Horror or Carry On Films!
I can see it now, 'Carry On Serving The Emperor' the female and male dorms of the Crimson Fist chapter have an Ork killing contest with the losers having to custard pie Pedro Kantor in the face!
Not to mention logical reasons for male only requirement like a genetic predisposition to increased muscle mass and aggression or that many chapter recruit from feral worlds where women fill traditional domestic roles.
If they want to increase female participation I would much prefer it if they just gave more book space to existing female characters and organisations rather than trying to shoehorn them into the Space marine background.
Although political correctness to this degree certainly does sound like the dark, dystopian future of the 40k setting...
Why would you side with the corporate head when they announce they have figured out the reason for their problem, then they continue to have the same problem? It would be like if GW announced the reason for 7th failing was the lack of marshmallow flavoured figurines and just saying "yup, sounds about right."
Sensual_T_Rex
I'll side with the corporate head because they have access to the all numbers and can see where they are and are not making money. As for Marvel's problems still continuing well it hasn't even been a month since the announcement so it's going to take some time before they gather new data on the new direction they plan on going if they even are.And if people were complaining to GW about the lack of marshmallow flavored figurines and they decided to make them only to have their numbers continue to fall I'd say it's pretty obvious that not enough people want them to make them worth selling.
A lot of the industries that used to be marketed at only men are experiencing growing pains as they are forced to deal with a world where women and men are equally represented. How well companies survive depends on whether they can adapt to these changing conditions. That is one of the reasons why some games, like Overwatch, that work to make sure that they are not viewed as boys-only have become such sensations while games that are sticking to their guns are slowly falling to the wayside. Games Workshop needs to begin including some changes in its lines and fiction or else it will lose its place at the top of the wargaming world to some upstart that actually tries to target people besides men.
Agreed a companies survival is based on their ability to anticipate what the consumers want. In GW case there's not much of a fan bases asking for female space marines. Are there some? Of course there are however if a not enough to warrant the investment necessary to turn a good profit. And on the subject of Overwatch it's still your standard online FPS with sexualized women who appeal to a predominantly male dominated fan base. You do remember the hub bub about Tracer showing off her butt and the "controversy " surrounding it.
Geez sorry about the word jumble but I'm tired and my phone kinda sucks.
Why would you side with the corporate head when they announce they have figured out the reason for their problem, then they continue to have the same problem? It would be like if GW announced the reason for 7th failing was the lack of marshmallow flavoured figurines and just saying "yup, sounds about right."
Sensual_T_Rex
I'll side with the corporate head because they have access to the all numbers and can see where they are and are not making money. As for Marvel's problems still continuing well it hasn't even been a month since the announcement so it's going to take some time before they gather new data on the new direction they plan on going if they even are.And if people were complaining to GW about the lack of marshmallow flavored figurines and they decided to make them only to have their numbers continue to fall I'd say it's pretty obvious that not enough people want them to make them worth selling.
A lot of the industries that used to be marketed at only men are experiencing growing pains as they are forced to deal with a world where women and men are equally represented. How well companies survive depends on whether they can adapt to these changing conditions. That is one of the reasons why some games, like Overwatch, that work to make sure that they are not viewed as boys-only have become such sensations while games that are sticking to their guns are slowly falling to the wayside. Games Workshop needs to begin including some changes in its lines and fiction or else it will lose its place at the top of the wargaming world to some upstart that actually tries to target people besides men.
Agreed a companies survival is based on their ability to anticipate what the consumers want. In GW case there's not much of a fan bases asking for female space marines. Are there some? Of course there are however not enough to warrant the investment necessary to turn a good profit. And on the subject of Overwatch it's still your standard online FPS with sexualized women who appeal to a predominantly male dominated fan base. You do remember the hub bub about Tracer showing off her butt and the "controversy " surrounding it.
Geez sorry about the word jumble but I'm tired and my phone kinda sucks.
CommanderRednaxela wrote: I would rather not. If GW truly wants to deal with the 'sexism' part of 40k, turn to Guard. Or better yet, Sisters.
SM are male. End of story. I could see that they could do it with this whole new project, but I'd not like it. SM are male. SoB are female. Guard are both (kind of)
Here is how I'd add more girls to the lot.
- Plastic sisters
- Female Guard
- Female Guard leaders (Emperor knows the Guard have a lack of heroes)
- Female Chaos Cultists
- Female Inquistionarial Agents (Tempestus, and such)
Orks are a fungi
Tau were body suits
Necrons are dead
Eldar were suits but perhaps could have more female. Same with DE and that new one
Nids are bugs
Lots of my old guardian type eldar seem to be mammary gland endowed ... Either that or gynomastia from too much bourbon. Then of course there are the banshees. And dark eldar are even more likely to be female.
I added the word perhaps because I wasn't sure. I don't know the Eldar model line that well. If they are pretty balanced then ok. (Also why I put them in the section of guys that don't need much fixing)
As for Tempestus, they are mostly ok, but I meant more about the berets instesd of the helmets.
Finally, no female SM would not make the franchise double in size. I'd be suprised if there was a noticable increase in female players. When I saw the trailer for Alien Isolation, I didn't wait until my sex was represented. If there is a girl who seriously wants to play, she'll play. 40k is simply more popular towards guys and thus they'll market that way.
Let us saybthere was this secret oilfield of new customers that could be tapoed with femake SM, why wouldn't GW do it. They have professionals (or whatever the GW equilevent is) trying to find who their market is, they wouldn't give the fluff a single thought if they couod double their profits. They know there isn't and thats why they don't.
TonyH122 wrote: But given this, then you're not really against having female Space Marines, you just don't want GW to do it. But then you've fallen into the trap of over-literal world-building.
It is, after all, a game. But it isn't just a game. And no game worth its salt is just a game. The best games allow you to let your imagination run away with itself, and encourage you to express yourself onto the game. If you don't want that, play Monopoly.
And you can. You could make a chapter of tau space marines too. But neither of these things actually make sense in the world that has been built in the fiction. While this same fiction has intentionally built in leeway for us to be able to do whatever we want with our imagination by saying all or none of it could be true.
Frankly the implications of 40k are horrifying and intended to be so. It's intended to be oppressive. It's intended to be bigoted. It was intended to be a bit of parody of certain politics some time ago, only people found the world interesting and built from there. So the very basis of the world building and the story itself focusing on being among the worst possible futures having a gak load of bigoted stupidity only makes sense. With the story that was built out ages ago female marines don't make much sense. So people interested in it will object. Doesn't mean you can't do it, just means it doesn't make any sense in universe. Why should they break with that much story to satisfy a desire for something you can do yourself?
Kroem wrote: If they want to increase female participation I would much prefer it if they just gave more book space to existing female characters and organisations rather than trying to shoehorn them into the Space marine background.
Although political correctness to this degree certainly does sound like the dark, dystopian future of the 40k setting...
Yeah. There's so much potential elsewhere to add female presence logically and without making fuss about it that changing existing background for it seems unneccessary.
"Okay let's make female space marines but ignore female IG troopers, storm troopers, etc etc etc"
While I don't care for the idea of Female Space Marines as a thing I do see "New Marines" as a new IP for GW to do what ever they want. I think it will hurt Old Marines less over all but still hurt them from a fluff perspective. Leading to the but why does it work now and why didn't it work before and insert thing about the Emperor hating women or some silly stuff like that. Which I think is unnecessary.
If it happens it happens, they'll all get power klawed to deff anyway so it's whatever.
If GW does make them I just hope they do a better job on the models than they did with that oddly proportioned Female Stormcast miniature. It looks bad. It looks like two different miniatures stuck together.
Elbows wrote:Unlike many games, GW's IPs' success is heavily influenced by the lore/fluff/background/world etc.
It would be silly to break or diminish your own fluff/lore to chase market margins by pandering to people.
YeOldSaltPotato wrote:And you can. You could make a chapter of tau space marines too. But neither of these things actually make sense in the world that has been built in the fiction. While this same fiction has intentionally built in leeway for us to be able to do whatever we want with our imagination by saying all or none of it could be true.
Frankly the implications of 40k are horrifying and intended to be so. It's intended to be oppressive. It's intended to be bigoted. It was intended to be a bit of parody of certain politics some time ago, only people found the world interesting and built from there. So the very basis of the world building and the story itself focusing on being among the worst possible futures having a gak load of bigoted stupidity only makes sense. With the story that was built out ages ago female marines don't make much sense. So people interested in it will object. Doesn't mean you can't do it, just means it doesn't make any sense in universe. Why should they break with that much story to satisfy a desire for something you can do yourself?
I think you guys gotta take a step back. The whole thing about Space Marines only being male is practically a throw-away line in the story, and not something that the entire continuity hinges on. Not only that, but these New Marines are said to be, well, new. There's absolutely no reason, story-wise, that you couldn't say that Gulliman figured out that "Hey, we can have 102% more Space Marines if women can also be Space Marines.". In these situations where people say the story is important, you have to remember the prime lesson from this wonderfully hilarious youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PlwDbSYicM&t=1s
Person 1: "How do you kill a vampire in a story?"
Person 2: "Stake through the heart... garlic... sunlight..."
Person 1: "No. You kill a vampire however you like, because vampires don't exist."
There are a ton of stories that break traditions, because those traditions aren't very important. Is it important that Homer is balding? No. Aside from some jokes and one hilarious episode, his having or not having hair doesn't tell us anything about who Homer is. Space Marines being men doesn't tell us anything important about who Space Marines are. Contrarily, Homer being fat DOES tell us something important about Homer; he's lazy. When you look at Homer, you don't think "here's someone with a genetic disorder or propensity for obesity", you think "he's a lazy guy whom can't be bothered to fix himself up". Space Marines being genetically and physically superior beings to regular humans DOES tell us something important about them; they're beyond human. If they're beyond human, does that mean they are beyond gender? For me, it does, because Space Marines, to me, are sexless anyways. In my mind, they ain't got no wee wee, no funbags, no cojhones, and no uterus. It just isn't something that matters in what makes a Marine a Marine. While it may off-handly reference that they are all men, that means nothing for new Marines.
Also, remember that "canon" doesn't necessarily mean good. Ergo this, completely 100% canon...
warhead01 wrote: but why does it work now and why didn't it work before
They have retconned FAR larger things than this.
Such as. I came in later 7th so I wouldn't know. (Except Cadia, feth that)
Necrons were just some models in 2nd edition. Then in some side game, they were presented as androids of Chaos. So Necron were in their first fluff Chaos. Then when they got their own army, they became a really cool force, led by the C'tan. But then, in fifth edition, they suddenly got all the current lore, basically making them undead. Or "Tomb Kings in Space" as a lot of people call them.
I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
I'm in the camp of those who thinks GW should introduce female Space Marines, but I acknowledge that would make a lot of current players' heads pop, and there's lower-hanging fruit as far as introducing more female presence into 40K goes. Plastic Sisters of Battle with a beefed up role in the Imperium's defense, IG, Eldar, Tau, Mechanicus, Inquisition. That would let GW test the waters before they go monkeying with their best-selling product line.
Also, women could be introduced into Space Marine armies without breaching the female Space Marine barrier. Chapters could start tasking some roles to chapter serfs to free up Space Marines for service in the battle companies. Vehicle crews stand out as something serfs could do, particularly any Rhino-chassis vehicles. Some chapter serfs are probably female, so you could have female non-Space Marines tied to Space Marine chapters serving as vehicle crew. That might get the community more comfortable with the idea of women serving in Space Marine chapters before GW makes the female Space Marine leap.
Yarium wrote: I think you guys gotta take a step back. The whole thing about Space Marines only being male is practically a throw-away line in the story, and not something that the entire continuity hinges on.
Except the entire story is about a lousy father and the horrific failures of his flawed sons, now the grandsons are trying to hold things together without even understanding the original point. It's a nearly standard story of kings and falling empires wrapped up in some ceramite and chainswords. It's as much about a really shity father son relationship as it is much of everything else, and that relationship echos down to the relationship between the lost primarchs and the spacemarines.
Not only that, but these New Marines are said to be, well, new. There's absolutely no reason, story-wise, that you couldn't say that Gulliman figured out that "Hey, we can have 102% more Space Marines if women can also be Space Marines.".
I legitimately have less problem with nu-marines being female than I would "oh they've just been there the entire time", it's an evolution of story rather than a cramming of someone's to do list. Except unless they're rolling back some of what's done to space marines in the process I do NOT envy GW's social media people when the wrong person grasps what's being done to pre-pubecent girls.
With Gulliman back things may very well change, but they should be changes detailed in story not changes in the background. But frankly his outlook on things hardly looks like roses so I don't see things getting much better in many senses any time soon.
It's not a matter of tradition in this case, or some vague shared cannon. It's a matter of this story has been told for years one way, it's been expanded to what, hundreds of novels now? Nothing has stopped female guardsman, eldar, or any of a number of other races from being prominent. If there was a female space marine it'd probably have come up by now, except every time the creation of space marines comes up(and if you've bought into the RPGs or some old white dwarfs they've nailed this one down pretty heavy) it's young boys. It hasn't been a throwaway line in a long time, it's baked into the setting at this point, without changing the process you aren't going change the story.
And let's be honest, if you're using squirrel girl as your example she's clearly a tool of tzeentch that must be purged. She's the living embodiment of writer's caveat at the cost of logic or reason. It's funny and occasionally interesting, but if you take any of it seriously people will lose their damn minds, like the comic nerds who hate her with a passion. Comics are not where I'm taking my idea of cohesive story telling from.
And again, none of this stops you from tossing a couple heads on and saying 'deal' when you're on the table. If I find some black widow shoulder pads I'll probably do it the marines I got in a the kill team box, but I can say damn well it just doesn't make sense in the story, which is itself rather gendered even if the marines themselves aren't to you. It's a stereotypical poor father soon relationships embodied in different aspects across twenty sons and then repeated with thousands more with their marines more often than not. That's part of what makes it interesting to me, watching this near god have such basic human failings is why I read the heresy books at this point.
With the story being what it is, it doesn't make sense from a story telling or logical perspective. It adds little and even assuming they did all that would really change would be naming conventions and possibly the use of brother between marines, if even they could tell the difference anymore. And yes, people take this seriously, that's kind of my point despite not really caring what people do with their armies and even plotting to do so myself.
YeOldSaltPotato wrote: It's a matter of this story has been told for years one way, it's been expanded to what, hundreds of novels now?
Yeah, many of which are hugely contradictory. The 40k universe is hardly a rigid and well thought out plot line. It has always been retconned and there is inevitably going to be a lot of things that are contradictory when that many writers write that many books in the same story. So what's the big deal if a little bit more is retconned?
Saying diversity is the reason overwatch is successful is lying to themselves, Battleborn is just as diverse and it's not doing great. If the game is fun people will play it regardless.
If people aren't into the game now adding diversity won't change it
Space Marines exist to do one thing; wield the utmost physical and martial might that human kind can muster to kill gak for the Emperor. That's it. It's the reason behind their genetic modifications, and for their recruitment from only the strongest of those born on the Imperium's most inhospitable and deadly worlds. They're not some kind of egalitarian peace-keeping force, they're a hidebound fraternity of fanatical killers serving a fascist regime as it tries to avoid total annihilation at the hands of even more ruthless and bloodthirsty enemies. Should Space Marines become Equal Opportunity murderers? No, because that is a policy and a sentiment of our own, significantly gentler time.
There already ARE, what are for all intents and purposes, female Space Marines. They are called Sisters of Battle, and the only thing GW has to do with them is actually support them.
Female SM wouldn't bring in new blood, nor would it change the image of wargamers like people have been insinuating. You want new blood and to change the image?
Take care of yourselves and don't be afraid to mention it as your hobby. Workout, eat healthy, hygiene. Let people see an ordinary guy can enjoy something that is usually seen as weird. You go to cons and see the stereotype which is sad, but not unexpected.
I think channels like miniwargaming are great it shows that the stereotype isn't 100%. Just... be productive and social.
I personnaly wouldn't mind female Space Marines. In my game of Deathwatch RPG, I have authorised several players to make female Space Marines if they wanted to. I even gender bent a few Primarchs for the lulz (Alpharius and Omegon were twins of opposite sex, Corax was a women with very masculine traits which led to confusion, one of the lost Primach was a women). Having female Space Marines doesn't change much to the faction as a hole. It only provides with a bit more of aesthetic diversity and some more character diversity for those who like to produce fluff about their army and characters. Women Space Marines coul even be a distinctive trait of a specific Chapter while all male could become one.
GW should indeed give more presence to women in their model line. SoB have been waiting for a long time for some attention and, with the Sister of Silence out, it seems strange to me that such a faction doesn't have a larger plastic range. Of course, SoB aren't Space Marines, neither are they attracting the same sort of collectors. Guards and Scions would also benefit from being diverse in terms of gender (and race) to show them as the ``Army of Humanity`` in a dark age of total war.
The only thing I would be missing from Space Marines should they integrate women is the overly macho and homoerotic undertone of their army. I love the idea of Space Marines as overly powerful drama queen with an enormous complex of superiority and very little intellectual maturity, especially when it comes to socialisation. Plus, it would put a stop on the fequent homosexual inuendo between Space Marines that I find so hillarious and which gives them more personnality (and originality) in my opinion.
PS: Am I the only one scared that the New Marines are going to make all other factions of the Imperium (beside the Mechanicus and the Knights) increasingly less relevent both on the tabletop and in the fluff?
epronovost wrote: PS: Am I the only one scared that the New Marines are going to make all other factions of the Imperium (beside the Mechanicus and the Knights) increasingly less relevent both on the tabletop and in the fluff?
Probably. I don't think it'll have that effect though. Unless they're going out of their way to make New Marines more point efficient and more powerful, New Marines are unlikely to harm other Imperial factions. Heck, they may just be an elite choice or something in the regular Space Marine armies.
However, I wouldn't be surprised if Space Marines as we know them get phased out for these New Marines over time.
Wow, this thread has come the full circle of people bringing politics for both sides of the feminism discussion without reason...
I'll leave this now... but before doing it:
GW, don't make Female Space Marines, make Females models to the races that have them in the fluff!
And talking about RPGs... I saw years ago a roleplay game in a forum where 4 players played as Space Marines. Two were good roleplayers: A Ultramarine and a Space Wolf. The others two... a Grey Knight and a Female Blood Angel.
It only took 10 posts for the Female Blood Angel and the Grey Knight to began to have sex. The others two players tried to carry the game in a productive way but it ended pretty soon. Make of that what you want
Please explain, I didn't thought my opinon was such a fringe opinion.
I personally agree with you on some things, such as how Space Marines are a half-parody of hyper masculine warrior culture viewed almost through the eyes of Greek drama/tragedy, complete with homoerotic undertones and everything that goes with the trope. I also think that shoehorning SM into an egalitarian coed force would basically destroy all of those things they represent.
However, I think that genderbending primarchs and the like is better left to personal games and fan-fiction and isn't worth experimenting with in any official capacity, whatsoever.
Galas wrote: It only took 10 posts for the Female Blood Angel and the Grey Knight to began to have sex. The others two players tried to carry the game in a productive way but it ended pretty soon. Make of that what you want
The roleplaying world is a ... very obscure world. You don't believe what I have seen in it. Don't matter the historical period, the ambientation, the universe, people just... sorry. My psychiatrist has recommended me to don't talk about it
God I hope not. Why? Because if you want to fix the problem of "Male as Default" in 40k, here's a short list of plastic kits you could really be making instead of another god damn space marine box:
Sisters of Battle. You could make this WHOLE DAMN ARMY with 4 good plastic kits. 1) Sisters/Sisters with Heavy Weapons/Command Sisters/Lots of Special Weapon Sisters could all be in one really good 10-man kit ala the skitarii box. 2) 5-man Seraphim elites box 3) Immolator/Organ tank/New Vehicle triple-kit with the rhino sprues. 4) Rework Repentia+Penitent Engines into a new centurion-sized heavy bezerk melee infantry concept, get rid of the awkward scantily clad ladies+Dominatrix thing.
Done. There's your Genestealer Cult/Skitarii/Deathwatch/Harlequin sized sisters release. They'd be at least as popular as any of those, especially if you made that initial 10 sister box a really great value for bits (Imagine the Skitarii box if rather than 2 different basic weapons they had a huge variety of heavy and special weaponry)
Imperial Guard. Their infantry looks fething terrible with their stubby arms and spaceballs helmets+shoulderpads. Scale down their armor, scale up the soldiers' actual features, and include a couple female torsos/heads and you've got yoruself an equal opportunity plastic kit.
Eldar Guardians/plastic aspects. Ancient, ugly, samey kits with tons of finecrap. Re-release in plastic and put some ladies in there.
All those are 100% more needed than more space marines kits. We currently have 7 options if we want modern plastic kits for bolter-armed power armored loyalists, with an 8th on the way.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.
OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.
OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.
They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.
OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.
They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.
I totally agree here. Less wolf, more Viking= better.
Think we need plastic sisters before we get female space marines.
Luciferian wrote: Space Marines exist to do one thing; wield the utmost physical and martial might that human kind can muster to kill gak for the Emperor. That's it. It's the reason behind their genetic modifications, and for their recruitment from only the strongest of those born on the Imperium's most inhospitable and deadly worlds. They're not some kind of egalitarian peace-keeping force, they're a hidebound fraternity of fanatical killers serving a fascist regime as it tries to avoid total annihilation at the hands of even more ruthless and bloodthirsty enemies. Should Space Marines become Equal Opportunity murderers? No, because that is a policy and a sentiment of our own, significantly gentler time.
There already ARE, what are for all intents and purposes, female Space Marines. They are called Sisters of Battle, and the only thing GW has to do with them is actually support them.
Nitpick, the Imperium isn't fascist. They're feudal and structured like the Holy Roman Empire. The Administratum itself has barely any legal control over anything and many of the organizations within the Imperium are rogue states only loosely held under power. A fascist would have a stroke looking at the Imperium and comprehending how it "works".
Galas wrote: Wow, this thread has come the full circle of people bringing politics for both sides of the feminism discussion without reason...
I'll leave this now... but before doing it:
GW, don't make Female Space Marines, make Females models to the races that have them in the fluff!
And talking about RPGs... I saw years ago a roleplay game in a forum where 4 players played as Space Marines. Two were good roleplayers: A Ultramarine and a Space Wolf. The others two... a Grey Knight and a Female Blood Angel.
It only took 10 posts for the Female Blood Angel and the Grey Knight to began to have sex. The others two players tried to carry the game in a productive way but it ended pretty soon. Make of that what you want
I really hate roleplayers like that and endeavor to stamp them out when I find them.
Luciferian wrote: Space Marines exist to do one thing; wield the utmost physical and martial might that human kind can muster to kill gak for the Emperor. That's it. It's the reason behind their genetic modifications, and for their recruitment from only the strongest of those born on the Imperium's most inhospitable and deadly worlds. They're not some kind of egalitarian peace-keeping force, they're a hidebound fraternity of fanatical killers serving a fascist regime as it tries to avoid total annihilation at the hands of even more ruthless and bloodthirsty enemies. Should Space Marines become Equal Opportunity murderers? No, because that is a policy and a sentiment of our own, significantly gentler time.
There already ARE, what are for all intents and purposes, female Space Marines. They are called Sisters of Battle, and the only thing GW has to do with them is actually support them.
Nitpick, the Imperium isn't fascist. They're feudal and structured like the Holy Roman Empire. The Administratum itself has barely any legal control over anything and many of the organizations within the Imperium are rogue states only loosely held under power. A fascist would have a stroke looking at the Imperium and comprehending how it "works".
Galas wrote: Wow, this thread has come the full circle of people bringing politics for both sides of the feminism discussion without reason...
I'll leave this now... but before doing it:
GW, don't make Female Space Marines, make Females models to the races that have them in the fluff!
And talking about RPGs... I saw years ago a roleplay game in a forum where 4 players played as Space Marines. Two were good roleplayers: A Ultramarine and a Space Wolf. The others two... a Grey Knight and a Female Blood Angel.
It only took 10 posts for the Female Blood Angel and the Grey Knight to began to have sex. The others two players tried to carry the game in a productive way but it ended pretty soon. Make of that what you want
I really hate roleplayers like that and endeavor to stamp them out when I find them.
they're not roleplayers they're ERPers and most RPers HATE them.
This is a typical and totally normal miss conception, if you don't follow the lore of AoS. Stormcast Eternal are magical empowered humans, but humans afterall. Much more than Space Marines.
Personally, I prefer it this way. The "They are woman inside that totally-male shape armour!" is pretty boring. They have done a good job doing a reasonable female armour, very bulky, without the typical boob-shape in the armour. (You know, like they do two balls. Here it jus has space)
It's been covered in this thread but I just want to say it: I hate this design more and more the more I see it. I hate the look of it, I hate the bizarre proportions of it, I hate the lore implications.
This whole 'is female, so smaller, softer, more petite' design philosophy is tiresome in the best of instances, but that torso is so darn tiny it could fit inside a regular stormcast's torso. The fact that it flies so hard in the face of all the existing lore describing women amongst the ranks of the normal, bulky stormcast eternals ultimately makes me more inclined to ignore it rather than everything that came before that contradicts it.
There are examples where people have slapped female heads on stormcast bodies and they look, strangely enough, like women in heavy armour. They look fine, and this is a solution to a non-existent problem.
If GW was to make female space marines I could care less. (They arent going to, and this 'end times' panic is way out of style, thank you.) But if they can't think of a way to do it without making them look like less thoroughly roided out compared to space marines, then I don't want them to do it.
But yeah, plastic sisters! Do it!
Female guardsmen? Fix the kit generally and include female head sculpts only. None of this Leftennant Mira size zero armour gak.
Improve the ratio of female/male parts in the inevitable plastic eldar revamp. Dark eldar are fine.
Literally everything except the sisters can be implemented alongside existing kit revamp projects. In much the same way that GW finally decided Shadowsun's 'Y' shaped nose was because of her gender and include a head with one in each of the revamped Tau kits.
The Rainbow Warriors are none of those things. They're named after the Greenpeace boat and, vicariously, the native american legend that was actually made up by an evangelist trying to convert people.
They exist solely for that image of a sister of battle shooting one. GW downplays them because it really is a one-note joke, and generally not funny enough to outshine the whole cultural genocide thing.
Actually, that model is the first model of a female stormcast eternal that GW has done. All the others models aren't male and female in male-shaped armour. They are all male. But the lore always speaked about male and female stormcast, yes.
But obviously, this comes down to personal preference based in our own reasons!
I want canonical Female Marines just to see the response from insecure manchildren on the Internet.
I want to be able to hear the frothing neckbeard shrieks of "SJW CANCER" and "GENETICALLY WEAKER" and aggressively unfunny transphobic "maybe the Emperor needs SRS"/"attack helicopter meme" stuff from my home.
And, hey, maybe it might let the hobby take a couple inching baby steps toward being able to talk about how it's a little fething weird that the only female models in the Imperium are -4 Str and have to strip down and get spanked when they've been naughty, and maybe that actually ISN'T "super cool so just shut up about it everything's perfect" just because it has an in-universe explanation.
That and frankly it makes sense. If Guilliman's gonna try to make Space Marines 2.0, doubling the pool of available candidates by fixing daddy's little FUBAR with chromosomes is a good place to start.
The only fluff I have read that makes any sense for NO GIRLS ALLOWED..
Is that the Primarchs are essentially clones of the Emperor himself, then the marines are augmented using the Genetic material of their Primarch. With the Emperor being Male it is a chromosome issue rather than a sexist one..
mynamelegend wrote: it's a little fething weird that the only female models in the Imperium are -4 Str and have to strip down and get spanked when they've been naughty, and maybe that actually ISN'T "super cool so just shut up about it everything's perfect"
See, this would seem less like SJW cancer if it had anything to do with anything.
See, this would seem less like SJW cancer if it had anything to do with anything.
Alright, so the usual response to "We'd like female Space Marines" is "Play Sisters of Battle".
Sisters of Battle are physically inferior to Space Marines, and have an entire unit specifically created to be fetish fuel and allow for nudity and BDSM-themed pain and humiliation of exclusively female characters.
"Wanna be a girl marine? Sure, just be weaker in every way and I hope you enjoy being spanked while naked in public" is actually not particularly cool.
Though honestly, between being SJW Cancer that doesn't have "anything to do with anything" and Transphobic Douche that doesn't have "anything to do with anything", I'll pick being the cancer every time.
(In case you didn't get it, I'm saying that the "lol maybe the Emperor is trans, being trans is a joke" bs was very, very uncool behavior.)
See, this would seem less like SJW cancer if it had anything to do with anything.
Alright, so the usual response to "We'd like female Space Marines" is "Play Sisters of Battle". Sisters of Battle are physically inferior to Space Marines, and have an entire unit specifically created to be fetish fuel and allow for nudity and BDSM-themed pain and humiliation of exclusively female characters. "Wanna be a girl marine? Sure, just be weaker in every way and I hope you enjoy being spanked while naked in public" is actually not particularly cool.
Though honestly, between being SJW Cancer that doesn't have "anything to do with anything" and Transphobic Douche that doesn't have "anything to do with anything", I'll pick being the cancer every time.
You are kinda underselling the Sisters of Battle here. The fact that they're human and are often called upon to purge heretic/renegade astartes says loads about their capabilities that few other branches of the Imperial military are expected to handle, short of other elite forces like Scions or other loyalist marines. Also, it seems kind of short-sighted to call Repentia simply fetish fuel, given that the whole thing about Sisters of Battle is their faith and the Repentia is another aspect of that, with it being focused on penance. You can project all your weird sexual ideas onto them if you like, but that's not what they're about. Of course it's dialed up to 11 as usual in 40k but that's the setting. They, unlike many other Imperial factions, repeatedly show in the fluff their purity and power against chaos from being the least affected, or sometimes semi-immunity from chaos afflictions and attacks that allow them to act as a bulwark for Imperial forces to counter-attack. They are certainly not weak at all compared to marines.
I mean, can we start first with the model lines that can have female options and get plastic sisters of battle before we jump the shark and go straight to retconning in female marines?
So you are stating, for the record, that you absolutely do not see how designing toys for adolescent boys, settling on "the girls should be forced to get naked because they've been bad girls, and have their sergeant unit whip them!", could in any way be construed in a sexual manner? That, in fact, anyone who points out that this is an extremely obviously sexual unit is the one who has a problem?
Yeah, sure, why not. For what it's worth, if you are actually serious in stating this, as opposed to an argument tactic, I believe you're being actively disingenuous or so naive that I can only assume you were chem-gelded at some point.
Alright, so the usual response to "We'd like female Space Marines" is "Play Sisters of Battle".
Sisters of Battle are physically inferior to Space Marines, and have an entire unit specifically created to be fetish fuel and allow for nudity and BDSM-themed pain and humiliation of exclusively female characters.
"Wanna be a girl marine? Sure, just be weaker in every way and I hope you enjoy being spanked while naked in public" is actually not particularly cool.
Though honestly, between being SJW Cancer that doesn't have "anything to do with anything" and Transphobic Douche that doesn't have "anything to do with anything", I'll pick being the cancer every time.
(In case you didn't get it, I'm saying that the "lol maybe the Emperor is trans, being trans is a joke" bs was very, very uncool behavior.)
Did I say that being trans is a joke? No, I didn't. I wasn't even making a joke. I was making a snide comment about the inevitable devolution of this kind of discussion - which you have rapidly accelerated since you've arrived.
Alas, yours is a rhetoric I know too well, along with its incendiary and hyperbolic nature.
The only question I have, is who got to you since you wrote this:
mynamelegend wrote: I was entering here hoping to see some cool ork models and it took until the third page for the OP to get around to it?
And he was actively afraid to post the pics?
Something is terribly wrong here, and it's not the subject of his work.
As atrocious as the nazis' actions were, and as atrocious as any other atrocity was (crusades, terror attacks, occupations, wars, what have you), censoring art and censoring the artist is always worth fighting against. Knee-jerk fear of the symbol just enhances the fear of what it symbolizes.
If a man is offended by art, that is his full and complete right.
But the artist's right is to create that offensive material. It has to be. In western society, in the modern world, freedom of speech and expression is seen as a basic human right.
If art is always safe, and never makes you think, is it art?
If you're telling the OP "THIS symbol is fine, and THIS one isn't", you are trying to censor him based on your own preferences and thoughts. It's your right to give your opinion of course, but to state it as a universal "thou must not" is simply not done.
It is the difference between taking offense at pictures of the Prophet Muhammed, and telling you that it should be ILLEGAL to portray the prophet.
If you want to make nazi orks, or jihad orks, or crusade orks, or muhammed orks, or orks pissing on a crucified Jesus, or god-knows-what-else kind of orky offensive weirdness you can think up? Go ahead. People might be offended, and that's their choice. But the creation of the object must be yours.
I don't see how "the Sisters of Battle are frankly kinda sexist" and "you should be allowed to be offended at things without calling for them to be illegal or disallowing them from being talked about" are ideologically incompatible.
Though, of course, if I called for Sisters of Battle to be banned for sale, or for GW to be censured for it, or even for people to stop buying and playing them, that would be quite a change from my old stance.
I stand by what I said.
People might be offended, and that's their choice. I am offended at your transphobic joke, and I am offended that the only female power armor models in Warhammer are also "genetically inferior" sex dolls. But the creation of that joke and the current incarnation of the Sisters of Battle are respectively yours, and Games Workshop's. I'm not telling you to not make such jokes, I'm saying that they are uncool. I'm not telling Games Workshop to not make female Space Marines either, for that matter (you'll notice that that is, in fact, the OTHER camp doing that). Nor am I ordering them to do so because it's the only possible path to being progressive. I'm saying I would be quite happy with seeing it.
And yes, I'm saying that my happiness would in no small part come from seeing the same branch of people that decry "SJWs" and "PC culture" get massively, unironically offended at them.
mynamelegend wrote: So you are stating, for the record, that you absolutely do not see how designing toys for adolescent boys, settling on "the girls should be forced to get naked because they've been bad girls, and have their sergeant unit whip them!", could in any way be construed in a sexual manner? That, in fact, anyone who points out that this is an extremely obviously sexual unit is the one who has a problem?
Yeah, sure, why not. For what it's worth, if you are actually serious in stating this, as opposed to an argument tactic, I believe you're being actively disingenuous or so naive that I can only assume you were chem-gelded at some point.
Within the context of 40K, no, and it seems that once again you deliberately choose to ignore that fact. Just like I don't see Daemonettes or Fiends and think "GW must be using the exposed boobs on these models to sell sex to kids!". It's overly reductive and honestly seems like an incredibly narrow-minded view. Repentia are functionally a female 40K version of the Flagellants from Fantasy, hell there's 40K arco-flagellants that are the almost same, just without the free will but almost the same amount of nudity and instead of needing to be whipped by a Mistress they pretty much whip themselves. Do you get all hot and bothered seeing them?
mynamelegend wrote: I don't see how "the Sisters of Battle are frankly kinda sexist" and "you should be allowed to be offended at things without calling for them to be illegal or disallowing them from being talked about" are ideologically incompatible.
Though, of course, if I called for Sisters of Battle to be banned for sale, or for GW to be censured for it, or even for people to stop buying and playing them, that would be quite a change from my old stance.
I stand by what I said.
People might be offended, and that's their choice. I am offended at your transphobic joke, and I am offended that the only female power armor models in Warhammer are also "genetically inferior" sex dolls. But the creation of that joke and the current incarnation of the Sisters of Battle are respectively yours, and Games Workshop's. I'm not telling you to not make such jokes, I'm saying that they are uncool. I'm not telling Games Workshop to not make female Space Marines either, for that matter (you'll notice that that is, in fact, the OTHER camp doing that). Nor am I ordering them to do so because it's the only possible path to being progressive. I'm saying I would be quite happy with seeing it.
And yes, I'm saying that my happiness would in no small part come from seeing the same branch of people that decry "SJWs" and "PC culture" get massively, unironically offended at them.
I called this with my first post in this thread. You openly admit that your motivations are mainly punitive - that is, regardless of its merit, you want something to happen merely to punish those who don't share your political views. If your aims were to bring awareness to the fact that the representation of the SoB is, in your opinion, sexist, you could have done that in a well-reasoned and respectful way. Instead, you began straight away by spewing rhetoric and flame baiting with cliched stereotypes and personal attacks. Because, exactly as I said, you've found ground to wage cultural warfare on and use something that other people enjoy as a wedge issue. That in itself is your sole purpose for being here at this very moment. It certainly isn't to engage in any kind of debate or discussion, otherwise you wouldn't automatically preclude any dissenting opinion from being anything other than the insecure wailing of neckbeards and man-children.
I already know that there will be no worthwhile debate with you, and you will continue to cherry pick anything which serves your purposes while descrying anything that does not as somehow invalid on the grounds of bigotry or injustice, no matter its factual or textual veracity. And you will do it all in the name of your personal politics, with absolutely no regard for anything else.
mynamelegend wrote: So you are stating, for the record, that you absolutely do not see how designing toys for adolescent boys, settling on "the girls should be forced to get naked because they've been bad girls, and have their sergeant unit whip them!", could in any way be construed in a sexual manner? That, in fact, anyone who points out that this is an extremely obviously sexual unit is the one who has a problem?
Yeah, sure, why not. For what it's worth, if you are actually serious in stating this, as opposed to an argument tactic, I believe you're being actively disingenuous or so naive that I can only assume you were chem-gelded at some point.
Here's and idea, if you don't want to be completely alone by alienating everyone who might possibly be on your side
STOP.
TALKING.
GAK.
ABOUT.
SOB.
Repentia or no repentia the vast majority of people who share even some of your opinions are likely favorable to SoB and pissing them off is not going to win you any support.
Sensual_T_Rex wrote: Like I said in the beginning there's no point in pandering to the professionally offended. No matter what you do they'll find fault in it and complain.
Yeah, that gak creeps me out, man. It's actually pretty pathological and repulsive. But hey, what do I know, I must either be a neckbeard or eunuch for holding that opinion
mynamelegend wrote: So you are stating, for the record, that you absolutely do not see how designing toys for adolescent boys, settling on "the girls should be forced to get naked because they've been bad girls, and have their sergeant unit whip them!", could in any way be construed in a sexual manner? That, in fact, anyone who points out that this is an extremely obviously sexual unit is the one who has a problem?
Yeah, sure, why not. For what it's worth, if you are actually serious in stating this, as opposed to an argument tactic, I believe you're being actively disingenuous or so naive that I can only assume you were chem-gelded at some point.
Jesus christ, I don't think I have ever seen anyone project this hard before. They're religious fanatics dialed up to an insane degree. Yeah, they wear less than the other Sisters, but Catachans wear less than your average Guardsman. Not all female nudity (and this isn't even nudity) is sexualised, and these sure as hell aren't. They're creepy. But yeah, they happen to have a female body. How shameful.
Its the typical Sjw's tactic anyone that disagrees must be shamed into compliance so it doesn't matter how logical or reasoned your arguments you committed wrong think so they think its okay to use any insult they like.
No one here objects to SoB female guard, or female inquisition members its not a case of eww no girls allowed.
Female marines make no sense in the setting it goes against the lore simple as that.
If all a person has is insults then they have no real argument.
I disagree with female Space Marines, it would involve a major retcon of the fluff of Space Marines to include them (which is that ONLY EVER MALES can be Space Marines). I think in the past its been chalked up to needing the male testosterone levels or the Y chromosome or some such.
The other side being, female space marines are utterly pointless. There are two ways models could go. Either, we have the utterly rediculous boob-plate space marines, in which case, these appeal to a small minority of overly sexual nerds who just want boobs in their army for no reason other than boobs... or they don't have boob-plate in which case they look exactly like male Space Marines. In which case the other difference is fluff. And, with Space Marines being pretty much genderless anyway, given that they have zero sexual urges, entirely focused on warfare, whether they are male or female is entirely irrelevant. So, why retcon 30 years of fluff for the sake of saying your models are female just because?
I do get the sexism arguments, but its pedantic, and nit-picky. At the end of the day its chunks of plastic on a table, and if you have to be so nit-picky that you neeeedddd female representation within a small society of trained killer supersoldiers, that's up to you. But I don't see any need for it.
Instead, how about proper female guard models, SoB, female Eldar, female Tau, female Inqusition models? These would at least look different and not totally crash the fluff of the biggest faction in the game.
Yeah they've brought back genestealer cults and given us mechanicum so its about time SoB got a new release and plastic sisters are perfectly possible with current tech.
And female guardsmen would just be a matter of heads as carapace would work for both genders as is.
mynamelegend wrote: So you are stating, for the record, that you absolutely do not see how designing toys for adolescent boys, settling on "the girls should be forced to get naked because they've been bad girls, and have their sergeant unit whip them!", could in any way be construed in a sexual manner? That, in fact, anyone who points out that this is an extremely obviously sexual unit is the one who has a problem?
Yeah, sure, why not. For what it's worth, if you are actually serious in stating this, as opposed to an argument tactic, I believe you're being actively disingenuous or so naive that I can only assume you were chem-gelded at some point.
1. They are not designed for adolescent boys. GW doesn't care if your male, female, both, trans, neither or Wookie, as long as you pay the bills. It just so happens to appeal to a certain brand of customer, who are stereotyped as being fat, greasy, sweaty and socially awkward (none of which really appeal to mainstream female demographics).
2. Sure, there could be construed a sexual element to them, however, the key thing is there is not intended to be any sexual modicum of the unit, they aren't repenting from sinful pre-marital sex or the female form. In this case, you are the only one sexualising them which is what you are arguing against. The fact no one else is looking at repentia and even considering that they are sexual means that the only one here sexualising bits of plastic is you.
I completly agree with that. Space Marine women can be intertaining, bring a lot of positive elements to the game in terms of aesthetic and character creation and, if integrated correctly, without sacrificing any elements of the current Space Marines (yes, even without sacrificing their overly macho and homoerotic undertone). I just don't trust GW authors to be capable of pulling it off. Very few writters have experience in that sort of thing neither do many readers like Luciferian. I'd rather have Space Marines as they are instead of having a poor man's version of both Space Marines women.
....Aight. This is getting silly. Screw a much later-dated piece of artwork showing arco-flagellants in gory detail, and let's look at the concept of Repentia from the original source - the models for them that were originally sculpted - for a second here.
There are three sculpts, it doesn't take that long.
Let's see, what do we expect if we're taking this concept seriously, i.e. following in line with Servitors and Arco-flagellants and other "dystopian horror" style units? Probably a bunch of emaciated, mutiliated outcasts already missing body parts, something like that?
What do we get? A bunch of perfect, voluptuous ladies whose black leather "armor" and robes just happens to include nearly exposed breasts and legs. 2/3 sculpts have their breasts barely concealed by a bit of metal, 1/3 was carefully constructed to show a some side-boob. And they've got a sergeant armed with whips and wearing a dominatrix mask.
Every prospective Sisters of Battle player is going to encounter them, and every one is going to get the intent of the joke. It's not subtle, guys. You can either decide it's not a big deal to you, or that maybe a you can find a different game/hobby, but denying that it exists is pretty freakin' dumb.
This unit was obviously intended to be a throwaway BDSM sex joke by the sculptor. Could they be redesigned into something inoffensive? Yeah, probably. But that'd require new models, which they haven't had for nearly 25 years. A piece of artwork shoved into a book somewhere showing them not as a sex joke is not going to cut it, because this is a miniature game, and those are the miniatures, right there.
Female marines? Ugh....I'm just so tired with the concept of the astartes in general now that I would just be irritated they're making yet more marine stuff. Sisters of battle are essentially the same concept, but slightly redesigned so that their rules aren't identical to astartes, which is fine, the game needs more differentiated unit archetypes and a T3 power armor army is more interesting than yet another marine statline army.
We're at the point where we can get all 9 space marine power armor marks, plus special boxes for space wolves dark angels grey knights and blood angels. Forgeworld sells 572 Dreadnought variations. Get GW to redesign Sisters as a decent plastic army, and leave one sculptor's awkward bdsm joke from 1990 behind, and redo the outdated basic infantry kits for the armies that are supposed to be equal opportunity, and you've pretty much fixed any problem that exists.
Alright, so the usual response to "We'd like female Space Marines" is "Play Sisters of Battle".
Or you can do what's actually come up in this thread and just head swap them and wave your hands and say "the warp" if anyone questions it.
If you want to twist the fluff to whatever you want it to be, go for it, no one is really going to care. But I've already outlined why it's real unlikely that GW will simply cram in female marines without some serious story progression/justification, it changes the dynamic due to a pile of social assumptions.that go into the structure of space marines and the story they're involved in. Could be real interesting, if someone had a good idea of something to do with it, but frankly I don't see it changing anything more than some head swaps would right now.
And as a mildly offended sisters player, they're way more interesting than space marines. They're human, they aren't engineered for war, half their gear is more reliquary than wargear, relentless to a point space marines find them obstinate and they're ridiculous to the point of greatness. The few novels they've gotten were quite good and I'd kill a man to get a hold of the audio drama, and reading them would probably fix up your problems with them a bit. Repentia are not sexy, they're flagellants with gigantic chainsaws and a death wish. Minis are questionable, but the actual fluff and art of them of them is pretty horrifying. I like my power armored flamer wielding church ladies thank you. So long as they're pointed at someone else at least.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.
OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.
They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.
There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.
I forsee that this is JUST ANOTHER troll thread. It has been discussed 10^9 times, with the same conclusion. There are no female space marines, and there will never be. Get over it.
Although, feel free to convert your SM army to be females if you want to look like a virgin manchild. Nothing holds you back...
HexHammer wrote: I foresee that there will come female space marines with the end times. That the Emperor finally have figured out how to make them and Rowboat will execute the vision that he was given when meeting with his father.
(GW smelled the coffee at long last and found a pretext how to implement females to the chapters)
Always noobs or feminists who post these dumb topics about female sm. News flash! They are called sisters of battle.
Just like the Norovirus, this topic comes around at least once a year and results in explosive volumes of.... *ahem* posted.
Can we just skip the whole pretense and just get straight to the arguments of sexism in our modern society, gender stereotyping and people pretending to understand GW financial reports and sales strategy regarding plastic boobplate?
A discussion always full of fun and excitement. But not one suited for the 40k general.
Suffice to say I think my concern was expressed more eloquently than I could have: GW can't be trusted to design female space marines well, and they're frankly way behind on representing the actual gender parity that's present in their fluff.
CadianGateTroll wrote: Always noobs or feminists who post these dumb topics about female sm. News flash! They are called sisters of battle.
Dude, it's only 5 pages, we've been through this already.
Wulfmar wrote: Just like the Norovirus, this topic comes around at least once a year and results in explosive volumes of.... *ahem* posted.
Can we just skip the whole pretense and just get straight to the arguments of sexism in our modern society, gender stereotyping and people pretending to understand GW financial reports and sales strategy regarding plastic boobplate?
If the whole point of modeling boobplate is to get people to buy the models, GW is doing something wrong.
On the topic of getting our britches twisted because "secksizm" and "muh gender stereotypes," the more people say it disturbs them, the more I think it should stay because after all, Warhammer 40k should always be a dystopia.
Hawky wrote:I forsee that this is JUST ANOTHER troll thread. It has been discussed 10^9 times, with the same conclusion. There are no female space marines, and there will never be. Get over it.
Although, feel free to convert your SM army to be females if you want to look like a virgin manchild. Nothing holds you back...
HandofMars wrote:This bait is too obvious.
While whether this topic is intended as trollbait or not is up for debate (and I also reject the idea of female marines), the discussion around feminism and sexism within wargaming is something that needs discussed, albeit in a reasonable and calm way.
For example, arguments could be made about the hypermasculine nature of Space Marines and exclusion of female Marines being sexist. Being a 1980s creation, I have no doubt there was some entrenched gender politics going on, but let's calmly discuss it.
Now, there are different views of feminism and I personal consider myself a Liberal Feminist. However, from a radical feminist point of view, this is a clear case of women being excluded from the super awesome soldier group that are Space Marines, the posterboys of the universe, implications being as benign as "Women can't be part of the club" to as toxic as "Women can't be as good as men, especially these super men."
I can see the argument made and acknowledge the claim is not unfounded. However, quite easily changed by GW by shoehorning FeMarines into the setting. So why don't they?
Well, as I previously mentioned I don't disagree on the argument made, I disagree on the usefulness of changing the fluff so radically. In the end, Space Marines are, functionally, genderless, as they have no sexual or personal desires except to fight in battle. Either men or women can do this in 40k, as shown by Sisters of Battle. This is not to say that Sisters of Battle fill the niche that FeMarines would, because they don't, and to say they are in fact reinforces the argument, as shown by stats, fluff and level of GW and player support all being significantly inferior to Space Marines. All I am saying is that both male and female are capable of complete devotion to the cause at cost of chastity and personal desires.
Now, why then should we not bring in FeMarines, even as a modelling option to standard marine kits? Well, for one, there are two routes to go with the models:
1. Boobs. Boobs, Boobs, Boobs. More specifically boob-armour. Which in itself is sexist and personally found distasteful, as it needless sexualises the model by giving it boobs for aesthetics. Space Marine armour is not form-fitting, and changing the shape of it to make it clear that "THIS MODEL HAS BEWBS" is pointless and tacky. From a fluff perspective, it would also make the armour thinner, change the angle and shape and thus the deflective properties, and be totally unnecessary.
2. No Boobs. This means a Female Space Marine would wear the exact same armour as the male versions, with the same levels of protection, and look identical in every single way. The only change would be the helmetless heads. Even then, would a female Space Marine look different to a male? Maybe more rounded features to distinguish between? Haircut would not be needed. After all, what use does a Space Marine have for long hair? It gets in the way, is something for an enemy to grab hold of in combat. Would a female marine not simply shave or cut their hair short like males, as it serves no practical purpose in the theatre of war? In which case, what aesthetic differences would a female marine have to a male one, and would it be enough to warrant a whole new model line?
Now, the fluff would require complete overhaul. For 30 years, Astartes are singularly male, no exceptions. Various reasons exist with no real clear answer, however, it has been suggested that only males can go through the transformation as it works in concert with male puberty and the massive increase in testosterone that men gain. Women obviously do not get this amount, so if the process requires it, its a genetic blocker to them. Now, this depends on whether the Emperor designed the process to exclude females, or whether the process simply doesn't work with them. Intentional or side effect? At current, its a side effect. It's like how the Pill doesn't work on men for contraception, because they don't have the right biology for it.
Changing this would require a fluff overhaul on the scale of Necrons 5th Ed, and would be very costly to do. This may also irk some players, although why, I have no idea and don't condone this for obvious reasons.
Why not invent a method that allows them to become Astartes? Well, if the process doesn't work with females, why invest resources to turn women into Space Marines when it works well enough already? Its a plain waste of resources to fix a military issue that doesn't exist.
In summary, there is very little to justify the change in the models, as on a realistic spectrum, they should look identical. In the fluff, they would be functionally identical as well, and would require a massive and costly overhaul of fluff so some can feel justified in pointing to their models and saying "These are females and its canon." The plain old argument of cost vs benefit in the real world would be rediculously weighted against it. All that would change is your headcanon aboout your own models would then become canon.
Now, I would not be opposed to FeMarines entering the fluff if GW did so today. I would just rather they spent their budget on releasing new models, fluff and other stuff, as well as developing rules.
Yes.... and NO. I have two daughters age 10 and 7. I am trying to warp my 10 year old into some miniature gaming with "Old Dad." When we went into the FLGS she was amazed by the quality of models and the inventory but with WH40K the first thing she asked was "where are the girls at?" She bought a 28mm princess Leia and is painting that model right now.
That said... can there not be any bastion of male dominated anything anymore? If WH40K can't be a perverse, oppressive, bigoted, sexist, sadistic, xenophobic, not at all homophobic, nightmare and cruelty fueled wet dream... what can?
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.
OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.
They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.
There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.
Yeah, the Imperium Assasins have the technology to make super humans that aren't space marines. In many cases I'll say that your Callidus or Eversor assasin can without a problem kill a normal Space Marine in 1vs1. Some kind of Valkirie/Shieldmaiden to the Space Wolves don't need to be so powerfull, but its a precedent that you can have some kind of "Servant" to the Space Wolves, or "Auxiliar unit", without being Female Space Marines.
Spoiler:
the_scotsman wrote: ....Aight. This is getting silly. Screw a much later-dated piece of artwork showing arco-flagellants in gory detail, and let's look at the concept of Repentia from the original source - the models for them that were originally sculpted - for a second here.
There are three sculpts, it doesn't take that long.
Let's see, what do we expect if we're taking this concept seriously, i.e. following in line with Servitors and Arco-flagellants and other "dystopian horror" style units? Probably a bunch of emaciated, mutiliated outcasts already missing body parts, something like that?
What do we get? A bunch of perfect, voluptuous ladies whose black leather "armor" and robes just happens to include nearly exposed breasts and legs. 2/3 sculpts have their breasts barely concealed by a bit of metal, 1/3 was carefully constructed to show a some side-boob. And they've got a sergeant armed with whips and wearing a dominatrix mask.
Every prospective Sisters of Battle player is going to encounter them, and every one is going to get the intent of the joke. It's not subtle, guys. You can either decide it's not a big deal to you, or that maybe a you can find a different game/hobby, but denying that it exists is pretty freakin' dumb.
This unit was obviously intended to be a throwaway BDSM sex joke by the sculptor. Could they be redesigned into something inoffensive? Yeah, probably. But that'd require new models, which they haven't had for nearly 25 years. A piece of artwork shoved into a book somewhere showing them not as a sex joke is not going to cut it, because this is a miniature game, and those are the miniatures, right there.
Female marines? Ugh....I'm just so tired with the concept of the astartes in general now that I would just be irritated they're making yet more marine stuff. Sisters of battle are essentially the same concept, but slightly redesigned so that their rules aren't identical to astartes, which is fine, the game needs more differentiated unit archetypes and a T3 power armor army is more interesting than yet another marine statline army.
We're at the point where we can get all 9 space marine power armor marks, plus special boxes for space wolves dark angels grey knights and blood angels. Forgeworld sells 572 Dreadnought variations. Get GW to redesign Sisters as a decent plastic army, and leave one sculptor's awkward bdsm joke from 1990 behind, and redo the outdated basic infantry kits for the armies that are supposed to be equal opportunity, and you've pretty much fixed any problem that exists.
I agree that the models of the Sister Repentia don't do merit to the twisted reality of their fluff. But those models are a child of their time, the 80's. You can't judge that with our standarts of today. I expect that, when they relaunch SOB (Please do it GW ) They will give them a more aproppiate look with their fluff.
I disagree with you on several points. Space Marines are clearly represented as men, vehiculate masculine values and stereotypes and have a rich emotional lives. They create strong relationships and express all the palets of human emotion like disgust, pride, stubborness and yes, even fear, but its more a fear of humiliation than aything else. Some Space Marines create strong bonds with each others or even with simple humans. Some, even, love as shown in the first three novels of the Horus Heresy and in the Salamander novels for example. You can totally imagine Space Marines as genderless warriors, but that's not ho they are portrayed in a lot of books, source material and art work. While their focus is on war, its not their sole concern. They are deeply religious and strongly tradtionnal. They question they role within the Imperium and their relationships with human on a frequent basis. Many have a taste for art, laws, science and engineering.
As for your arguments about modelling, they constitute an argument from incredulity since I can imagine numerous ways to represent women as Space Marines in an evident, yet non overly sexualised fashion (AKA no boob plate). I don't think any argument should be based on the efficiency of the design of the Space Marine armor to avoid going in pseudo-scientific explainations.
The same goes with the transformation of Space Marines. The New Marines are, potentially, created in a different, better fashion. No overhaul is needed in adding a new type of units. Centurion didn't massively altered the fluff of the Space Marines, neither were all their fliers. We aren't talking about retconning the fact that all Space Marines were male, but are meerly saying that, after 10 000 years, its now possible for women to become Space Marines. In such circomstances there is no retcon, only addition of new information that changes the future of the Adeptus Astartes, not its past. This makes your argument moot.
As for the reason why should such change occur, the answer to me is pretty simple and htere are two possible. One, the New Marine creating process is, by complete chance, working on women too. Two, its a deliberate change in order to make Space Marines better, by removing a non-excellence based criteria to become a Space Marines. If you want the best and brightest to become Space Marines, many of the best and brightest human beings are women. By this you naturally improve and widden your recruitment base and thus can recruit better aspirants. This is very useful when you are fighting for your survival.
The only reason I am opposed to women Space Marines is because I think GW will lack the proper inspiration to make them anything else, but tacky (or useless) and, if not, will fail to preserve the most interesting part of the Space Marine characterisation: their machismo and homoerotism. Could it be done well and preserve these aspects and add quality women Space Marines? Yes, but its difficult. For these reason, I don't think your arguments are very convincing. To me, half of them are non sequitur and the other half are arguments from incredulity and fallacious appeal to traditions.
PS: The Repentia model we have date back from 2003 when the Codex Witch Hunter was first published. The unit concept might date back from the Rogue Trader era, but not the models.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.
OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.
They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.
There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.
Yeah, the Imperium Assasins have the technology to make super humans that aren't space marines. In many cases I'll say that your Callidus or Eversor assasin can without a problem kill a normal Space Marine in 1vs1. Some kind of Valkirie/Shieldmaiden to the Space Wolves don't need to be so powerfull, but its a precedent that you can have some kind of "Servant" to the Space Wolves, or "Auxiliar unit", without being Female Space Marines.
Spoiler:
the_scotsman wrote: ....Aight. This is getting silly. Screw a much later-dated piece of artwork showing arco-flagellants in gory detail, and let's look at the concept of Repentia from the original source - the models for them that were originally sculpted - for a second here.
There are three sculpts, it doesn't take that long.
Let's see, what do we expect if we're taking this concept seriously, i.e. following in line with Servitors and Arco-flagellants and other "dystopian horror" style units? Probably a bunch of emaciated, mutiliated outcasts already missing body parts, something like that?
What do we get? A bunch of perfect, voluptuous ladies whose black leather "armor" and robes just happens to include nearly exposed breasts and legs. 2/3 sculpts have their breasts barely concealed by a bit of metal, 1/3 was carefully constructed to show a some side-boob. And they've got a sergeant armed with whips and wearing a dominatrix mask.
Every prospective Sisters of Battle player is going to encounter them, and every one is going to get the intent of the joke. It's not subtle, guys. You can either decide it's not a big deal to you, or that maybe a you can find a different game/hobby, but denying that it exists is pretty freakin' dumb.
This unit was obviously intended to be a throwaway BDSM sex joke by the sculptor. Could they be redesigned into something inoffensive? Yeah, probably. But that'd require new models, which they haven't had for nearly 25 years. A piece of artwork shoved into a book somewhere showing them not as a sex joke is not going to cut it, because this is a miniature game, and those are the miniatures, right there.
Female marines? Ugh....I'm just so tired with the concept of the astartes in general now that I would just be irritated they're making yet more marine stuff. Sisters of battle are essentially the same concept, but slightly redesigned so that their rules aren't identical to astartes, which is fine, the game needs more differentiated unit archetypes and a T3 power armor army is more interesting than yet another marine statline army.
We're at the point where we can get all 9 space marine power armor marks, plus special boxes for space wolves dark angels grey knights and blood angels. Forgeworld sells 572 Dreadnought variations. Get GW to redesign Sisters as a decent plastic army, and leave one sculptor's awkward bdsm joke from 1990 behind, and redo the outdated basic infantry kits for the armies that are supposed to be equal opportunity, and you've pretty much fixed any problem that exists.
I agree that the models of the Sister Repentia don't do merit to the twisted reality of their fluff. But those models are a child of their time, the 80's. You can't judge that with our standarts of today. I expect that, when they relaunch SOB (Please do it GW ) They will give them a more aproppiate look with their fluff.
The Repentia are a child of the '80s, but I don't think this should be used as an excuse. In fact, I think this should be used as the stick and carrot both to encourage new Sisters models. The carrot "GW could have better gender representation and attract more female and feminist customers" and the stick being "You don't have enough female miniatures that aren't half-naked "
No because there are more marines in a single chapter than there are assassins of a single temple. Apply any logic you want, the current fluff won't get around it.
Quickjager wrote: No because there are more marines in a single chapter than there are assassins of a single temple. Apply any logic you want, the current fluff won't get around it.
It's a complete rewrite or nothing.
If you are answering to my point, I think you need to re-read it, because that has nothing to do with what I said
I disagree with you on several points. Space Marines are clearly represented as men, vehiculate masculine values and stereotypes and have a rich emotional lives. They create strong relationships and express all the palets of human emotion like disgust, pride, stubborness and yes, even fear, but its more a fear of humiliation than aything else. Some Space Marines create strong bonds with each others or even with simple humans. Some, even, love as shown in the first three novels of the Horus Heresy and in the Salamander novels for example.
Are they represented as men? They use masculine pronouns, of course, and *were* males at birth. Post-Astartes implantation, they're eunuchs who use male pronouns. If I was reduced to just my head (so detached from my genetalia, torso, arms, legs etc etc) and I go by a male pronoun, am I a male? What about the inverse - a head which goes by female pronouns?
Also, I've read all three of the original Horus Heresy novels and didn't find any love (that is, beyond that of comradeship) present. Is that what you were implying, or something else?
You can totally imagine Space Marines as genderless warriors, but that's not ho they are portrayed in a lot of books, source material and art work. While their focus is on war, its not their sole concern. They are deeply religious and strongly tradtionnal. They question they role within the Imperium and their relationships with human on a frequent basis. Many have a taste for art, laws, science and engineering.
Absolutely so. How does that relate to their gender? I can be genderless and have taste in art/law/science/engineering. Alternatively, I can be genderfluid and have the same tastes.
Does my gender affect my tastes?
As for your arguments about modelling, they constitute an argument from incredulity since I can imagine numerous ways to represent women as Space Marines in an evident, yet non overly sexualised fashion (AKA no boob plate). I don't think any argument should be based on the efficiency of the design of the Space Marine armor to avoid going in pseudo-scientific explainations.
These examples being?
They would need the same strength as a current Astartes, or else they wouldn't be in the army. So their mass needs to be the same. They would most likely lack boobs anyway, due to having them removed. So, we're left with their faces, which may be obscured by helmets. Many could well be bald, and males could have long hair too - of course, they may need it short, due to it presenting a liability in melee combat. So, face shape? However, with all the drugs and implants, especially in their heads, who's to say that they would look different?
Essentially, there's a good chance that a female inducted into the Astartes would look identical.
The same goes with the transformation of Space Marines. The New Marines are, potentially, created in a different, better fashion. No overhaul is needed in adding a new type of units. Centurion didn't massively altered the fluff of the Space Marines, neither were all their fliers. We aren't talking about retconning the fact that all Space Marines were male, but are meerly saying that, after 10 000 years, its now possible for women to become Space Marines. In such circomstances there is no retcon, only addition of new information that changes the future of the Adeptus Astartes, not its past. This makes your argument moot.
Only in the NuMarines, I might add. If the NuMarines are capable of female recruits, I will not bat an eyelid. It would be a retcon if it were in the standard Astartes though.
As for the reason why should such change occur, the answer to me is pretty simple and htere are two possible. One, the New Marine creating process is, by complete chance, working on women too.
In which case, brilliant. No complaints from me.
Two, its a deliberate change in order to make Space Marines better, by removing a non-excellence based criteria to become a Space Marines. If you want the best and brightest to become Space Marines, many of the best and brightest human beings are women. By this you naturally improve and widden your recruitment base and thus can recruit better aspirants. This is very useful when you are fighting for your survival.
If you want the best and brightest to be Space Marines, then surely you would want an excellence based criteria? If it were possible that a female could be implanted, and if they passed all the same tests that a male applicant would, then there's no reason they shouldn't be applicable. If they accomplish the same mental and physical tasks, then so be it - induct them.
Your idea would widen then base, but not mean you could induct better applicants, because you still need them to be up to standard, and survive the implantation process.
The only reason they aren't considered is because we know that the standard gene-seed does not work for them.
The only reason I am opposed to women Space Marines is because I think GW will lack the proper inspiration to make them anything else, but tacky (or useless) and, if not, will fail to preserve the most interesting part of the Space Marine characterisation: their machismo and homoerotism.
Is that the essential reason? If it were just that, why keep it?
Could it be done well and preserve these aspects and add quality women Space Marines? Yes, but its difficult. For these reason, I don't think your arguments are very convincing. To me, half of them are non sequitur and the other half are arguments from incredulity and fallacious appeal to traditions.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.
OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.
They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.
There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.
Yeah, the Imperium Assasins have the technology to make super humans that aren't space marines. In many cases I'll say that your Callidus or Eversor assasin can without a problem kill a normal Space Marine in 1vs1. Some kind of Valkirie/Shieldmaiden to the Space Wolves don't need to be so powerfull, but its a precedent that you can have some kind of "Servant" to the Space Wolves, or "Auxiliar unit", without being Female Space Marines.
Spoiler:
the_scotsman wrote: ....Aight. This is getting silly. Screw a much later-dated piece of artwork showing arco-flagellants in gory detail, and let's look at the concept of Repentia from the original source - the models for them that were originally sculpted - for a second here.
There are three sculpts, it doesn't take that long.
Let's see, what do we expect if we're taking this concept seriously, i.e. following in line with Servitors and Arco-flagellants and other "dystopian horror" style units? Probably a bunch of emaciated, mutiliated outcasts already missing body parts, something like that?
What do we get? A bunch of perfect, voluptuous ladies whose black leather "armor" and robes just happens to include nearly exposed breasts and legs. 2/3 sculpts have their breasts barely concealed by a bit of metal, 1/3 was carefully constructed to show a some side-boob. And they've got a sergeant armed with whips and wearing a dominatrix mask.
Every prospective Sisters of Battle player is going to encounter them, and every one is going to get the intent of the joke. It's not subtle, guys. You can either decide it's not a big deal to you, or that maybe a you can find a different game/hobby, but denying that it exists is pretty freakin' dumb.
This unit was obviously intended to be a throwaway BDSM sex joke by the sculptor. Could they be redesigned into something inoffensive? Yeah, probably. But that'd require new models, which they haven't had for nearly 25 years. A piece of artwork shoved into a book somewhere showing them not as a sex joke is not going to cut it, because this is a miniature game, and those are the miniatures, right there.
Female marines? Ugh....I'm just so tired with the concept of the astartes in general now that I would just be irritated they're making yet more marine stuff. Sisters of battle are essentially the same concept, but slightly redesigned so that their rules aren't identical to astartes, which is fine, the game needs more differentiated unit archetypes and a T3 power armor army is more interesting than yet another marine statline army.
We're at the point where we can get all 9 space marine power armor marks, plus special boxes for space wolves dark angels grey knights and blood angels. Forgeworld sells 572 Dreadnought variations. Get GW to redesign Sisters as a decent plastic army, and leave one sculptor's awkward bdsm joke from 1990 behind, and redo the outdated basic infantry kits for the armies that are supposed to be equal opportunity, and you've pretty much fixed any problem that exists.
I agree that the models of the Sister Repentia don't do merit to the twisted reality of their fluff. But those models are a child of their time, the 80's. You can't judge that with our standarts of today. I expect that, when they relaunch SOB (Please do it GW ) They will give them a more aproppiate look with their fluff.
The Repentia are a child of the '80s, but I don't think this should be used as an excuse. In fact, I think this should be used as the stick and carrot both to encourage new Sisters models. The carrot "GW could have better gender representation and attract more female and feminist customers" and the stick being "You don't have enough female miniatures that aren't half-naked "
But again as has been shown changing your product for feminists from tumblr does not improve sales ever in fact it loses them.
They don't buy the products and won't even if you change them, its not a thing up for debate there are too many examples of toxic third wave feminism infiltrating and then destroying communities just look what they did to new atheism.
Honestly I wouldn't want a bigot coming into the place I play and start going on about how straight white guys are responsible for all evil in the world and then demand you let them win because your ancestor did something to their ancestor.
But again as has been shown changing your product for feminists from tumblr does not improve sales ever in fact it loses them.
They don't buy the products and won't even if you change them, its not a thing up for debate there are too many examples of toxic third wave feminism infiltrating and then destroying communities just look what they did to new atheism.
Honestly I wouldn't want a bigot coming into the place I play and start going on about how straight white guys are responsible for all evil in the world and then demand you let them win because your ancestor did something to their ancestor.
Feth that.
Count me in this camp. I think it's a great idea for GW's product line in general to be more inclusive and representative, for them to show some love to SoB, and even for them to "modernize" models like the Repentia to make them more tasteful. However, there is a very thin line for something like female Space marines; on one side there's simply more adolescent fap fuel, and on the other there's intentionally destroying thematic and textual elements of the setting for the sole purpose of turning 40k into a blunt political instrument. I don't want to attract people who want either of those things. Giving the latter group concessions only shows them you can be cowed into allowing them to police your thoughts and to use coercive, cult-like tactics to extort your compliance.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.
OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.
They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.
There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.
Yeah, the Imperium Assasins have the technology to make super humans that aren't space marines. In many cases I'll say that your Callidus or Eversor assasin can without a problem kill a normal Space Marine in 1vs1. Some kind of Valkirie/Shieldmaiden to the Space Wolves don't need to be so powerfull, but its a precedent that you can have some kind of "Servant" to the Space Wolves, or "Auxiliar unit", without being Female Space Marines.
Spoiler:
the_scotsman wrote: ....Aight. This is getting silly. Screw a much later-dated piece of artwork showing arco-flagellants in gory detail, and let's look at the concept of Repentia from the original source - the models for them that were originally sculpted - for a second here.
There are three sculpts, it doesn't take that long.
Let's see, what do we expect if we're taking this concept seriously, i.e. following in line with Servitors and Arco-flagellants and other "dystopian horror" style units? Probably a bunch of emaciated, mutiliated outcasts already missing body parts, something like that?
What do we get? A bunch of perfect, voluptuous ladies whose black leather "armor" and robes just happens to include nearly exposed breasts and legs. 2/3 sculpts have their breasts barely concealed by a bit of metal, 1/3 was carefully constructed to show a some side-boob. And they've got a sergeant armed with whips and wearing a dominatrix mask.
Every prospective Sisters of Battle player is going to encounter them, and every one is going to get the intent of the joke. It's not subtle, guys. You can either decide it's not a big deal to you, or that maybe a you can find a different game/hobby, but denying that it exists is pretty freakin' dumb.
This unit was obviously intended to be a throwaway BDSM sex joke by the sculptor. Could they be redesigned into something inoffensive? Yeah, probably. But that'd require new models, which they haven't had for nearly 25 years. A piece of artwork shoved into a book somewhere showing them not as a sex joke is not going to cut it, because this is a miniature game, and those are the miniatures, right there.
Female marines? Ugh....I'm just so tired with the concept of the astartes in general now that I would just be irritated they're making yet more marine stuff. Sisters of battle are essentially the same concept, but slightly redesigned so that their rules aren't identical to astartes, which is fine, the game needs more differentiated unit archetypes and a T3 power armor army is more interesting than yet another marine statline army.
We're at the point where we can get all 9 space marine power armor marks, plus special boxes for space wolves dark angels grey knights and blood angels. Forgeworld sells 572 Dreadnought variations. Get GW to redesign Sisters as a decent plastic army, and leave one sculptor's awkward bdsm joke from 1990 behind, and redo the outdated basic infantry kits for the armies that are supposed to be equal opportunity, and you've pretty much fixed any problem that exists.
I agree that the models of the Sister Repentia don't do merit to the twisted reality of their fluff. But those models are a child of their time, the 80's. You can't judge that with our standarts of today. I expect that, when they relaunch SOB (Please do it GW ) They will give them a more aproppiate look with their fluff.
The Repentia are a child of the '80s, but I don't think this should be used as an excuse. In fact, I think this should be used as the stick and carrot both to encourage new Sisters models. The carrot "GW could have better gender representation and attract more female and feminist customers" and the stick being "You don't have enough female miniatures that aren't half-naked "
But again as has been shown changing your product for feminists from tumblr does not improve sales ever in fact it loses them.
They don't buy the products and won't even if you change them, its not a thing up for debate there are too many examples of toxic third wave feminism infiltrating and then destroying communities just look what they did to new atheism.
Honestly I wouldn't want a bigot coming into the place I play and start going on about how straight white guys are responsible for all evil in the world and then demand you let them win because your ancestor did something to their ancestor.
Feth that.
I think your issues go beyond the basics of whether or not there should and feasibly could be introduced into the setting. If you have an issue with feminism, feminists or females in the gaming clun that's your problem and doesn't belong in this discussion.
But again as has been shown changing your product for feminists from tumblr does not improve sales ever in fact it loses them.
They don't buy the products and won't even if you change them, its not a thing up for debate there are too many examples of toxic third wave feminism infiltrating and then destroying communities just look what they did to new atheism.
Honestly I wouldn't want a bigot coming into the place I play and start going on about how straight white guys are responsible for all evil in the world and then demand you let them win because your ancestor did something to their ancestor.
Feth that.
Count me in this camp. I think it's a great idea for GW's product line in general to be more inclusive and representative, for them to show some love to SoB, and even for them to "modernize" models like the Repentia to make them more tasteful. However, there is a very thin line for something like female Space marines; on one side there's simply more adolescent fap fuel, and on the other there's intentionally destroying thematic and textual elements of the setting for the sole purpose of turning 40k into a blunt political instrument. I don't want to attract people who want either of those things. Giving the latter group concessions only shows them you can be cowed into allowing them to police your thoughts and to use coercive, cult-like tactics to extort your compliance.
Its called "demographics" and markets. If there's a vocal enough faction within the overall market asking for one thing, like FeMarines (copyrigjhting that) then why should GW not be permitted to produce them? If the rest of the market cares that muvh they can be as vocal. Let the business follow business. Its not cult tactics, its supply and demand.
Let's not mix terms i'm very specifically against 3rd wave feminism i am myself a 2nd wave femenist.
I'm against a very specific group not feminism in general.
I've got nothing against women nor do i have a problem playing games with them.
But again to point this out only 16% of american and 7% of uk women call themselves femenist, the vast majority of women do not support modern feminism either, because like me they know it's become a hate movement and has long since diverted away from equality.
I think your issues go beyond the basics of whether or not there should and feasibly could be introduced into the setting. If you have an issue with feminism, feminists or females in the gaming clun that's your problem and doesn't belong in this discussion.
Its called "demographics" and markets. If there's a vocal enough faction within the overall market asking for one thing, like FeMarines (copyrigjhting that) then why should GW not be permitted to produce them? If the rest of the market cares that muvh they can be as vocal. Let the business follow business. Its not cult tactics, its supply and demand.
Unfortunately I have to disagree with you. Not that anyone should be able to produce or buy whatever they want, but that such a demand for this specific thing exists in a profitable manner. Outside of an extremely vocal and extremely small minority who use coercion instead of purchasing power to achieve their goals, no one is really clamoring for female Space Marines, even the more "feminist" people in this thread. "Just because" isn't a compelling reason to seek something like that, but enforcing and policing political boundaries IS.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Are they represented as men? They use masculine pronouns, of course, and *were* males at birth. Post-Astartes implantation, they're eunuchs who use male pronouns. If I was reduced to just my head (so detached from my genetalia, torso, arms, legs etc etc) and I go by a male pronoun, am I a male? What about the inverse - a head which goes by female pronouns?
Also, I've read all three of the original Horus Heresy novels and didn't find any love (that is, beyond that of comradeship) present. Is that what you were implying, or something else?
Space Marines aren't masculine only by virtue of their phenotype, but they are masculine in the socio-cultural sense by modern Occidental standards. They are described and interract very much like stereotypical cisgendered males.
In the Horus Heresy novels and Salamanders novels, some relationships could be described as romantic, but never as sexual (Ka'dai and his apothecary is the biggest one as some within the chapter even Wonder if they were fully in love). You can have romance with someone without being sexualy attracted or consume this relationship. It's what we usualy refer as Platonic love, a deep sense of communion that goes beyond friendship, but never become fully sexual (though there might be a form of sexual tension). That's the form of relationship I was referring to as homoerotic love.
Absolutely so. How does that relate to their gender? I can be genderless and have taste in art/law/science/engineering. Alternatively, I can be genderfluid and have the same tastes.
Does my gender affect my tastes?
The argument you are refering to doesnt adress the gender of Space Marines but their vision as purely war machine which they are not. They are warriors yes, but they can be more.
These examples being?
They would need the same strength as a current Astartes, or else they wouldn't be in the army. So their mass needs to be the same. They would most likely lack boobs anyway, due to having them removed. So, we're left with their faces, which may be obscured by helmets. Many could well be bald, and males could have long hair too - of course, they may need it short, due to it presenting a liability in melee combat. So, face shape? However, with all the drugs and implants, especially in their heads, who's to say that they would look different?
Essentially, there's a good chance that a female inducted into the Astartes would look identical.
Again, this is an argument of incredulity based on nothing very concrete. Space Marines look just like men. Some are beautiful, others, ugly as balls. AlI of them look muscular, but not built like weightlifters, more like martial artists or sport adepts. I don't see why it would be different for women Space Marines. They could and probably would look like highly athletic women. Who knows how and why the New Marine transformation affect the body of a women. Since its a work of fiction, we can find all sorts of justifictions for the chosen appearence of women Marines (which woud be based on peronnal preferences). For example, if I wanted them to look like bikini supermodels (not that's what I would do, I would model the after combat sport athlete), I could say that their muscle, while small, are superperformant and they stand almost a foot taller than Space Marine men due to how the new cocktail of hormones makes the growth spur of women stop at the same time than men. This makes them, much taller and leaner, but just as strong and heavy. That's just one example of many that make as much sense as yours. I could also declare that, in general, Space Marine women are a little bit weaker than their masculine counterpart, but they are nimbler and have sharper senses thus making them just as good on the battlefield. Bikini model Space Marine women make as much sense as ultra butch Space Marine Women provided there is an explanation behind those choices that can hold the water just as well as having fused rib-cage, but still being capable of breathing. Truth be told, if we are consistent, there is probably a wide variety of shape and size within the Space Marines, some are certainly much taller and stronger than others, while some are more quick, nimble and agile. If some Space Marines are pretty others are ugly. It would be the same for women.
If you want the best and brightest to be Space Marines, then surely you would want an excellence based criteria? If it were possible that a female could be implanted, and if they passed all the same tests that a male applicant would, then there's no reason they shouldn't be applicable. If they accomplish the same mental and physical tasks, then so be it - induct them.
Your idea would widen then base, but not mean you could induct better applicants, because you still need them to be up to standard, and survive the implantation process.
The only reason they aren't considered is because we know that the standard gene-seed does not work for them.
There are three elements for a person to become a Space Marine as we speak. He must be a boy, he must be amongst the best and brightest on his planet, he must survive the implantation. If the best and brightest on your planet happens to be a girl, she will never be a Space Marines. If New Marines can be women, it reduces the quantity of non-excellence based requirements from 2 to 1. Its not hard to imagine that amongst the best and brightest teenager on a planet there will be a good quantity of women, hell in some places and time, it might be the majority of the best and brightest. Having a wider base with the same level of available spots allows you to better refine your recruits. The best 5 out of 200 are more probably, but not necessarly, better than best 5 out of 100.
Is that the essential reason? If it were just that, why keep it?
Because I consider it a definingtrait of the Space Marines, an important part of their characterisation and their most interesting aspect. Its what makes Space Marine more than simple power fantasy for young men in my opinion.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Are they represented as men? They use masculine pronouns, of course, and *were* males at birth. Post-Astartes implantation, they're eunuchs who use male pronouns. If I was reduced to just my head (so detached from my genetalia, torso, arms, legs etc etc) and I go by a male pronoun, am I a male? What about the inverse - a head which goes by female pronouns?
Also, I've read all three of the original Horus Heresy novels and didn't find any love (that is, beyond that of comradeship) present. Is that what you were implying, or something else?
Space Marines aren't masculine only by virtue of their phenotype, but they are masculine in the socio-cultural sense by modern Occidental standards. They are described and interract very much like stereotypical cisgendered males.
There we are. You're applying modern values and expectations to a setting that's more in common with the middle ages than our own.
Not to mention that you're using a stereotype of modern times to justify something thousands of years in the future.
Not quite what I'd call evidence.
In the Horus Heresy novels and Salamanders novels, some relationships could be described as romantic, but never as sexual (Ka'dai and his apothecary is the biggest one as some within the chapter even Wonder if they were fully in love). You can have romance with someone without being sexualy attracted or consume this relationship. It's what we usualy refer as Platonic love, a deep sense of communion that goes beyond friendship, but never become fully sexual (though there might be a form of sexual tension). That's the form of relationship I was referring to as homoerotic love.
Which Horus Heresy relationship (barring the Primarchs, because they're a whole other beast) could be deemed as romantic? I can only think of ones in very deep respect, which I wouldn't class as "love", homoerotic or otherwise. Hell, the suffix -erotic implies sexual alone.
You can also have a very strong friendship and not call it love.
Absolutely so. How does that relate to their gender? I can be genderless and have taste in art/law/science/engineering. Alternatively, I can be genderfluid and have the same tastes.
Does my gender affect my tastes?
The argument you are refering to doesnt adress the gender of Space Marines but their vision as purely war machine which they are not. They are warriors yes, but they can be more.
I absolutely agree that they're not 100% war machine, but their purpose, their intended goal, is as that. What they do in their off-time, as laid out by the 4th (?) edition Codex, is up to them, but if that interferes in their primary goal, then they're not a very good Space Marine, are they?
It's like being a builder nowadays, but you get distracted from your work birdwatching. Your job, your primary purpose in your society, is as a builder, but you can still birdwatch in your spare time.
Still - this has no bearing on gender. Still, as long as we agree that one's tastes are not defined by gender.
These examples being?
They would need the same strength as a current Astartes, or else they wouldn't be in the army. So their mass needs to be the same. They would most likely lack boobs anyway, due to having them removed. So, we're left with their faces, which may be obscured by helmets. Many could well be bald, and males could have long hair too - of course, they may need it short, due to it presenting a liability in melee combat. So, face shape? However, with all the drugs and implants, especially in their heads, who's to say that they would look different?
Essentially, there's a good chance that a female inducted into the Astartes would look identical.
Again, this is an argument of incredulity based on nothing very concrete. Space Marines look just like men. Some are beautiful, others, ugly as balls. AlI of them look muscular, but not built like weightlifters, more like martial artists or sport adepts. I don't see why it would be different for women Space Marines. They could and probably would look like highly athletic women.
With the amount of drugs they'd be pumped up with? All of them look like bodybuilders - no graces, just sheer muscle. There's pictures that support that notion - it's not "based on nothing concrete". It's canon. That's what a Space Marines looks like not because he's male, but because of the sheer testosterone in his system. If you're insinuating otherwise, could you show me a picture of a Space Marine out of armour who doesn't look like a weightlifter? I see them looking far more like Hafthor Bjornsson than Bruce Lee.
Who knows how and why the New Marine transformation affect the body of a women. Since its a work of fiction, we can find all sorts of justifictions for the chosen appearence of women Marines (which woud be based on peronnal preferences). For example, if I wanted them to look like bikini supermodels (not that's what I would do, I would model the after combat sport athlete), I could say that their muscle, while small, are superperformant and they stand almost a foot taller than Space Marine men due to how the new cocktail of hormones makes the growth spur of women stop at the same time than men. This makes them, much taller and leaner, but just as strong and heavy. That's just one example of many that make as much sense as yours.
But why limit that to women? Why aren't mens' muscles superperformant too then? Why can't men look identical?
Why is having a difference between men and women an issue that you wish to distinguish? They're both superhumans hopped up on god knows how many drugs and hormones - why would they look any different?
Why don't you think women shouldn't look like massive bodybuilders, like the normal marines look like?
I could also declare that, in general, Space Marine women are a little bit weaker than their masculine counterpart, but they are nimbler and have sharper senses thus making them just as good on the battlefield.
If they're weaker, then why are they accepted in? If they can't match the basic standard of a Space Marine, then they're not up to snuff. They'd make a brilliant SoB or Guardwoman though.
What about male marines who are a little bit weaker but nimbler than their brethren? Are they still inducted, despite not meeting the requirement? Is there a different standard for gender? Why?
Bikini model Space Marine women make as much sense as ultra butch Space Marine Women provided there is an explanation behind those choices that can hold the water just as well as having fused rib-cage, but still being capable of breathing. Truth be told, if we are consistent, there is probably a wide variety of shape and size within the Space Marines, some are certainly much taller and stronger than others, while some are more quick, nimble and agile. If some Space Marines are pretty others are ugly. It would be the same for women.
Yes, but all Space Marines look "ultra-butch". Seriously, find one that doesn't. Just one Marine who doesn't look like a bodybuilder. Of course there's variety, but not an entirely new build.
There's my reasoning for FeMarines looking like bodybuilders - because ALL Space Marines do.
If you want the best and brightest to be Space Marines, then surely you would want an excellence based criteria? If it were possible that a female could be implanted, and if they passed all the same tests that a male applicant would, then there's no reason they shouldn't be applicable. If they accomplish the same mental and physical tasks, then so be it - induct them.
Your idea would widen then base, but not mean you could induct better applicants, because you still need them to be up to standard, and survive the implantation process.
The only reason they aren't considered is because we know that the standard gene-seed does not work for them.
There are three elements for a person to become a Space Marine as we speak. He must be a boy, he must be amongst the best and brightest on his planet, he must survive the implantation. If the best and brightest on your planet happens to be a girl, she will never be a Space Marines. If New Marines can be women, it reduces the quantity of non-excellence based requirements from 2 to 1. Its not hard to imagine that amongst the best and brightest teenager on a planet there will be a good quantity of women, hell in some places and time, it might be the majority of the best and brightest. Having a wider base with the same level of available spots allows you to better refine your recruits. The best 5 out of 200 are more probably, but not necessarly, better than best 5 out of 100.
Absolutely - so long as the quality of the "brightest and best" doesn't change. Female recruits need to jump through the same hoops as anyone else to be a Space Marines. That's my whole point.
There is only two elements - being the best, and surviving. Because with the normal Space Marines, it was impossible for the woman to survive, they simply couldn't proceed. Now, if the NuMarine procedure is the same, but allows for females, then the net hasn't changed - it's just that women can now actually survive, and have a chance at the same goal as men.
Is that the essential reason? If it were just that, why keep it?
Because I consider it a definingtrait of the Space Marines, an important part of their characterisation and their most interesting aspect. Its what makes Space Marine more than simple power fantasy for young men in my opinion.
I see it differently, but they're both opinions and both valid. Suffice to say, I believe that cancels both points to be moot for this discussion.
To the best of my knowledge, the line “all Marines must be male” first appeared in an article in a very early White Dwarf and was reprinted in the Warhammer 40,000 Compendium, circa 1989. Parts of that article were reprinted again in White Dwarf #249.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.
OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.
They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.
I totally agree here. Less wolf, more Viking= better.
Think we need plastic sisters before we get female space marines.
Space Wolf Shield Maidens would go downhill every bit as fast as bikini power armour, especially with characters like Lukas Strifeson in the Wolves' ranks.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: There we are. You're applying modern values and expectations to a setting that's more in common with the middle ages than our own.
Not to mention that you're using a stereotype of modern times to justify something thousands of years in the future.
Not quite what I'd call evidence.
Space Marines are a modern creation by modern men for consomption by modern persons as entertainment. They aren't a social thought experiment on gender stereotype in the far future. They are the exact opposite. They are the product of our vision of what a perfect monastic soldier should be and look like in a science fanstasy setting. Its a typical power fantasy. There is no denying it. Space marine are strongly gendered and explicitly so. Nobody ask the question are Space Marine men or women? Do they behave like men or women? We have a very clear answer to both those question. From an inside perspective, you are right, we don't know how they perceive themselves sexualy speaking, but that's a non sequitur. Since they are imaginary, their only real identity is the one we ascribe to them.
You can also have a very strong friendship and not call it love.
You can also have a very stong friendship and call it love. Both are just as likely and possible depending on your interpretation of some cues, inuendo and events.
I absolutely agree that they're not 100% war machine, but their purpose, their intended goal, is as that. What they do in their off-time, as laid out by the 4th (?) edition Codex, is up to them, but if that interferes in their primary goal, then they're not a very good Space Marine, are they?
It's like being a builder nowadays, but you get distracted from your work birdwatching. Your job, your primary purpose in your society, is as a builder, but you can still birdwatch in your spare time.
Still - this has no bearing on gender. Still, as long as we agree that one's tastes are not defined by gender.
I completly agree on that. The concept presented by deadshot was that of Space Marines without gender and solely war machines. Space Marines are men and are more than simple war machine (even if its their primary function). My mention of their hobbies and passion was to prove that they were more than machine, not that they were men. They are men due to their apperance, values and behaviors, not because of their hobbies.
With the amount of drugs they'd be pumped up with? All of them look like bodybuilders - no graces, just sheer muscle. There's pictures that support that notion - it's not "based on nothing concrete". It's canon. That's what a Space Marines looks like not because he's male, but because of the sheer testosterone in his system. If you're insinuating otherwise, could you show me a picture of a Space Marine out of armour who doesn't look like a weightlifter? I see them looking far more like Hafthor Bjornsson than Bruce Lee.
Most images in my opinion, especially those of scouts (who are the most useful since its easier to see their mensuration) makes them look more like Heavy or Welterweight boxers or martial artists. Several of those at the bottom of this entry on Wikia are good example of this. Note the two Raven Guards with the snipers, the Space Wolf and the Imperial Fist at the top. They are too slim to be proper bodybuilder and to lean and tall to be good weightlifters, but have the proper appearence to be tough soldiers. I can easily imagine a tough women with similar mensuration and she would still look feminine.
Why is having a difference between men and women an issue that you wish to distinguish? They're both superhumans hopped up on god knows how many drugs and hormones - why would they look any different?
Why don't you think women shouldn't look like massive bodybuilders, like the normal marines look like?
Why don't you want them to be different? Does the idea of a women super soldier, stronger than any men displeases you particularly?
I already mention why its interesting to a have Space Marine women, because they bring a greater aesthetic diversity. I like to see men and women in a model army because they bring a bit of variety and a slight touch of originality to the hole.
Since I personnaly think that Marines aren't forced to look like bodybuilders (even if some will look like so) i think this question answers itself. Since God knows how many drugs and hormones are pumped into them, we don't know how they would look like either. They could remain very feminine for all we know since, even amongst women bodybuilders, many still look feminine. It could even make them look even more feminine for all we know.
If they're weaker, then why are they accepted in? If they can't match the basic standard of a Space Marine, then they're not up to snuff. They'd make a brilliant SoB or Guardwoman though.
What about male marines who are a little bit weaker but nimbler than their brethren? Are they still inducted, despite not meeting the requirement? Is there a different standard for gender? Why?
Weaker in terms of physical might doesn't mean worse in combat in general. Strength is one of the many, many factor that makes a good solider and in a form of warfare mostly done at range with guns and canons, it's not even a vital one either. There is already weaker, but nimbler marines. Abbadon was much stronger than Loken who was himself stronger than Lucius who happens to be better swordsmen than both of them becasue he's more nimble and agile. Its the same thing for all of them. Why would you think the requirements to become a Space Marine involve strength test? Why would it be the only test or the most important one? If so, girls will outperform boys on average since between the age of 10 and 14 years old (the prime age of recruitment for Space Marines), girls are taller, heavier and stronger than boys on average. The situation reverse itself around the age of 16-18 years old, but at that point, Marines are already on the battlefield serving in Scout units. Nowhere do I mention that women would have different test than men, simply that most of them might be in the lower tier within their chapter in terms of physical strength, but that this apparent weakness can be compensated by other qualities much like Space Marine men who are in the same situation.
Yes, but all Space Marines look "ultra-butch". Seriously, find one that doesn't. Just one Marine who doesn't look like a bodybuilder. Of course there's variety, but not an entirely new build.
There's my reasoning for FeMarines looking like bodybuilders - because ALL Space Marines do.
There's my reasoning, Space Marines women would look like women because women bodybuilder, Heavyweight and Welterweight boxers, or even soldier women look like women not like men at all. The difference in term of aesthetic is obvious. Even if I was to admit all Space Marines look like bodybuilders (I think they look like strong soldiers, but not like bodybuilders), your argument for them being identical to men to point where the difference is moot is a bit strange. Plus, considering that we are talking about changing the apperance of (some) Space Marines saying that they all look the same, thus should keep on looking the same is a fallacious appeal to tradition. It doesn't make any sense for them to look the same if we make them different. If you take all that I have said and the fact that I think I have found Space Marines who don't look like bodybuilders, you should see why I am supporting such a vision.
Absolutely - so long as the quality of the "brightest and best" doesn't change. Female recruits need to jump through the same hoops as anyone else to be a Space Marines. That's my whole point.
There is only two elements - being the best, and surviving. Because with the normal Space Marines, it was impossible for the woman to survive, they simply couldn't proceed. Now, if the NuMarine procedure is the same, but allows for females, then the net hasn't changed - it's just that women can now actually survive, and have a chance at the same goal as men.
The standards shouldn't/haven't changed.
indeed, I never said the standards would need to change (they are probably different from Chapter to Chapter anyway). I am simply stating the obvious. The best and brightest teenagers of a planet will count amongst them a plurality of girls, sometime a minority at certain time and space, sometime a majority. Right now, the very best potential warrior in the galaxy might be a girl, as such, the very best warrior might not be able to become a Space Marine. If the New Marine can be women, than, there is no reason why the very best potential warriors in the galaxy couldn't be Space Marines. That's the crux of my argument and I think we both agree on that.
I see it differently, but they're both opinions and both valid. Suffice to say, I believe that cancels both points to be moot for this discussion.
I'm perfectly fine with that! I would also like to know what you think is the most interesting thing about Space Marines in terms of character if you don't mind sharing (potentialy by PM as to not derail the thread).
Sgt_Smudge wrote: There we are. You're applying modern values and expectations to a setting that's more in common with the middle ages than our own.
Not to mention that you're using a stereotype of modern times to justify something thousands of years in the future.
Not quite what I'd call evidence.
Space Marines are a modern creation by modern men for consomption by modern persons as entertainment. They aren't a social thought experiment on gender stereotype in the far future. They are the exact opposite. They are the product of our vision of what a perfect monastic soldier should be and look like in a science fanstasy setting. Its a typical power fantasy. There is no denying it. Space marine are strongly gendered and explicitly so.
All of Warhammer is Macho as hell. Being effeminate won't help when that Tyranid just wants to eat your face.
You can also have a very strong friendship and not call it love.
You can also have a very stong friendship and call it love. Both are just as likely and possible depending on your interpretation of some cues, inuendo and events.
The word "Love" in the English language is far too limiting and no, both are not as likely to happen. Keep your homoerotic headcanon at home.
With the amount of drugs they'd be pumped up with? All of them look like bodybuilders - no graces, just sheer muscle. There's pictures that support that notion - it's not "based on nothing concrete". It's canon. That's what a Space Marines looks like not because he's male, but because of the sheer testosterone in his system. If you're insinuating otherwise, could you show me a picture of a Space Marine out of armour who doesn't look like a weightlifter? I see them looking far more like Hafthor Bjornsson than Bruce Lee.
Most images in my opinion, especially those of scouts (who are the most useful since its easier to see their mensuration) makes them look more like Heavy or Welterweight boxers or martial artists. Several of those at the bottom of this entry on Wikia are good example of this. Note the two Raven Guards with the snipers, the Space Wolf and the Imperial Fist at the top. They are too slim to be proper bodybuilder and to lean and tall to be good weightlifters, but have the proper appearence to be tough soldiers. I can easily imagine a tough women with similar mensuration and she would still look feminine.
Why is having a difference between men and women an issue that you wish to distinguish? They're both superhumans hopped up on god knows how many drugs and hormones - why would they look any different?
Why don't you think women shouldn't look like massive bodybuilders, like the normal marines look like?
Why don't you want them to be different? Does the idea of a women super soldier, stronger than any men displeases you particularly?
I already mention why its interesting to a have Space Marine women, because they bring a greater aesthetic diversity. I like to see men and women in a model army because they bring a bit of variety and a slight touch of originality to the hole.
Since I personnaly think that Marines aren't forced to look like bodybuilders (even if some will look like so) i think this question answers itself. Since God knows how many drugs and hormones are pumped into them, we don't know how they would look like either. They could remain very feminine for all we know since, even amongst women bodybuilders, many still look feminine. It could even make them look even more feminine for all we know.
Greater aesthetic diversity ha. Good meme. They pump these kids full of Testosterone before they hit puberty. You'd still get ordinary Astartes.
If they're weaker, then why are they accepted in? If they can't match the basic standard of a Space Marine, then they're not up to snuff. They'd make a brilliant SoB or Guardwoman though.
What about male marines who are a little bit weaker but nimbler than their brethren? Are they still inducted, despite not meeting the requirement? Is there a different standard for gender? Why?
Weaker in terms of physical might doesn't mean worse in combat in general. Strength is one of the many, many factor that makes a good solider and in a form of warfare mostly done at range with guns and canons, it's not even a vital one either.
Astartes are shock troopers. They aren't shooting the enemy more than they are punching them.
There is already weaker, but nimbler marines. Abbadon was much stronger than Loken who was himself stronger than Lucius who happens to be better swordsmen than both of them becasue he's more nimble and agile.
Lucius is a better swordsman because he has technique. You think someone so nimble and agile would get punched in the nose like a chump?
Its the same thing for all of them. Why would you think the requirements to become a Space Marine involve strength test?
They are looking for the cream of the crop. If that means weeding out the 99 to get that juicy 100th candidate, so be it.
Why would it be the only test or the most important one? If so, girls will outperform boys on average since between the age of 10 and 14 years old (the prime age of recruitment for Space Marines), girls are taller, heavier and stronger than boys on average. The situation reverse itself around the age of 16-18 years old, but at that point, Marines are already on the battlefield serving in Scout units. Nowhere do I mention that women would have different test than men, simply that most of them might be in the lower tier within their chapter in terms of physical strength, but that this apparent weakness can be compensated by other qualities much like Space Marine men who are in the same situation.
[insert obligatory "Maybe it's because they need a Y-Chromosome" here]
Yes, but all Space Marines look "ultra-butch". Seriously, find one that doesn't. Just one Marine who doesn't look like a bodybuilder. Of course there's variety, but not an entirely new build.
There's my reasoning for FeMarines looking like bodybuilders - because ALL Space Marines do.
There's my reasoning, Space Marines women would look like women because women bodybuilder, Heavyweight and Welterweight boxers, or even soldier women look like women not like men at all. The difference in term of aesthetic is obvious. Even if I was to admit all Space Marines look like bodybuilders (I think they look like strong soldiers, but not like bodybuilders), your argument for them being identical to men to point where the difference is moot is a bit strange. Plus, considering that we are talking about changing the apperance of (some) Space Marines saying that they all look the same, thus should keep on looking the same is a fallacious appeal to tradition.
Appeal to tradition Pump a bunch of pre-pubescent kids full of Testosterone and they'll all start to look alike.
It doesn't make any sense for them to look the same if we make them different.
We aren't making them differently. You said that yourself.
NuMarines can be both for all I care. They'll turn into Spartans from the Halo franchise minus the kidnappings.
The only marines that should still be all-ale are the dark angels because it fits their theme.
Also more female models for IG, Eldars, Tau, and some plastic Sisters of Battle.
I would have added some male SoB just to make the whatabouters shut up but really, if you open the current Sisters of Battle codex, the only special character there is already male so there is no need…
Epronovost, it's kind of hard for me to understand your position.
I think we generally agree on the thematic elements that make Space Marines what they are. In my opinion, they're an amalgam of hyper-chauvinistic martial cultures through history, but especially from Greco-Roman and Feudal periods. Their portrayal is both reverent of such cultures at times, and a parody of it at others. You also can't forget the monastic elements of devotion, spiritual discipline and asexuality (nor are Sisters of Battle complete without their characterization as nuns).
Now, during the periods Space Marines draw their inspiration from (and more or less through all of Western history to this day) the vast majority of warriors and combatants were men, if only because brute physical strength was their most commonly sought after characteristic. As you have said yourself, Space Marines are in essence an exploration of these traditionally masculine cultures and traits.
You have also said that is what you find to be interesting about Space Marines, and that a severe deviation from this would distort their character. So, assuming that the in-universe representation of female Space Marines would not violate those principles, and would be somewhere in between what Sgt Smudge and you are discussing - that is to say, they would be functionally excellent warriors if not necessarily among the physically strongest, but their culture would be no different from that already shared between male Space Marines - then what would really differentiate them as female except for perhaps slight differences in body structure? And why would that be interesting or add to the trope?
All of Warhammer is Macho as hell. Being effeminate won't help when that Tyranid just wants to eat your face.
Actualy being macho won't help at all. Placing high value stoicism, strength, brashness and honor will not help you survive and triumph. There somthing called called temperance. Not being macho doesn't mean being feminine. Being macho isn't exclusive to men either. Many women are macho.
The word "Love" in the English language is far too limiting and no, both are not as likely to happen. Keep your homoerotic headcanon at home.
I'm not the one who put idealise sculpted abs on Blood Angels (and Minotaurs), made Loken comment on how this gut and this guy were so beautiful, Salamanders of the 3rd company wonder if the late captain Ka'dai and the apothecary were more than just Brothers, etc. I'm sorry, but it seems to be a trait shared by some. Feel free to ignore it, but it leaves me to wonder...
You seem to forget that Astartes are 8 feet tall. Their muscle mass is proportioned to their height.
No, I didn't since it would be the same thing for Space Marine women. They would be awfully tall and heavy compared to a normal men, but they would have the general apperance of a soldier women (only 20% bigger).
Greater aesthetic diversity ha. Good meme. They pump these kids full of Testosterone before they hit puberty. You'd still get ordinary Astartes.
We don't know if they are pump full of testosterone. In fact pumping them full of testosterone would make them look like women due to little phenomenon called fat/muscle conversion. Gaining quickly mass by converting fat into muscle causes cell to release estrogen, a women's sexual hormones. They probably use something different. Then again, Space Marine creation is so full of pseudo-scientific bs that its not worth going there and try to make sense out of it. Space Marines look like men because the guy in charge of making drawings of them was told to make them look like men. If he's told to make them look like women they will.
Astartes are shock troopers. They aren't shooting the enemy more than they are punching them.
They do punch a lot of enemies, but they shoot a lot too. In fact they mostly mop up resistence in close combat. That's why the basic Space Marine, the tactical marine, has a rifle as main weapon and not a sword (some exception applies of course, with some Chapters being really good in close combat, while other favor long range engagement)
Lucius is a better swordsman because he has technique. You think someone so nimble and agile would get punched in the nose like a chump?
Everyone can loose a sparring match, that doesn't make him a chump. In fact, he is still widely considered, even by Loken, as one of the most brilliant Space Marine out there.
Appeal to tradition Pump a bunch of pre-pubescent kids full of Testosterone and they'll all start to look alike.
We aren't making them differently. You said that yourself.
We are not making them different in a fundamental level (AKA they will still be enhance near perfect warriors organise in various Chapter of closely knit soldiers, with a strong overtone of macho and homoerotism.). What's interesting in Space Marine remains (except if you find their gender exclusivity their main selling point, in that case we are changing them indeed). We are making aethetically different, but still simillar.
NuMarines can be both for all I care. They'll turn into Spartans from the Halo franchise minus the kidnappings.
Does that mean that I lost my time answering you?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Luciferian wrote: Epronovost, it's kind of hard for me to understand your position.
I think we generally agree on the thematic elements that make Space Marines what they are. In my opinion, they're an amalgam of hyper-chauvinistic martial cultures through history, but especially from Greco-Roman and Feudal periods. Their portrayal is both reverent of such cultures at times, and a parody of it at others. You also can't forget the monastic elements of devotion, spiritual discipline and asexuality (nor are Sisters of Battle complete without their characterization as nuns).
Now, during the periods Space Marines draw their inspiration from (and more or less through all of Western history to this day) the vast majority of warriors and combatants were men, if only because brute physical strength was their most commonly sought after characteristic. As you have said yourself, Space Marines are in essence an exploration of these traditionally masculine cultures and traits.
You have also said that is what you find to be interesting about Space Marines, and that a severe deviation from this would distort their character. So, assuming that the in-universe representation of female Space Marines would not violate those principles, and would be somewhere in between what Sgt Smudge and you are discussing - that is to say, they would be functionally excellent warriors if not necessarily among the physically strongest, but their culture would be no different from that already shared between male Space Marines - then what would really differentiate them as female except for perhaps slight differences in body structure? And why would that be interesting or add to the trope?
I'll try.
1) It provides more diversity in terms of aesthetic while still remaining in the same mold. This is important for me because it allows me to better personnalise my squads and individual models.
2) It opens the way to interesting super warrior culture trope for homemade Chapters otherwise closed like amazon warriors for example or the very current SDF forces of Rojava.
3) It gives a center stage to a rarely seen and used trope: that of the "Vasquez", the macho women. Plus, the "Vasquez" can come in a lot of variations, some that we seldom see on a regular basis and other, because of the relative rarity of the trope, might still be left to create. I find that very interesting.
4) Should that be your cup of tea, it can bring a nice element of change to the tradition of a major faction and create a lot of interesting emotional confrontations and reactions within a Chapter. Of course this is purely optionnal.
It always amuses me to see people stubbornly insisting that the process of making space marines, which is blatant "a space wizard did it" technobabble with no connection to reality, would be unrealistic if it could be applied to women. The difference between a human male and a human female is far, far less than the difference between a human male and a space marine. And if your process is essentially "throw out everything about the body you started with, and replace it with a space marine" then there's no inherent realism problem with applying that same process to women.
It also amuses me to see people completely fail to understand how power armor works. The whole point of power armor is that the strength of the wearer is completely irrelevant. The armor is far stronger than the person inside it, and all the user's movements are doing is telling the armor how to move. You aren't contributing your own strength to a punch, you're making a punching motion that commands the armor to do the same and deliver the punch for you. The only difference between wearing power armor and pressing the "punch" button on a video game controller is that the power armor's movements are far faster and more intuitive because of the superior control interface. Starship Troopers (you know, the book that invented GW's concept of space marines) got it right, a disabled suit of power armor is a metal tomb for the wearer because no matter how strong you are you aren't going to match the strength of the armor's own systems.
Stormcast Eternals did it right. You power comes by magic, based in your strenght of soul and power of will, so 0 arguments about females being less capable than men.
But as I said, to me the in-universe reason for Space Marines being only male has 0 weight really. It is what it is, and if they want they can change it. But should they? Personally, to me, It doesn't worth it, having much more things they can do first to give a proper and better female representation in the model line.
Will I be pissed if they did it? Not really, at least not for the Space Marine side. But I will be pissed for the Sister of Battle side. It will be another form of neglecting them, just like Sisters of Silence popping out of nowhere.
Damm, you 30k! Go back to the Horus Heresy series and leave my 40k alone!
1) It provides more diversity in terms of aesthetic while still remaining in the same mold. This is important for me because it allows me to better personnalise my squads and individual models.
2) It opens the way to interesting super warrior culture trope for homemade Chapters otherwise closed like amazon warriors for example or the very current SDF forces of Rojava.
3) It gives a center stage to a rarely seen and used trope: that of the "Vasquez", the macho women. Plus, the "Vasquez" can come in a lot of variations, some that we seldom see on a regular basis and other, because of the relative rarity of the trope, might still be left to create. I find that very interesting.
4) Should that be your cup of tea, it can bring a nice element of change to the tradition of a major faction and create a lot of interesting emotional confrontations and reactions within a Chapter. Of course this is purely optionnal.
Well, I'd consider your first two reasons to be already possible seeing that they deal with conversions and homebrew chapters. I've seen way tier ideas for homebrew chapters than ones that include females, though that doesn't say much when you consider what some people come up with.
I do enjoy the old Vasquez or Brienne of Tarth, and I agree that they can be very well conceived and interesting characters. However, a major component of that character type is that they're a rare exception in a field dominated by men. Unless they were equally rare among Space Marines, I fear they'd lose their impact and exceptionalism.
The final point isn't something I'm terribly interested in, personally, because I've actually experienced it first hand with the pressure to allow female soldiers into combat arms units in the military. Which might explain some of my opinions on the topic and my inability to separate it from the politics involved.
Deadshot wrote: the discussion around feminism and sexism within wargaming is something that needs discussed, albeit in a reasonable and calm way.
Ultimately I agree with everything else you've said but I respectfully disagree with the quoted sentence. Feminism and sexism are not something that needs to be discussed in wargaming because people play this game for fun and to relax. People don't play it to get into deep identity politics and the like. To bring it up and disrupt people enjoying a game is no different then me going to a feminist poetry slam and telling everyone to stop reading poetry and start talking about male circumcision. Or going to someone's wedding and as the couple start smearing cake on each others faces and laughing I get up and tell everyone we need to discuss starving children in Africa.
And as others have said it's not hard to make female space marines. Just buy some after market women heads and start converting. Heck I've even seen after market SM bewb chest plates that would make more "feminine " SM if one was inclined.
Besides I can't imagine anyone who would call someone out to there face saying you can't have female marines. I'll give a more personal example. Now I'm pretty green to this game and I'm certainly not a lore nut but from what I can tell my DKok army technically goes against the lore. The idea behind my army is Krieg is using tech to reanimate the dead making my army an undead one. However no one cares about that. All I hear is wow your undead space nazi army looks cool. Then of course I have to remind them that they're not nazi but WW1 trench soldiers.
Well, I'd consider your first two reasons to be already possible seeing that they deal with conversions and homebrew chapters. I've seen way tier ideas for homebrew chapters than ones that include females, though that doesn't say much when you consider what some people come up with.
I completly agree with you. As mentionned earlier, I did it for RPG games since I don't personnaly own a Space Marine army (but could make one quickly considering I have several starter kit). Full support from GW is always appreciated and helps a lot for the modelling though.
I do enjoy the old Vasquez or Brienne of Tarth, and I agree that they can be very well conceived and interesting characters. However, a major component of that character type is that they're a rare exception in a field dominated by men. Unless they were equally rare among Space Marines, I fear they'd lose their impact and exceptionalism.
I disagree a bit on this point. Not being "unique" or exceptionnal doesn't diminish those characters since they are interesting and good on their own rights. There is also many subvarients that can make each of these "macho women" unique. Much like all "macho men" aren't alike.
The final point isn't something I'm terribly interested in, personally, because I've actually experienced it first hand with the pressure to allow female soldiers into combat arms units in the military. Which might explain some of my opinions on the topic and my inability to separate it from the politics involved.
I can completly understand that. As a former soldier (in the reserve though) myself, I have met several women who had rather nasty experience while integrating the army that ranges from contempt from officers, trainers and fellow soldiers, disregarding or dimishing their accomplishments, constently asking them to "prove they can make it", passing judgement on the worth of their gender based on personal performance, sexual harassment, stereotyping, etc (I also heard and personnaly seen great example of integration and friendship). On the other side, some men also felt like their every actions and thoughts were harshly policed around their female collegues and that they could be disciplined at any moment for alleged cases of harassment or for not being good support. Our military institutions are still adapting to the reality of women in combat and in the army in general (I heard the navy was the worst place to be a women while the air force was the best, but can tell if that's true or not). Being a very macho and traditional institution, Armed Forces aren't good at changing and adapting to such novelty. As a feminist activist and a history teacher, conflict around integration of women is almost a profession for me. Of course, it transcribe in my interest. Imagining how the Adeptus Astartes would adapt to women in their ranks has a certain appeal to me even if my answer is disappointingly simple (they would fit like hands on glove thanks to the Imperium long standing tradition of women in elite combat units). In any case, to each its own story and interests.
BTW: thanks for sharing the last part, it does help to undertand your point of view.
Sensual_T_Rex wrote: Feminism and sexism are not something that needs to be discussed in wargaming because people play this game for fun and to relax.
First of all, the idea that we can't criticize something because it's "just fun" is absurd. If 40k involves sexism then that sexism can and should be criticized.
Second, the idea that 40k is "just for fun" and doesn't incorporate any real-world politics goes directly against the history of the game. Earlier editions had various commentary on British politics and social issues (Margaret Thatcher as an ork warboss, anyone?), it's only in newer editions that we seem to have picked up the idea that 40k is its own separate world and straightforward heroic scifi.
Perhaps one thing GW could do which would at least partially satisfy all parties is to reopen bitz ordering and provide official conversion options such as female heads, the only real alternatives for which are made by third parties and can get you kicked out of a GW store. That way anyone could make as many official female models as they wanted in any of their lines. Though I also do agree with most others here that they should update nearly all of their lines to have female options by default and release more female special characters like the new Inquisitor.
It also amuses me to see people completely fail to understand how power armor works. The whole point of power armor is that the strength of the wearer is completely irrelevant. The armor is far stronger than the person inside it, and all the user's movements are doing is telling the armor how to move. You aren't contributing your own strength to a punch, you're making a punching motion that commands the armor to do the same and deliver the punch for you. The only difference between wearing power armor and pressing the "punch" button on a video game controller is that the power armor's movements are far faster and more intuitive because of the superior control interface. Starship Troopers (you know, the book that invented GW's concept of space marines) got it right, a disabled suit of power armor is a metal tomb for the wearer because no matter how strong you are you aren't going to match the strength of the armor's own systems.
As much as i agree with this, i do find it necessary to point out that SM Scouts, not in power armor have a S of 4, while Sisters of Battle in power armor have a S of 3.
Not that you are wrong, I'd make the same argument. Its just that game stats would tell us that 40k power armor is either not as powered, or (maybe more likely) that its not made equally.
It also amuses me to see people completely fail to understand how power armor works. The whole point of power armor is that the strength of the wearer is completely irrelevant. The armor is far stronger than the person inside it, and all the user's movements are doing is telling the armor how to move. You aren't contributing your own strength to a punch, you're making a punching motion that commands the armor to do the same and deliver the punch for you. The only difference between wearing power armor and pressing the "punch" button on a video game controller is that the power armor's movements are far faster and more intuitive because of the superior control interface. Starship Troopers (you know, the book that invented GW's concept of space marines) got it right, a disabled suit of power armor is a metal tomb for the wearer because no matter how strong you are you aren't going to match the strength of the armor's own systems.
As much as i agree with this, i do find it necessary to point out that SM Scouts, not in power armor have a S of 4, while Sisters of Battle in power armor have a S of 3.
Not that you are wrong, I'd make the same argument. Its just that game stats would tell us that 40k power armor is either not as powered, or (maybe more likely) that its not made equally.
Power Armor is powered, however the enhances of an Astartes allow them to move their armor even when the backpack is ripped off. However the armor does significantly increase their strength and durability, but not to the point where it isn't impossible for an unarmored marine to beat an armored one in a fistfight.
Sensual_T_Rex wrote: Feminism and sexism are not something that needs to be discussed in wargaming because people play this game for fun and to relax.
First of all, the idea that we can't criticize something because it's "just fun" is absurd. If 40k involves sexism then that sexism can and should be criticized.
Second, the idea that 40k is "just for fun" and doesn't incorporate any real-world politics goes directly against the history of the game. Earlier editions had various commentary on British politics and social issues (Margaret Thatcher as an ork warboss, anyone?), it's only in newer editions that we seem to have picked up the idea that 40k is its own separate world and straightforward heroic scifi.
First of all lol, I never said you can't criticize the game. What I was saying is don't get all flabbergasted when you bring up something off topic and people blow you off.
Second, I hate to break it to you but yes this is a game and like most games it's supposed to be played for fun. I don't care nor have I met anyone who plays so they can get into serious discussions about identity politics.
I'll give you 2 more examples l. Let's say me and you were playing against each other. What would you rather talk about. Our armies and how we painted them and the theme they have. Perhaps talk about the game we're going to play and what the scenario is about. Or would you like me spend a few hours of your time telling you about the time I was at work and got my testicles caught on a fence and sliced my scrotum open? I'll wager you'd rather talk about the former then the latter.
The other example I have is a reference to DnD.
GM: You're ushered into the throne room and taken before the elven king. The king is a slight fellow with large blue eyes long golden hair and a short trimmed beard.
Player: Elves can't have beards!
GM: the elven king give you incredulous look strokes his beard and says I beg to differ.
In this scenario what would you rather do? Get into a long winded discussion about whether elves can or can't have beards. Or would you rather say to heck with it the elf has a beard let's get back to the adventure. Me personally I'd rather just get back to the adventure.
Sensual_T_Rex wrote: Feminism and sexism are not something that needs to be discussed in wargaming because people play this game for fun and to relax.
First of all, the idea that we can't criticize something because it's "just fun" is absurd. If 40k involves sexism then that sexism can and should be criticized.
Second, the idea that 40k is "just for fun" and doesn't incorporate any real-world politics goes directly against the history of the game. Earlier editions had various commentary on British politics and social issues (Margaret Thatcher as an ork warboss, anyone?), it's only in newer editions that we seem to have picked up the idea that 40k is its own separate world and straightforward heroic scifi.
First of all lol, I never said you can't criticize the game. What I was saying is don't get all flabbergasted when you bring up something off topic and people blow you off.
Second, I hate to break it to you but yes this is a game and like most games it's supposed to be played for fun. I don't care nor have I met anyone who plays so they can get into serious discussions about identity politics.
I'll give you 2 more examples l. Let's say me and you were playing against each other. What would you rather talk about. Our armies and how we painted them and the theme they have. Perhaps talk about the game we're going to play and what the scenario is about. Or would you like me spend a few hours of your time telling you about the time I was at work and got my testicles caught on a fence and sliced my scrotum open? I'll wager you'd rather talk about the former then the latter.
The other example I have is a reference to DnD.
GM: You're ushered into the throne room and taken before the elven king. The king is a slight fellow with large blue eyes long golden hair and a short trimmed beard.
Player: Elves can't have beards!
GM: the elven king give you incredulous look strokes his beard and says I beg to differ.
In this scenario what would you rather do? Get into a long winded discussion about whether elves can or can't have beards. Or would you rather say to heck with it the elf has a beard let's get back to the adventure. Me personally I'd rather just get back to the adventure.
So basically relax and just try to have some fun
See, I disagree. If enough people are concerned enough to raise the issue, its a legitimate discussion. 40k armies are heavily personalised and so a gender identity crisis does pop up. I also disagree with your example of DnD as its the exact opposite of what's going on.here. a better version would be
Player: The elf enters the throne room, stroking his beard thoughtful as the king speaks.
GM: Elves can't have beards. They lack the gene for facial hair. No Elf has ever been able to grow a beard in 10k years.
PL: But...
GM: No beards.
Here's idea for pro-female marines. Start collecting evidence these would increase amount of NEW money that exceeds money lost by players who reduce spending due to it.
You can prove to GW it will be profitable for them they will do it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Peregrine wrote: It also amuses me to see people completely fail to understand how power armor works. The whole point of power armor is that the strength of the wearer is completely irrelevant. The armor is far stronger than the person inside it, and all the user's movements are doing is telling the armor how to move.
Wonder what kind of feats power armoured marine then can do then since naked marine can hack himself inside buildings with bare hands. If armour is far stronger...
But its not a significant portion raising this issue its a vocal minority which in no way represents the community, most gamers wouldn't give it a second thought they are just toy soldiers.
But like with gamergate before trying to force a third wave feminist agenda will red pill a bunch of people and they won't side with you.
You've only got to look on YouTube to see how badly things like antifa has backfired people have woken up to the nonsense that is the regressive left.
I'm a liberal myself and if lived in the states I'd be out there with the free speech guys because the ultra left are nuts and need to be stopped.
Deadshot wrote: See, I disagree. If enough people are concerned enough to raise the issue, its a legitimate discussion. 40k armies are heavily personalised and so a gender identity crisis does pop up.
But why is it a legitimate discussion? It's like what you said and I also said. There is nothing stopping you from making female space marines. There's dozens of sites I've seen that give options to make them. It's kinda like how angry marines and pretty marines aren't official chapters but people still make and play them. I can't imagine someone telling a person to there face no you can't play your army because no girlz allowed, and even if they did they'd get laughed out and ostracized for being a butthead. My army goes against cannon but no one cares about that. They just like how cool they look.
Deadshot wrote: See, I disagree. If enough people are concerned enough to raise the issue, its a legitimate discussion. 40k armies are heavily personalised and so a gender identity crisis does pop up.
But why is it a legitimate discussion? It's like what you said and I also said. There is nothing stopping you from making female space marines. There's dozens of sites I've seen that give options to make them. It's kinda like how angry marines and pretty marines aren't official chapters but people still make and play them. I can't imagine someone telling a person to there face no you can't play your army because no girlz allowed, and even if they did they'd get laughed out and ostracized for being a butthead. My army goes against cannon but no one cares about that. They just like how cool they look.
Gender equality is always a valid discussion regardless of medium. If enough people are vocal enough about the issue in wargaming then it should be addressed, and there is evidence to suggest that there is a gender inequality: from the male to female wargamer ratio, the relatively few female models available (particularly in 40K) and the sexualised nature of the few that do exist (lack of clothing, huge boobs with tiny bits of armour, etc). All the other things brought up here so far.
I will happily agree that I will happily play against FeMarine conversions, however, there's a huge difference between FeMarines and joke chapters and homebrew chapters. None are official, however, Angry Marines are quite clearly a parody/humour faction, one that GW has said "No, this is not allowed" for the obvious reasons, particularly in their stores (rude language, posing, meanings, un-kid friendly army). FeMarines are a more serious creation more akin to a homebrew chapter, but the big difference is that homebrew chapters, within certain confines of the established fluff, are "semi-canon." For example, I am creating a homebrew Chapter called the Blue Sentinels based on the covenant of the same name from Dark Souls 2 and 3. They wear dark blue armour, silver trim, and their modus operandi is rapid response, quickly travelling in force to defend invaded planets, fleet based so they can get there very quickly. They specialise in Vanguard Veterans and their first company is Blades of the Darkmoon, and wear purple armour with gold trim.
Note that while this chapter isn't official, and my own creation, GW would happily point to this chapter and say "It probably exists somewhere in the galaxy at some point! Do as you please!" (apart from the obvious IP infringement). The key to remember is that this does not in any way break established canon, regardless of how minor or major that canon is.
A second example: Homebrew Chapter A is just like a normal chapter but rediscovered the STC for Terminator armour and kept it for themselves, which is why they field huge numbers of Terminators in their GSF. They are constantly told to give it to the AdMEch and inquisition but they repeatedly mouth them off and get away with it. Again, a homebrew but this breaks a minor piece of canon, in that you don't mouth off the Inqusition and get away with it, as well as withholding STCs and not getting Titans dropped through your roof. It would still be accepted though, if grudgingly, by players.
Now, FeMarines break a whole bucketful of canon. In fact, all the canon for Space Marines throughout 10k years. Such a development would require complete rewrite of the history of Space Marines, including 90% of Black Library content, as well as the Horus Heresy series, FWHH books and basically all written content, as the question would remain, where are the FeMarines? Let's say there was no rewrite though, and you went in a GW store with your GirlMarines army. With the Blue Sentinels above, the comments might be something akin to "Cool chapter bro, love the Dark Souls reference, interesting concept." Homebrew A might be "Seems a bit far fetched, but MEQ is MEQ, I'll accept your slightly wishywashy reason for Terminator hordes." Where FeMarines would be an instant "Girls can't be Space Marines" as evidenced by this entire thread. They might still play against that army, because MEQ is MEQ. But, there is a fine line between Acceptable Homebrew Chapters and borderline non-acceptable chapters. But there is a hard line of "Canon" drawn in the sand between homebrew chapters and female space marines, and regardless of what you say, no one will ever accept your FeMarines as canon, semi-canon, or close to canon.
PLease bear in mind as well I'm talking strictly about classic marines, not these new Guilliman marines, as these are different kette of fish. My issue with FeMarines lies entirely in the shoehorning them into the setting, much like how some people hate how Centurians, Stormravens, Stormtalons, Stalkers, Hunters and Stormhawks were suddenly just "Always there from the beginning." As well, writing in a reason such as "Oh they just discovered that they can make girl space marines in this year" would gak all over the established fluff as well, as the gene-modifications of Space Marines, Custodes and Primarchs was always the Emperor's Magnum Opus that no one else has figured out, not even Fabius Bile who has spent 10k years doing so.
My main issue personally with FeMarines is the cost and effort of putting them into the setting, the jarringness and reboot on the level of OldCrons to NewCrons of the biggest army set in the game, and the production of new models that will in my opinion look exactly the same as regular space marines.
However, you can't read this thread and say there is no issue here, as clearly there is. Its easy to say "its only a game of plastic crack" but I do think it should be thoroughly discussed whether this is in fact gender inequality within the community, in which case it should be stamped out as with any other time it comes up, or if its okay that there is no Female Marines.
Someone said earlier that they disagreed with me about it needing to be discussed. I wish to clarify what I meant was not that it should be discussed, period, but rather, that it is going to be discussed and therefore should be done in a calm and intellectual manner (and not devolve into elements of "Fething Feminazi's invading my space" or some such equivilent argument).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hobojebus wrote: But its not a significant portion raising this issue its a vocal minority which in no way represents the community, most gamers wouldn't give it a second thought they are just toy soldiers.
But like with gamergate before trying to force a third wave feminist agenda will red pill a bunch of people and they won't side with you.
You've only got to look on YouTube to see how badly things like antifa has backfired people have woken up to the nonsense that is the regressive left.
I'm a liberal myself and if lived in the states I'd be out there with the free speech guys because the ultra left are nuts and need to be stopped.
You have no numbers or statistics to back up whether this is a vocal minority, a vocal majoirty, a non vocal supermajority or anything else. I could just as easily say that most gamers would see this as inconsequential enough that they wouldn't care either way if FeMarines were canon today, and it's just a vocal minority like yourself who hates third-wave feminism. You see one person bring this up every now and then but it keeps cropping up so it obvious is consistantly on someone's mind. And yes, they do represent an element of the community. Not the whole community, but we're not dealing with criminal investigation. Shutting down of minority voices is how racial and gender inequality came about in the first place.
I will also say your views on third-wave feminism aren't the discussion here, and how you view gamergate, Female Marines, what you think of the "Regressive Left" or whoever else, isn't relevant here. The discussion is whether or not we should have female space marines. My argument is simply that the time, effort and retconning needed to add them to the setting is too great, and the cost of rules and model production is better spent strengthening the product line and rules we currently have. However, if FeMarines became the new craze and everyone was demanding them, then this argument would be void and so I'd accept them into the setting. You argument seems to be that you perceive a third-wave feminist, ultra-Left agenda to mess up with your hobby (that you also don't have to deal with because you can just not buy said models), which doesn't hold any weight in discussion.
Well I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. From what I've seen the majority of the people on this site say they don't care. And the few who say they do I guarantee wouldn't say it to your face. And to those people who care let them huff and puff in their closets. The only thing limiting anyone in this game is the mind set of the person in question. My army isn't cannon and anyone who says nope can't play em can get bent. Luckily for me I game at a store where everyone is welcomed and no one ever tells anyone their army sucks because muh cannon. And with that I bid you goodnight my fellow gamers and thanks for the enlightened conversation.
Two seconds on google found that, feminism is on the decline across the world because the crazies escaped tmblr.
So given the average citizen is going right how would that not apply to warhammer players?
Changing a product to satisfy a small demographic is bad business I've named several examples through out this thread where it went badly.
It also wouldn't work because even when the vocal minority gets its way they arnt happy and find something else to moan about.
What's next a demand its changed to an empress on the golden throne? Why not you're already asking for major retconning.
Wrong statistic, that's the number of British that consider themselves Feminist, not the number of 40k players who want Female marines. Two very different figures, and the second one in which you have no numbers to direct to. Without knowing exactly what portion of the consumer base is actually wanting female marines, what part is vocal about it, and who does not want them at all, you can't make any such strict claims about minorities and small demographics. There could easily be a number of female gamers who don't ever visit this forum, silently hoping that GW makes Female Marines soon. That number could just as easily be in excess or twice as large as the membership of Dakka. You and I have absolutely no clue what that number is because last I check no one has conducted detail research of who wants female marines.
The "changing a product" is a valid point, but as mention, this may not be a vocal minority, it could be a non-vocal majority, or supermajority. And if GW considered it profitable and it was profitable then it would work, and I'm sure many gamers here would eventually pick up female marines. I doubt many, if any, would boycott female marine models just to make a point.
The last two lines aren't about models and why there should and shouldn't be female marines in the game and fluff, you're once again bringing personal gripes about a particular political mindset as an argument why you don't want female marines, because you feel like it would result in a domino effect of female-everything from further pressure. Which it may do, and if you feel that strongly about it at that time then you can also be vocal. But if people want it, why shouldn't they have it?
To clarify, I personally dont think they should have it, from a budget, investment and retcon perspective. I feel the setting would be too dramatically changed, the cost of doing so too high, and the effort required better spent elsewhere. You are arguing purely from a political perspective.
Deadshot wrote: You and I have absolutely no clue what that number is because last I check no one has conducted detail research of who wants female marines.
Which is why I said that pro-female marines should start getting some solid proofs If they can get evidence it will bring more profit to GW than otherwise then they will do it. Of course it annoys those who don't want but clearly they have then been minority enough that even them quitting makes it still more profitable.
Deadshot wrote: You and I have absolutely no clue what that number is because last I check no one has conducted detail research of who wants female marines.
Which is why I said that pro-female marines should start getting some solid proofs If they can get evidence it will bring more profit to GW than otherwise then they will do it. Of course it annoys those who don't want but clearly they have then been minority enough that even them quitting makes it still more profitable.
Proof: "If GW brought out female marines I would buy an army." GW then examine the production, shipping, distribution costs, all unknowable variables for us. The examine projected sales,another unknown to us, and then decide whether to pursue the line. All a pro-FeMarine person needs to do is show market interest, and if the market is there GW will produce it. As current, GW deem the cost too high, either is expected loss of established customer or financial. But if there was vocal enough consumers to warrant it, why should GW not produce it?
Deadshot wrote: If enough people are concerned enough to raise the issue, its a legitimate discussion. 40k armies are heavily personalised and so a gender identity crisis does pop up.
Hence my friend who was disappointed by the lack of female Space Wolves.
Wherever one falls on the FeMarine issue, it's obvious it would be a controversial move, and there's a lot GW could do to promote more gender diversity in 40K before they whack that particular hornet's nest. They could start by creating a mini for Inquisitor Valeria. Then a female Farseer, maybe a few female Warlocks. Produce some female Imperial Guard officers. All of these things can be done without retooling major kits or ticking off any fanboys.
GW could also suck it up and release plastic Sister of Battle. They could then beef up the role of SoBs in the current lore - not contradict any of the past fluff, mind you, but write into the fluff that in the Imperium's current state of crisis, the High Lords of Terra are calling on the Ecclesiarchy to deploy their fighting forces in coordination with the Imperial Guard, and authorizing/leaning on the Ecclesiarchy to up the numbers of SoBs that can take the field. SoBs don't require all kinds of wacky space pseudo-science to create, so mass recruitment would be easier than for Space Marines, so the role of the Adepta Sororitas in the overall fighting strength of the Imperium would grow to the point where they are of equivalent significance to Space Marines. This would bring more gender parity in the setting without requiring massive retcons, sort of the way American football and girl's field hockey are considered equivalent under Title IX - for those unfamiliar, it's the law that requires American schools receiving federal funding to offer equivalent sports options to both boys and girls. Most American high schools don't have a girl's (American) football team, but they have a girl's field hockey team as an equivalent offering.
Anyhow, the introduction of FeMarines wouldn't have to be an all-or-nothing proposition. GW could test the waters by introducing a limited role for female troopers in one Space Marine chapter. The Space Wolves would be the ideal choice here, because they're already the most individualistic, having them recruit female warriors could be seen as a legitimate reaction to their current crisis, and there's a shield-maiden tradition within the Viking theme. They could release one kit that's designed to represent an all-female unit, with bitz to represent a couple variants - less elite Shield Maidens and more elite Valkyries, say. GW could then gauge the reaction before introducing the idea of FeMarines in other chapters. If there's an overall negative reaction, they can let the kit languish. If there's an overall positive reaction, they can move forward, and they can do so by stating in the fluff that other chapters start following the Space Wolves' example. That doesn't contradict any existing fluff, and there's a precedent for Space Wolves coming up with something that other Space Marine chapters wind up adopting - it's the fluff for the Predator Annihilator in Imperial Armor II.
Luciferian wrote: Perhaps one thing GW could do which would at least partially satisfy all parties is to reopen bitz ordering and provide official conversion options such as female heads, the only real alternatives for which are made by third parties and can get you kicked out of a GW store. That way anyone could make as many official female models as they wanted in any of their lines. Though I also do agree with most others here that they should update nearly all of their lines to have female options by default and release more female special characters like the new Inquisitor.
This is my biggest gripe with GW and always has been. I can see doing this for tournament play but kicking people out of stores for a third party MOD is just asinine, especially when there are so many good kitbashing opportunities. Maybe I'd like a Bretonia army that looks more historical? Maybe I want to theme my own undead army. Maybe I want Adeptus Arbites that look like Judge Dredd. Ugh!
Luciferian wrote: Perhaps one thing GW could do which would at least partially satisfy all parties is to reopen bitz ordering and provide official conversion options such as female heads, the only real alternatives for which are made by third parties and can get you kicked out of a GW store. That way anyone could make as many official female models as they wanted in any of their lines. Though I also do agree with most others here that they should update nearly all of their lines to have female options by default and release more female special characters like the new Inquisitor.
This is my biggest gripe with GW and always has been. I can see doing this for tournament play but kicking people out of stores for a third party MOD is just asinine, especially when there are so many good kitbashing opportunities. Maybe I'd like a Bretonia army that looks more historical? Maybe I want to theme my own undead army. Maybe I want Adeptus Arbites that look like Judge Dredd. Ugh!
Promotion of business rivals inside their own stores (its a store, not a gaming club!) and I'm pretty sure that would border on IP infringement. Not seriously but being GW are they going to take such a risk? Tournaments are the ones that should be permitting conversions as they are not official GW events, and as long as things are clear, what's the issue? Why should an independent and privately run competition have less strict rules than the store trying to sell product while you're over on the table showing off the conversion bits you got cheaper online?
Luciferian wrote: Perhaps one thing GW could do which would at least partially satisfy all parties is to reopen bitz ordering and provide official conversion options such as female heads, the only real alternatives for which are made by third parties and can get you kicked out of a GW store. That way anyone could make as many official female models as they wanted in any of their lines. Though I also do agree with most others here that they should update nearly all of their lines to have female options by default and release more female special characters like the new Inquisitor.
This is my biggest gripe with GW and always has been. I can see doing this for tournament play but kicking people out of stores for a third party MOD is just asinine, especially when there are so many good kitbashing opportunities. Maybe I'd like a Bretonia army that looks more historical? Maybe I want to theme my own undead army. Maybe I want Adeptus Arbites that look like Judge Dredd. Ugh!
Promotion of business rivals inside their own stores (its a store, not a gaming club!) and I'm pretty sure that would border on IP infringement. Not seriously but being GW are they going to take such a risk? Tournaments are the ones that should be permitting conversions as they are not official GW events, and as long as things are clear, what's the issue? Why should an independent and privately run competition have less strict rules than the store trying to sell product while you're over on the table showing off the conversion bits you got cheaper online?
I'm pretty sure I have seen actual GW sponsored tournaments. Isn't Golden Demon? In an independent tournament, if I was organizing it I would totally allow mods.
Golden Demon isn't a tournament. It's been a pro-painting competition for DECADES, longer than I've been alive. You should google it, beautiful paints and conversions.
Player: The elf enters the throne room, stroking his beard thoughtful as the king speaks.
GM: Elves can't have beards. They lack the gene for facial hair. No Elf has ever been able to grow a beard in 10k years.
PL: But...
GM: No beards.
Player: The elf enters the throne room, stroking his beard thoughtful as the king speaks.
GM: Elves can't have beards. They lack the gene for facial hair. No Elf has ever been able to grow a beard in 10k years.
PL: But...
GM: No beards.
Player: The elf enters the throne room, stroking his beard thoughtful as the king speaks.
GM: Elves can't have beards. They lack the gene for facial hair. No Elf has ever been able to grow a beard in 10k years.
PL: But...
GM: No beards.
Welcome to Warcraft High and Blood Elves
Nope!
Spoiler:
GM makes the rules, Elves have no beards.
Except GM is an analogy to GW, Elves are equivilent to Space Marines, and beards to women. Because by this GM's rules Elves can't grow beards since they came about 10k years ago, and still can't.
Player: The elf enters the throne room, stroking his beard thoughtful as the king speaks.
GM: Elves can't have beards. They lack the gene for facial hair. No Elf has ever been able to grow a beard in 10k years.
PL: But...
GM: No beards.
Welcome to Warcraft High and Blood Elves
Nope!
Spoiler:
If you try that I'll take that crappy manga as Canon (At least those small details), you are gonna have a bad time! Is just like Med'an crossing the Mare Magnum in a bat, in HOURS, from Duskwood to Theramore Island. Warcraft Mangas and Comics are in general, one of the worst lore-friendly things out there. Even Blizzard ignore them in many cases! The Med'an comics for example, have been practically ignored.
I still remember that short history about Lor'themar Theron where it was snowing in Quel'thalas. It is called Land of Eternal Spring for a reason! And Sylvannas didn't decompose, he uses magic to avoid that!
ngngngn!
But sorry, I'll not derrail the thread anymore with warcraft lore.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: There we are. You're applying modern values and expectations to a setting that's more in common with the middle ages than our own.
Not to mention that you're using a stereotype of modern times to justify something thousands of years in the future.
Not quite what I'd call evidence.
Space Marines are a modern creation by modern men for consomption by modern persons as entertainment. They aren't a social thought experiment on gender stereotype in the far future. They are the exact opposite. They are the product of our vision of what a perfect monastic soldier should be and look like in a science fanstasy setting. Its a typical power fantasy. There is no denying it. Space marine are strongly gendered and explicitly so. Nobody ask the question are Space Marine men or women? Do they behave like men or women? We have a very clear answer to both those question. From an inside perspective, you are right, we don't know how they perceive themselves sexualy speaking, but that's a non sequitur. Since they are imaginary, their only real identity is the one we ascribe to them.
So, really, because it's created in the modern day and imaginary, we can ignore all context that applies to the setting?
"Yeah, my Plague Marines actually worship Slaanesh and hate Nurgle, like, I know they're all about Plagues and stuff, but nah - REALLY not a fan of Nurgle and all. Wh- you disagree? Well your canon doesn't matter, it's the 21st century, it's the modern day, I don't need to consider the context of the setting!"
Again, what is definitively MALE about Space Marines? For me, masculine =/= male. A woman can be masculine. A man can be feminine. Agender can be either. That's just a verb, a descriptive. Actual male or female though - what makes a Space Marine male? Genetalia? Do they have them? Their choice of pronoun? If it is choice of pronoun, then can a disembodied head of a former man identify under female nouns? Are they then a female?*
*I'd just like to clarify, that's not intended as an insult or loaded question at all. I welcome any views and opinions on the matter, so there's no right and wrong. I just want your opinion on that matter.
You can also have a very strong friendship and not call it love.
You can also have a very stong friendship and call it love. Both are just as likely and possible depending on your interpretation of some cues, inuendo and events.
Absolutely, hence why I'm asking for a confirmation of love. Not interpretation - actual love, as far as it can be confirmed.
I absolutely agree that they're not 100% war machine, but their purpose, their intended goal, is as that. What they do in their off-time, as laid out by the 4th (?) edition Codex, is up to them, but if that interferes in their primary goal, then they're not a very good Space Marine, are they?
It's like being a builder nowadays, but you get distracted from your work birdwatching. Your job, your primary purpose in your society, is as a builder, but you can still birdwatch in your spare time.
Still - this has no bearing on gender. Still, as long as we agree that one's tastes are not defined by gender.
I completly agree on that. The concept presented by deadshot was that of Space Marines without gender and solely war machines. Space Marines are men and are more than simple war machine (even if its their primary function). My mention of their hobbies and passion was to prove that they were more than machine, not that they were men. They are men due to their apperance, values and behaviors, not because of their hobbies.
Mostly agreed, except I wouldn't say that their appearance, values and behaviours define them as men. Are you suggesting that a women can't have the same values and behaviours as a Space Marine, nor share the same appearance if they were likewise put under the same massively invasive procedures?
What about choice of identification? If a canon Space Marine identified as female, are they still a Space Marine? After all, you did just imply that ONLY men could have the "apperance, values and behaviors" of a Space Marine.
With the amount of drugs they'd be pumped up with? All of them look like bodybuilders - no graces, just sheer muscle. There's pictures that support that notion - it's not "based on nothing concrete". It's canon. That's what a Space Marines looks like not because he's male, but because of the sheer testosterone in his system. If you're insinuating otherwise, could you show me a picture of a Space Marine out of armour who doesn't look like a weightlifter? I see them looking far more like Hafthor Bjornsson than Bruce Lee.
Most images in my opinion, especially those of scouts (who are the most useful since its easier to see their mensuration) makes them look more like Heavy or Welterweight boxers or martial artists. Several of those at the bottom of this entry on Wikia are good example of this. Note the two Raven Guards with the snipers, the Space Wolf and the Imperial Fist at the top. They are too slim to be proper bodybuilder and to lean and tall to be good weightlifters, but have the proper appearence to be tough soldiers. I can easily imagine a tough women with similar mensuration and she would still look feminine.
However, look at some of the other Scouts - very muscular and hopped up.
Not to mention that Space Marines are all very tall (seven feet is average) and must still be in proportion. Alternatively, look at images of other Space Marines outside of armour - not just Scouts.
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
They look VERY bulky to me.
Again, all your examples are Scouts, who may not have undergone the full transformation of the Biscopea. Two of my examples are full Space Marines, and are very large.
Why would a woman not look the same?
Why is having a difference between men and women an issue that you wish to distinguish? They're both superhumans hopped up on god knows how many drugs and hormones - why would they look any different?
Why don't you think women shouldn't look like massive bodybuilders, like the normal marines look like?
Why don't you want them to be different? Does the idea of a women super soldier, stronger than any men displeases you particularly?
Not at all. I want them to be exactly the same. Hence my argument. With the NuMarines, I don't believe there needs to be a difference based on gender.
I already mention why its interesting to a have Space Marine women, because they bring a greater aesthetic diversity. I like to see men and women in a model army because they bring a bit of variety and a slight touch of originality to the hole.
Since I personnaly think that Marines aren't forced to look like bodybuilders (even if some will look like so) i think this question answers itself. Since God knows how many drugs and hormones are pumped into them, we don't know how they would look like either. They could remain very feminine for all we know since, even amongst women bodybuilders, many still look feminine. It could even make them look even more feminine for all we know.
But why based on men and women? If we can have the more slight frames of women, why can men of a slight bent be taken in? Wouldn't they look more like the women then? What about women who outstrength those men? Would they not look like the typical men?
If you want different frames and variety in your Space Marines, like more athletic ones, then why stratify that on gender? At the moment, you're implying that men MUST be big, and women MUST be more slight, when there are notable exceptions either side.
If they're weaker, then why are they accepted in? If they can't match the basic standard of a Space Marine, then they're not up to snuff. They'd make a brilliant SoB or Guardwoman though.
What about male marines who are a little bit weaker but nimbler than their brethren? Are they still inducted, despite not meeting the requirement? Is there a different standard for gender? Why?
Weaker in terms of physical might doesn't mean worse in combat in general. Strength is one of the many, many factor that makes a good solider and in a form of warfare mostly done at range with guns and canons, it's not even a vital one either. There is already weaker, but nimbler marines. Abbadon was much stronger than Loken who was himself stronger than Lucius who happens to be better swordsmen than both of them becasue he's more nimble and agile.
If strength wasn't a factor, then why would the Biscopea be implanted? If strength wasn't a factor, then why even screen for the strongest recruits, if you're only after their hardiness? Lucius was still very strong, and his agility came from skill - not from his lack of strength or biology. One can be skilled and strong - it's not mutually exclusive.
Its the same thing for all of them. Why would you think the requirements to become a Space Marine involve strength test? Why would it be the only test or the most important one? If so, girls will outperform boys on average since between the age of 10 and 14 years old (the prime age of recruitment for Space Marines), girls are taller, heavier and stronger than boys on average.
Except that women are useless in the current tests, because they simply can't survive it. They don't meld with the geneseed. Why bother having female recruits when you know that they won't make it?
The NuMarines are a different story, because we don't know how their creation process works.
The situation reverse itself around the age of 16-18 years old, but at that point, Marines are already on the battlefield serving in Scout units. Nowhere do I mention that women would have different test than men, simply that most of them might be in the lower tier within their chapter in terms of physical strength, but that this apparent weakness can be compensated by other qualities much like Space Marine men who are in the same situation.
So why do the Space Marines accept inferior stock, if that's the case? If they're lower tier, but still in the right bracket, that's fine. However, if that's an appropriate bracket, that means that there must be men in that bracket too. If so, then surely it would be better to have your "variety" of Space Marine aesthetic based on one's build rather than gender?
Yes, but all Space Marines look "ultra-butch". Seriously, find one that doesn't. Just one Marine who doesn't look like a bodybuilder. Of course there's variety, but not an entirely new build.
There's my reasoning for FeMarines looking like bodybuilders - because ALL Space Marines do.
There's my reasoning, Space Marines women would look like women because women bodybuilder, Heavyweight and Welterweight boxers, or even soldier women look like women not like men at all.
Real world women bodybuilders, heavyweights and welterweights are not pumped full of foreign organs, hormones, drugs and quite literally transformed into superhumans. Even male bodybuilders wouldn't necessarily look like Space Marines, but as we see in the art, we DO see Space Marines looking like bodybuilders. Therefore, it's not unreasonable to assume that a woman who undergoes the same procedure would look the same.
The difference in term of aesthetic is obvious. Even if I was to admit all Space Marines look like bodybuilders (I think they look like strong soldiers, but not like bodybuilders), your argument for them being identical to men to point where the difference is moot is a bit strange. Plus, considering that we are talking about changing the apperance of (some) Space Marines saying that they all look the same, thus should keep on looking the same is a fallacious appeal to tradition. It doesn't make any sense for them to look the same if we make them different. If you take all that I have said and the fact that I think I have found Space Marines who don't look like bodybuilders, you should see why I am supporting such a vision.
I don't see a difference in aesthetic at all - given that it takes the implantation procedure to turn a 12 year old into something that would make the strongest man ashamed, why would a 12 year old girl not turn out the same?
If you're suggesting that there's different brackets of a Space Marine's strength, then why would that be stratified on gender?
Absolutely - so long as the quality of the "brightest and best" doesn't change. Female recruits need to jump through the same hoops as anyone else to be a Space Marines. That's my whole point.
There is only two elements - being the best, and surviving. Because with the normal Space Marines, it was impossible for the woman to survive, they simply couldn't proceed. Now, if the NuMarine procedure is the same, but allows for females, then the net hasn't changed - it's just that women can now actually survive, and have a chance at the same goal as men.
The standards shouldn't/haven't changed.
indeed, I never said the standards would need to change (they are probably different from Chapter to Chapter anyway). I am simply stating the obvious. The best and brightest teenagers of a planet will count amongst them a plurality of girls, sometime a minority at certain time and space, sometime a majority. Right now, the very best potential warrior in the galaxy might be a girl, as such, the very best warrior might not be able to become a Space Marine. If the New Marine can be women, than, there is no reason why the very best potential warriors in the galaxy couldn't be Space Marines. That's the crux of my argument and I think we both agree on that.
Yes, absolutely. I do not think that women should be inducted into the current Space Marines, because we have a perfectly good reason why not. However, if the NuMarines could allow for female soldiers, I don't see at all why they shouldn't be given the same opportunities. If they can pass the tests, then they get in. Enough said. However, I don't think they need anything more than a different head - their brawn should be the same as any other Space Marine.
I see it differently, but they're both opinions and both valid. Suffice to say, I believe that cancels both points to be moot for this discussion.
I'm perfectly fine with that! I would also like to know what you think is the most interesting thing about Space Marines in terms of character if you don't mind sharing (potentialy by PM as to not derail the thread).
The word "Love" in the English language is far too limiting and no, both are not as likely to happen. Keep your homoerotic headcanon at home.
I'm not the one who put idealise sculpted abs on Blood Angels (and Minotaurs), made Loken comment on how this gut and this guy were so beautiful, Salamanders of the 3rd company wonder if the late captain Ka'dai and the apothecary were more than just Brothers, etc. I'm sorry, but it seems to be a trait shared by some. Feel free to ignore it, but it leaves me to wonder...
Scuplted abs means nothing about their sexuality? It might just be their choice of art - it may mean nothing else.
Saying someone is "beautiful" doesn't have to imply sexuality or even love. I can look at a sword and say "dang, that's a beautiful weapon" - it doesn't mean I want to stick it somewhere or have feelings for it.
Again, I'll drop this if I see actually confirmed "love", rather than what we have no reason to see as anything more than respect.
You seem to forget that Astartes are 8 feet tall. Their muscle mass is proportioned to their height.
No, I didn't since it would be the same thing for Space Marine women. They would be awfully tall and heavy compared to a normal men, but they would have the general apperance of a soldier women (only 20% bigger).
Would they? Space Marines don't seem to just get "bigger" like simply scaling up. Their entire muscle mass, structure, and proportions change. A female would look like a current Space Marine, no?
Greater aesthetic diversity ha. Good meme. They pump these kids full of Testosterone before they hit puberty. You'd still get ordinary Astartes.
We don't know if they are pump full of testosterone. In fact pumping them full of testosterone would make them look like women due to little phenomenon called fat/muscle conversion. Gaining quickly mass by converting fat into muscle causes cell to release estrogen, a women's sexual hormones. They probably use something different. Then again, Space Marine creation is so full of pseudo-scientific bs that its not worth going there and try to make sense out of it. Space Marines look like men because the guy in charge of making drawings of them was told to make them look like men. If he's told to make them look like women they will.
All we know as far as hormones go is that they're implanted with the Biscopea, which "releases hormones that vastly increase muscle growth throughout the marine's body. It also serves to form the hormonal basis for many of the later implants".
If the art depicted them as women, then I'd argue that all men and women implanted would look like that. That's not the case. We see Space Marines look like men, so they all should, because that's what the procedure has them end up looking like.
Regardless if it's psuedo-scientific bullgak, it's psuedo-scientific bullgak that's canon.
Astartes are shock troopers. They aren't shooting the enemy more than they are punching them.
They do punch a lot of enemies, but they shoot a lot too. In fact they mostly mop up resistence in close combat. That's why the basic Space Marine, the tactical marine, has a rifle as main weapon and not a sword (some exception applies of course, with some Chapters being really good in close combat, while other favor long range engagement)
Actually, a Tactical Marine is expected to do double duty - hence that they are only promoted to Tactical when they've mastered both shooting and assault.
Lucius is a better swordsman because he has technique. You think someone so nimble and agile would get punched in the nose like a chump?
Everyone can loose a sparring match, that doesn't make him a chump. In fact, he is still widely considered, even by Loken, as one of the most brilliant Space Marine out there.
Still, it doesn't mean that he doesn't have technique, and that his technique comes from agility over strength alone. All Space Marines combine the two - that's what makes them so powerful.
NuMarines can be both for all I care. They'll turn into Spartans from the Halo franchise minus the kidnappings.
Does that mean that I lost my time answering you?
Well, that depends.
If we're talking about the OldMarines, then it's completely valid. If it's NuMarines, then probably not. A lot of people don't care about the NuMarines, because they have no canon opposing it. I count myself in that category - I would have no objection to FemNuMarines, but normal FeMarines are not something I support.
1) It provides more diversity in terms of aesthetic while still remaining in the same mold. This is important for me because it allows me to better personnalise my squads and individual models.
But, going back to your point on women being in the lower tier of Space Marine strength, would that not mean that there are men in that category too? If so, then why do you need female marines when male ones could also fit that slim look you prefer? Would that not be enough for personalisation? What specifically about women would grant that? Boobplate? Long hair?
2) It opens the way to interesting super warrior culture trope for homemade Chapters otherwise closed like amazon warriors for example or the very current SDF forces of Rojava.
Is that worth rewriting the lore of the standard Space Marines? Could those same Amazonians not be achieved through Catachans (who certainly fit the aesthetic) or Sisters of Battle - perhaps Sisters recruited from a planet like Catachan?
3) It gives a center stage to a rarely seen and used trope: that of the "Vasquez", the macho women. Plus, the "Vasquez" can come in a lot of variations, some that we seldom see on a regular basis and other, because of the relative rarity of the trope, might still be left to create. I find that very interesting.
Are you suggesting that ONLY Space Marines can be macho? That Sisters of Battle can't possess the same traits?
After all the only actual difference, aside from faith and doctrine, is that Space Marines are genetically engineered and rare, and Sister are not genetically engineered and are more common. Aside from those two features, they are the same - monogender factions that wield bolters and power armour, fighting for the Imperium fanatically and with great skill.
Is genetic modification necessary for the "Vasquez"?
4) Should that be your cup of tea, it can bring a nice element of change to the tradition of a major faction and create a lot of interesting emotional confrontations and reactions within a Chapter. Of course this is purely optionnal.
Judging from many responses, it seems that this one isn't widely supported.
Peregrine wrote:It always amuses me to see people stubbornly insisting that the process of making space marines, which is blatant "a space wizard did it" technobabble with no connection to reality, would be unrealistic if it could be applied to women. The difference between a human male and a human female is far, far less than the difference between a human male and a space marine. And if your process is essentially "throw out everything about the body you started with, and replace it with a space marine" then there's no inherent realism problem with applying that same process to women.
Again, even if "a wizard did it" is the explanation, that's the canon explanation. It's just as valid as us accepting that a meltagun is really good against armour, or that a Stormtalon can somehow fly, or that 1000 Space Marines per 1000 Chapters can be as efficient as we see them. Regardless of your opinions of the validity of GW canon, it is still canon. If they consistently tell us that X is X, we should accept that. (Emphasis consistently, due to Goto and suchlike). If X is, in this case, "Women can't be implanted with the geneseed" then that's true. To do otherwise would be to say "No GW, X actually = Y."
It also amuses me to see people completely fail to understand how power armor works. The whole point of power armor is that the strength of the wearer is completely irrelevant. The armor is far stronger than the person inside it, and all the user's movements are doing is telling the armor how to move. You aren't contributing your own strength to a punch, you're making a punching motion that commands the armor to do the same and deliver the punch for you. The only difference between wearing power armor and pressing the "punch" button on a video game controller is that the power armor's movements are far faster and more intuitive because of the superior control interface. Starship Troopers (you know, the book that invented GW's concept of space marines) got it right, a disabled suit of power armor is a metal tomb for the wearer because no matter how strong you are you aren't going to match the strength of the armor's own systems.
I assume you've heard of the Biscopea? One of the organs implanted? Yeah, it's called the Forge of Strength for a reason. To quote, it "initiates a growth process that ultimately causes the adolescent human male implanted with the organ to reach the massive height and gain the superhuman strength and muscle density of the Astartes".
So regardless of if power armour does provide strength or not, the Space Marine must still be stronger than a normal man, obviously to the degree of getting S4 in the game (yes, game abstraction, I'm aware, but it does tell us that there is a real strength there, and that Sisters, even when in the same armour, have a weaker strength). Therefore, it's not illogical to assume that, even IF power armour gives strength bonuses, the greatest part of a Space Marine's strength comes from his organs and body.
Obviosuly, Power Armor doesn't work as mecha suits. Is Armour afterall.
The Crisis Suits or the Centurion Suits, those are the kind of thing that if they are shut down, the wearer just can't move. But you see Adeptas Sororitas with Power Armour or human Inquisitors with Power Armour, and it is said that Power Armour adds to the strenght of the wearer, don't just substitutes it.
And, no-space marines wearing power armour lack the Black Caparece, so they can't use Power Armour to their full potential, more like a second skin.
Is not part of the lore that a Power Armour don't make a Space Marine Slower or less agile, in fact, it just add to them? Because of the Black Caparace.
Also a further note but having your female super soldiers still have a female body shape (wide hips, smaller shoulders) is laughable as it's this body structure which leads to much of the disparity of strength between the sexes. Wide hips only exist for birthing the enormous bloated skulls of human babies and constant injection of 'roids and hormones from childhood should result in a "female" that looks nothing like the typical woman or could be described as feminine.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: However, look at some of the other Scouts - very muscular and hopped up.
Not to mention that Space Marines are all very tall (seven feet is average) and must still be in proportion. Alternatively, look at images of other Space Marines outside of armour - not just Scouts.
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
They look VERY bulky to me.
Again, all your examples are Scouts, who may not have undergone the full transformation of the Biscopea. Two of my examples are full Space Marines, and are very large.
Why would a woman not look the same?
Sorry I haven't read the whole conversation and I don't know how relevant it is but you can have a character that looks both VERY bulky and distinctly feminine.
Glory is great at this :
http://mooncalfe.deviantart.com/gallery/33270379/Glory (That's not even her final form btw ^^)
Or, Mountain Girl?
(nsfw nudity)
Again, what is definitively MALE about Space Marines? For me, masculine =/= male. A woman can be masculine. A man can be feminine. Agender can be either. That's just a verb, a descriptive. Actual male or female though - what makes a Space Marine male? Genetalia? Do they have them? Their choice of pronoun? If it is choice of pronoun, then can a disembodied head of a former man identify under female nouns? Are they then a female?*
Masculine doesn't equal male in my opinion too. Male gender identity is built on three things, first a sexual phenotype (or birth sex if you prefer), all Space Marines have the birth sex of men, personnal identity (AKA what you consider yourself to be), Space Marines refer to themselves using male pronouns and titles like Brother or he thus they identify as males (making themselves cisgendered individuals), the third element is perceived sexual identity (the gender people asign to you based on your apperance). Space Marines look like men, have the male birth sex and identify themselves as men. Thus their are men not agender or transgender or women. The have no characteristic associate with agenderism or transgenderism. Being of masculine birth sex is even stated as a fundamental requirement to become a Space Marine. Thus, I identify Space Marines as men (and "manly men" at that).
On the point of behavior. That we like it or not (I don't), certain behavior and traits are strongly associated with masculinity and the fact of being a men while other are the reverse. GW never intendend to redefine, subvert or criticise this cultural trait of the modern Western world. The inspiration for the Space Marine sub-cultures are drawn from historical hyper-masculine warrior societies like Holy Orders of knights like the Templar and the Teutonnic from wich they derive some aesthetic elements, rank, organisation name, weapons and names and from Greeko-Romans from which they derive names, organisation and recruitment startegies. The values of the Space Marines Chapters are the same values vehiculated by those historical institutions. These values were also associated with men. Women in those societies (and still the case in ours to a lesser extant) are proscribed, ridiculed or considered as weird and abnormal for espousing those values and practices. GW wanted the Space Marine to be considered "manly" by their consumer base. Its part of their marketing. The absence of Space Marine women isn't accidental either. It was a clear decision from the company with the clear intent of making this army the paragon of "manlyness" and they think that Space Marine women would dillute this. Many people on this thread agree with that statement.
Yes, Space Marines women should be considered masculine. "Masculine women" are very cool in my opinion and in no way different in behavior and values than a "manly men".
My entire argument is to adress that of Deadshot who said that Space Marines are agender war machines. No, in my opinion, they are men and while they are warrior supreme, they are capable and interested by much more. While they could have some traits of agender people, like not associating or carring about gender at all, representation of Space Marines in novels doesn't allow us to see how they see themselves. They do believe to be transhumen, but from Loken appreciation of masculine beauty, he seems to lop Space Marines in the group of men since he appreciate the beauty of Little Horus, Horus himself and that of Tarvitz, but fail to appreciate that of Keeler and the other female remembrencer due to him having little experience with women. Thus, we can extrapolate and declare that Space Marines perceive themselves to be men, but not entirely humen men. This would make them cisgender in the broad sense of the term and not agender. They are asexual thought (except maybe some Space Wolves).
Absolutely, hence why I'm asking for a confirmation of love. Not interpretation - actual love, as far as it can be confirmed.
My best example would be the relationship of Captain Ka'dai and his Apothecary which was described as "maybe more than brotherhood" by some member of the Chapter. This was in reaction to the Apothecary exilling himself in the wasteland to die after the death of Ka'dai. This would be, in my opinion, a clear case of romantic suicide. We could place Loken's best friend (I don't remember his name) anguish at the idea of dying far from Loken in the same category. So, yeah, platonic love is something more than possible in my opinion.
I absolutely agree that they're not 100% war machine, but their purpose, their intended goal, is as that. What they do in their off-time, as laid out by the 4th (?) edition Codex, is up to them, but if that interferes in their primary goal, then they're not a very good Space Marine, are they?
It's like being a builder nowadays, but you get distracted from your work birdwatching. Your job, your primary purpose in your society, is as a builder, but you can still birdwatch in your spare time.
Still - this has no bearing on gender. Still, as long as we agree that one's tastes are not defined by gender.
What about choice of identification? If a canon Space Marine identified as female, are they still a Space Marine? After all, you did just imply that ONLY men could have the "apperance, values and behaviors" of a Space Marine.
That's actually a good question for you. I would say yes, a Space Marine who identify as a women would still be a Space Marine (and would be a women). That could break GW position of only men can be Space Marines though. Values and behavior, no, apperance, yes, considering that they dress in masculine fashion and don't go through any form of gender reassignment therapy they do look like men. Does it mean they are, not necessarly, but it gives strong hints than yes.
However, look at some of the other Scouts - very muscular and hopped up.
Not to mention that Space Marines are all very tall (seven feet is average) and must still be in proportion. Alternatively, look at images of other Space Marines outside of armour - not just Scouts.
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
They look VERY bulky to me.
Again, all your examples are Scouts, who may not have undergone the full transformation of the Biscopea. Two of my examples are full Space Marines, and are very large.
Why would a woman not look the same?
They do look strong, some more than others. You wanted me to show non-bulky Space Marines and I did. Did I say they couldn't be bulky? No, I said their look is varied. Some are others not so much. Some are probable smaller than 7 foot tall (the average of the Space Marines) while others are much bigger than that. All Space Marines look strong. Space Marine men look strong, some look even like musclebound monsters, others much less so. Space Marine would look strong. Strong women don't look like men. They look like women. Some will look very feminine, others not just like for the male counterparts. Some images of Blood Angels picture them as very feminine in terms of facial traits, Sanguinius is a prime example of that.
But why based on men and women? If we can have the more slight frames of women, why can men of a slight bent be taken in? Wouldn't they look more like the women then? What about women who outstrength those men? Would they not look like the typical men?
You can look feminine and be extremely strong. Even stronger than a men. I know several women who are stronger than men who are themselves quite strong. They don't look like men at all. I have clearly mentionned that Space Marine men can have a more slender shape and proved it with artworks. There is body diversity within the Adeptus Astartes that you include women or not.
If you want different frames and variety in your Space Marines, like more athletic ones, then why stratify that on gender? At the moment, you're implying that men MUST be big, and women MUST be more slight, when there are notable exceptions either side.
I don't stratify be gender. I firmly believe there is variety in the apperence and performance of Space Marine men within the same Chapter. The same would applie to Space Marine women.
If strength wasn't a factor, then why would the Biscopea be implanted?
Because Space Marines are a power fantasy. They are akin to superheroes. They are not an acurate representation of how a futuristic super soldier would look like. Strength in a superhero is important. The good thing is that Space Marine women would be inhumanly strong thanks to the Biscopea and their power armor.
If strength wasn't a factor, then why even screen for the strongest recruits, if you're only after their hardiness? Lucius was still very strong, and his agility came from skill - not from his lack of strength or biology. One can be skilled and strong - it's not mutually exclusive.
Of course, the very best Space Marines will be strong, fast, resistent, determined, charismatic, agile, flexible, stealthy, perceptive, intelligent, adaptable and wise in equal amount.
Except that women are useless in the current tests, because they simply can't survive it. They don't meld with the geneseed. Why bother having female recruits when you know that they won't make it?
Indeed, now there is no use to invite girls in Space Marine recruitment tests, but should there be women amongst the New Marines, they will be. Right now, though, if I was in command of a Space Marine Chapter I would still test girls and pick those who would be Space Marine worthy and train them as Chapter serfs and squires this way, my Chapter would have a lot of talent.
Real world women bodybuilders, heavyweights and welterweights are not pumped full of foreign organs, hormones, drugs and quite literally transformed into superhumans. Even male bodybuilders wouldn't necessarily look like Space Marines, but as we see in the art, we DO see Space Marines looking like bodybuilders. Therefore, it's not unreasonable to assume that a woman who undergoes the same procedure would look the same.
Considering that Space Marine men currently look like real bodybuilder, heavyweight and welterweigths male athlete, why would Space Marine women, look any different than real bodybuilder, heavyweight, welterweight female athlete?
Is your vision plausible, certainly. Is mine also plausible certainly. Mine has the extra virtue of bringing more to the hobby and remaining more consistent. If hormonal change make women turned into giant creature almost identical to men, why arent men looking like half gorilla creatures (like smaller Ogryn for example)?
I don't see a difference in aesthetic at all - given that it takes the implantation procedure to turn a 12 year old into something that would make the strongest man ashamed, why would a 12 year old girl not turn out the same?
If you're suggesting that there's different brackets of a Space Marine's strength, then why would that be stratified on gender?
Since the adult version of a Space Marine looks just like a highly trained adult men, an adult Space Marine women would probably look like a highly trained women. The potential bracket and difference was if you wanted to preserve gender dimorphism of normal human which makes men larger, heavier and stronger on average, but women more agile and perceptive.
Scuplted abs means nothing about their sexuality? It might just be their choice of art - it may mean nothing else.
Saying someone is "beautiful" doesn't have to imply sexuality or even love. I can look at a sword and say "dang, that's a beautiful weapon" - it doesn't mean I want to stick it somewhere or have feelings for it.
No, but considering this particular art style is borrowed from greek warrior culture, a culture that emphasis homosexual love and pederasty as part of team building and military life, it makes me raise an eyebrow. That's also the point of homoerotism, it's all suggestive and nothing concrete. They glorify male beauty and strength and bathe in the most viril and macho institution in the 40K universe. The inuendo are far too easy to make. There's a reason why "Space Marines are gay" jokes are so common.
.
Actually, a Tactical Marine is expected to do double duty - hence that they are only promoted to Tactical when they've mastered both shooting and assault.
Yes, but one of this double duty is more important on average than the other and that's shooting as proven by their standard equipment.
But, going back to your point on women being in the lower tier of Space Marine strength, would that not mean that there are men in that category too? If so, then why do you need female marines when male ones could also fit that slim look you prefer? Would that not be enough for personalisation? What specifically about women would grant that? Boobplate? Long hair?
Yes, in pure terms of variety of models it would be enough to have more variety in body representation amongst men to bring more aethetic choices and personalisation. Of course, simply making lighter and slimer male Space Marines would not bring all the other points bellow. Idealy, I would go for both. Slimer Space Marines AND female Space Marines. That way I can make nimble guys and gals in addition to the super buff guys and gals.
Is that worth rewriting the lore of the standard Space Marines? Could those same Amazonians not be achieved through Catachans (who certainly fit the aesthetic) or Sisters of Battle - perhaps Sisters recruited from a planet like Catachan?
I am only talking about the New Marine. Not standard Space Marines. Personnaly, I don't have any special attachment the details of the canon of 40K. I don't mind the idea that some Orks might not be green, some Eldar might worship chaos, some Tyranid might hold and cultivate planets (or at least live in ecological balance there), or some Space Marines are women and operate in Chapters that count more than a 1000 Space Marines. These are rather small details to me. So yes, I wouldn't bat an eye at this change, but I can understand your love for such little details.
To answer your question, no Sisters of Battle from a jungle world wouldn't cut it for me. I love Sisters of Battle, but for different reasons than Space Marines.
Are you suggesting that ONLY Space Marines can be macho? That Sisters of Battle can't possess the same traits?
After all the only actual difference, aside from faith and doctrine, is that Space Marines are genetically engineered and rare, and Sister are not genetically engineered and are more common. Aside from those two features, they are the same - monogender factions that wield bolters and power armour, fighting for the Imperium fanatically and with great skill.
Is genetic modification necessary for the "Vasquez"?
You might want to review the tropes of SoB. They are the epidemy of the rather sexist and conventional heroine. Sisters of Battle are built to lose with grace. Martyrdom is at the core of their identity. Space Marines are meant to win and almost constantly do in novels and stories. SoB are highly sexualised both in the fluff (they used to be bodyguards and sex toys for a tyrant) and in models (the very obvious armored lingery and boob plate style). Sisters of Battle are also rarer than Space Marines. The last estimate of their total force was around 50K, far from 1 000 000. Sisters of Battle are penitent, value humility and belong to the Sisterhood which mostly provide care (education, medecine and religious service) to the population. This is completly opposed to machismo which define itself (amongst other thing) by pride and bravado. Some Chapter are more penitent and humble than others of course, but none like the Sisters of Battle. Sisters of Battle are used as support character to Space Marines in the setting, only very rarely as heroes of a story (or as a feared main antagonist). They have been used at least twice as victims to spurn the real heroes to greater feats of bravery. They are also "worfed" more frequently. SoB are a very feminine army and not only because its made of exclusively of women. The two armies are very different in term of style.
Space Marines aren't the ONLY macho army in the Imperium. The Imperial Guard also is and, yes, even the Sisters of Battle have a few macho elements (like Saint Mina and the Bloody Rose Order). The fact is that the Adeptus Astartes are the MOST macho of them all and the Sister of Battle the least. If you want a clearly macho character, you better search amongst Space Marines than Sisters. Sisters of Battle are too sexualised and not macho enough in general to make place for all the subtypes and styles of "macho women" that Space Marine women could bring. Guard women could make good macho women character too.
Judging from many responses, it seems that this one isn't widely supported.
Indeed, but since its not mandatory, why deprive the minority from its like since it comes at no cost to yours? The same goes for the entire issue of New Space Marine women. If you don't want them in your army, you can declare that your army doesn't have any. If you want a lot you can, if you want a few you can to. Plus, if you have variety between slightly more slender and slightly bigger marines you can quadrupal the changes you can make to your Space Marines (Big male, big female, small male and small female instead of the current one size fits all or two with only male).
Sorry I haven't read the whole conversation and I don't know how relevant it is but you can have a character that looks both VERY bulky and distinctly feminine.
Glory is great at this :
http://mooncalfe.deviantart.com/gallery/33270379/Glory (That's not even her final form btw ^^)
Or, Mountain Girl?
(nsfw nudity)
For anybody who desire female Space Marines, I have a good message for you.
Behold:
The Left Marines, successor chapter of Pretty Marines, have tradition that once they are promoted to the rank of Tactical Marine, they start to identify as woman, despite being physically man.
Now you can have female space marines, that are possible in current canon. Case closed.
Hawky wrote: For anybody who desire female Space Marines, I have a good message for you.
Behold:
The Left Marines, successor chapter of Pretty Marines, have tradition that once they are promoted to the rank of Tactical Marine, they start to identify as woman, despite being physically man.
Now you can have female space marines, that are possible in current canon. Case closed.
You claim they are 'Left Marines', but what if they were right all along?
In fact, once they are done there will be nothing left at all...
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Nobody asked because some of us don't like putting well established fluff on the chopping block.
Personally, that all the figures the Sisters of Battle obey are male is to me even more "offensive" that only male Space Marines But whell, thats their fluff. The Brides of the Emperor were originally the sex-bodyguards of Vandire.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Didn't I answered that question with a yes to you before?
If you really want a "Sister of Battle" men, you can have one. Ironically you can already have some male units within a classic SoB army with priests and Deathcult assassins.
Personnaly, I created in headcanon, (and will produce a fandex expension for them) a male equivalent for Sisters of Battle called the Brotherhood of Thor formed by the former companion and bodyguards of Sebastien Thor during the Reign of Blood. They still operate within the Ecclesiarchy as warrior-priests and maintain a strong rivalry and distrust of Sister of Battle.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Well see the difference here is the fluff reasoning.. of why each is single Gender
Sisters of Battle, are all Female as an exploit of the Charter that the Church cannot have any 'Men at Arms'
Spacemarines, are all Male.. because.. Reasons unclear... Appears to be a No Girls Allowed Club.....
And then somebody decides that they just said military and the militant just aren't a military but a defense force or something stupid like that.
The point is that we are messing with fluff to mess with it at that point. Girls get their "Girls Only Club" with Adeptus Soritas, and boys get their "Boys Only Club" with Adeptus Astartes. Then we have all the rest of the armies which have variance. If that isn't shown in the model range that isn't too bad. I mean it really is only Guard that need better representation, and for the Sisters to get a new model range.
Hawky wrote: For anybody who desire female Space Marines, I have a good message for you.
Behold:
The Left Marines, successor chapter of Pretty Marines, have tradition that once they are promoted to the rank of Tactical Marine, they start to identify as woman, despite being physically man.
Now you can have female space marines, that are possible in current canon. Case closed.
You claim they are 'Left Marines', but what if they were right all along?
In fact, once they are done there will be nothing left at all...
But it's OK, because then won't everything be all right?
Hawky wrote: For anybody who desire female Space Marines, I have a good message for you.
Behold:
The Left Marines, successor chapter of Pretty Marines, have tradition that once they are promoted to the rank of Tactical Marine, they start to identify as woman, despite being physically man.
Now you can have female space marines, that are possible in current canon. Case closed.
You claim they are 'Left Marines', but what if they were right all along?
In fact, once they are done there will be nothing left at all...
But it's OK, because then won't everything be all right?
If there is no left, then where is right? Does the right become the center? Feth, I'm nose bleeding. These are too complicated questions for me.
Before this thread Is locked, I want to say that, besides some people being very heated and bringing here politics etc... to me this has been a constructive discussion!
Galas wrote: Before this thread Is locked, I want to say that, besides some people being very heated and bringing here politics etc... to me this has been a constructive discussion!
I'll dare count myself amongst those whose arguments and points were constructive in your opinion and say thank you.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Nobody asked because some of us don't like putting well established fluff on the chopping block.
Personally, that all the figures the Sisters of Battle obey are male is to me even more "offensive" that only male Space Marines But whell, thats their fluff. The Brides of the Emperor were originally the sex-bodyguards of Vandire.
Actually the Sororitas pretty much operate on their own and bow to Inquisitors of the Ordo Hereticus if they bow to anyone else at all.
Galas wrote: Before this thread Is locked, I want to say that, besides some people being very heated and bringing here politics etc... to me this has been a constructive discussion!
I'll dare count myself amongst those whose arguments and points were constructive in your opinion and say thank you.
Yeah, maybe I don't agree with you in all of what you said, but to me, when people bring their opinions with arguments to back them and in a polite manner, even more in heated debates like this, they receive all my respect!
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Nobody asked because some of us don't like putting well established fluff on the chopping block.
Personally, that all the figures the Sisters of Battle obey are male is to me even more "offensive" that only male Space Marines But whell, thats their fluff. The Brides of the Emperor were originally the sex-bodyguards of Vandire.
Actually the Sororitas pretty much operate on their own and bow to Inquisitors of the Ordo Hereticus if they bow to anyone else at all.
Maybe my fluff in the matter is a little rusty, but I remember them being the weaponized arm of the Ordo Hereticus and in general the Ecclesiarchy, but you are correct. Is more that the Special Characters of the Ecclesiarchy are all men, but for no real reason, they could be female.
Yeah, maybe I don't agree with you in all of what you said, but to me, when people bring their opinions with arguments to back them and in a polite manner, even more in heated debates like this, they receive all my respect!
I agree. Epronovost, you and I agree on some things and disagree on others, but I respect the reasoning behind your opinions and the way in which you presented them. I can honestly say that I would be happier with female Space Marines if someone like you were giving them due consideration.
Tactical_Spam wrote: The Special Characters are all men, but women priests definitely exist in the fluff. Now only if GW could make some female models
I think that this might have changed. In the Codex Millitarum Tempestus its mention that only boys with great faith are selected to become priests, girls with similar traits are sent to "civilian" branches of the Sisterhood. Maybe that concern only Scholam students though. There are a lot of priests who aren't from the Scholam.
PS: That's a huge compliment from you Luciferian, thank you.
Female space marines already exist, they are called the Sisters of Battle. All that needs to happen is for them to have a supported and good quality model line and then thats that.
Galas wrote: Before this thread Is locked, I want to say that, besides some people being very heated and bringing here politics etc... to me this has been a constructive discussion!
I'll dare count myself amongst those whose arguments and points were constructive in your opinion and say thank you.
Yeah, maybe I don't agree with you in all of what you said, but to me, when people bring their opinions with arguments to back them and in a polite manner, even more in heated debates like this, they receive all my respect!
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Nobody asked because some of us don't like putting well established fluff on the chopping block.
Personally, that all the figures the Sisters of Battle obey are male is to me even more "offensive" that only male Space Marines But whell, thats their fluff. The Brides of the Emperor were originally the sex-bodyguards of Vandire.
Actually the Sororitas pretty much operate on their own and bow to Inquisitors of the Ordo Hereticus if they bow to anyone else at all.
Maybe my fluff in the matter is a little rusty, but I remember them being the weaponized arm of the Ordo Hereticus and in general the Ecclesiarchy, but you are correct. Is more that the Special Characters of the Ecclesiarchy are all men, but for no real reason, they could be female.
well the SOBs had a bit of a spcecial character shortage. if GW revives em they'd benifit from a cannoess character or three
Vulkan Fran'cis wrote: Female space marines already exist, they are called the Sisters of Battle. All that needs to happen is for them to have a supported and good quality model line and then thats that.
Everyone is waiting. Maybe 8th will be their time to shine.
I'm calling it now. The SoB are going to be completely redesigned. Their new name is going to be the sisterhood of the traveling battle pants. Their new motto will be eat, prey, love, purge. And their new color scheme Wil be 50 shades of grey.
I'm joking people please don't take this seriously.
Tactical_Spam wrote: Of all the things that are distinct about Glory, femininity is not one of them.
Well she definitely looks like a woman, not a man.
She is definitely too strong to be a space marine though. Maybe she could be more like the equivalent of a primarch?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Nah people keep answering that rhetorical questions that is only motivated by whataboutism ^^.
Sensual_T_Rex wrote: I'm calling it now. The SoB are going to be completely redesigned. Their new name is going to be the sisterhood of the traveling battle pants. Their new motto will be eat, prey, love, purge. And their new color scheme Wil be 50 shades of grey.
I'm joking people please don't take this seriously.
I don't know, it certainly sounds appropriate. Good name, by the way. If I didn't already have my own plans for one (if they are ever released in plastic), I would totally take that one up.
I'm more curious how high the prices will jump if they do a new sprue to accommodate female parts. I mean, since the 3rd Ed. Marine kit has come out, we've had a few retools/new molds from there, correct? I don't remember anything being unserviceable from the old sprues except the lack of special/heavy/CC weapons. One sprue could have accommodated that without retooling the entire kit and caboodle. I don't care what they do with the modern rules anymore, I care if they drive the prices up constantly for no reason.
Eh, I'm still in that "eh, nah, don't want femarines" boat.
If we do have femarines, from an aesthetic perspective I'd be happiest if, well, they looked exactly like male marines. If you look at high level female lifters, they don't look tremendously feminine to begin with and are still a long way behind the men (the world record holding female olympic lifter weighs 110kg, but was still lifting less than the world record holding 69kg class male). So once you genetically enhance the females I imagine they're going to just look like male Space Marines anyway.
Unfortunately for biology, the features that make a human physically strong aren't the feminine ones. Smaller torso, narrower shoulders, smaller size, glass jaw, delicate breast tissue, hips that are proportionally broader than the mid section and legs.
I know the IG have females in the story, but even there I prefer the aesthetic of all male IG. If GW decide to bring in female guard, fine, they're in the fluff, but when I started collecting IG I wasn't even aware of that fluff and was more than happy with an army made of nothing but buff dudes. I like it because IG are some of the weediest fighters in the galaxy, but they still come across as big buff well trained dudes, so it puts in to perspective just how powerful everything else is. IG act as a point of reference for the rest of 40k.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:Sorry I haven't read the whole conversation and I don't know how relevant it is but you can have a character that looks both VERY bulky and distinctly feminine.
Glory is great at this :
http://mooncalfe.deviantart.com/gallery/33270379/Glory (That's not even her final form btw ^^)
Or, Mountain Girl?
(nsfw nudity)
Good point, but if I'm honest, I don't really see anything feminine in either. The boobs I can ignore safely for the sake of Marine discussion, as it's likely that they would be removed or bound by cloth or suchlike. The hair isn't exactly gender exclusive (men can have long hair), which leaves the waist. Frankly, that waist is incredibly tight and I don't see how such a waist would exist on a Space Marine, female or not.
Again, what is definitively MALE about Space Marines? For me, masculine =/= male. A woman can be masculine. A man can be feminine. Agender can be either. That's just a verb, a descriptive. Actual male or female though - what makes a Space Marine male? Genetalia? Do they have them? Their choice of pronoun? If it is choice of pronoun, then can a disembodied head of a former man identify under female nouns? Are they then a female?*
Masculine doesn't equal male in my opinion too. Male gender identity is built on three things, first a sexual phenotype (or birth sex if you prefer), all Space Marines have the birth sex of men, personnal identity (AKA what you consider yourself to be), Space Marines refer to themselves using male pronouns and titles like Brother or he thus they identify as males (making themselves cisgendered individuals), the third element is perceived sexual identity (the gender people asign to you based on your apperance). Space Marines look like men, have the male birth sex and identify themselves as men. Thus their are men not agender or transgender or women. The have no characteristic associate with agenderism or transgenderism. Being of masculine birth sex is even stated as a fundamental requirement to become a Space Marine. Thus, I identify Space Marines as men (and "manly men" at that).
Space Marines have the birth sex of men, yes. However, they are then chemically castrated. Their birth sex means nothing when you're pumped full of Astartes implants and hormones.
So, male pronouns define them as male? How about I give male pronouns to a car? To a toaster? Is that toaster male? Is that car male? How about a snail? Snails are hermaphroditic - they have no male/female.
Sexual identity: So, you say if it looks like something, then it is that sex? So, a sculpture of a woman is an actual woman, and has a sex? How about transsexuals? Some can quite easily look like the opposite gender. However, just because they look like X gender, they ARE X gender?
To clarify, let's take a robot, or statue. I give male pronouns to it, and it looks like a male. It's birth gender means nothing, either because it has none, or because it has been removed/altered. Is that statue/robot a man?
On the point of behavior. That we like it or not (I don't), certain behavior and traits are strongly associated with masculinity and the fact of being a men while other are the reverse. GW never intendend to redefine, subvert or criticise this cultural trait of the modern Western world. The inspiration for the Space Marine sub-cultures are drawn from historical hyper-masculine warrior societies like Holy Orders of knights like the Templar and the Teutonnic from wich they derive some aesthetic elements, rank, organisation name, weapons and names and from Greeko-Romans from which they derive names, organisation and recruitment startegies. The values of the Space Marines Chapters are the same values vehiculated by those historical institutions. These values were also associated with men. Women in those societies (and still the case in ours to a lesser extant) are proscribed, ridiculed or considered as weird and abnormal for espousing those values and practices. GW wanted the Space Marine to be considered "manly" by their consumer base. Its part of their marketing. The absence of Space Marine women isn't accidental either. It was a clear decision from the company with the clear intent of making this army the paragon of "manlyness" and they think that Space Marine women would dillute this. Many people on this thread agree with that statement.
So you're saying that women can't be masculine? You're saying that there's absolutely no way that there could ever be a feminine Space Marine (say, with a love of art and expression?), or that a masculine Sister of Battle is impossible?
Yes, Space Marines women should be considered masculine. "Masculine women" are very cool in my opinion and in no way different in behavior and values than a "manly men".
But only Space Marines in the entire 40k universe should be masculine?
My entire argument is to adress that of Deadshot who said that Space Marines are agender war machines. No, in my opinion, they are men and while they are warrior supreme, they are capable and interested by much more. While they could have some traits of agender people, like not associating or carring about gender at all, representation of Space Marines in novels doesn't allow us to see how they see themselves. They do believe to be transhumen, but from Loken appreciation of masculine beauty, he seems to lop Space Marines in the group of men since he appreciate the beauty of Little Horus, Horus himself and that of Tarvitz, but fail to appreciate that of Keeler and the other female remembrencer due to him having little experience with women. Thus, we can extrapolate and declare that Space Marines perceive themselves to be men, but not entirely humen men. This would make them cisgender in the broad sense of the term and not agender. They are asexual thought (except maybe some Space Wolves).
They percieve themselves with male pronouns. That doesn't make them men. It makes them agender, who use masculine pronouns.
They are transhuman, we are told that as an outright fact in the canon.
Again - Loken can appreciate the beauty of Little Horus, Horus and Tarvitz, but at the same time we also see Space Marines appreciate the beauty of war, their wargear, destruction, etc etc. Is a bolter a symbol of masculine beauty?
Absolutely, hence why I'm asking for a confirmation of love. Not interpretation - actual love, as far as it can be confirmed.
My best example would be the relationship of Captain Ka'dai and his Apothecary which was described as "maybe more than brotherhood" by some member of the Chapter. This was in reaction to the Apothecary exilling himself in the wasteland to die after the death of Ka'dai. This would be, in my opinion, a clear case of romantic suicide. We could place Loken's best friend (I don't remember his name) anguish at the idea of dying far from Loken in the same category. So, yeah, platonic love is something more than possible in my opinion.
Again, that isn't confirmation. Speculation, yes, in universe speculation even better. But it's not confirmation, which is what I asked for.
Torgaddon's lament with that can also be attributed with brotherhood and friendship - not necessarily love.
If I see canon love, actually confirmed, I'll accept your point.
I absolutely agree that they're not 100% war machine, but their purpose, their intended goal, is as that. What they do in their off-time, as laid out by the 4th (?) edition Codex, is up to them, but if that interferes in their primary goal, then they're not a very good Space Marine, are they?
It's like being a builder nowadays, but you get distracted from your work birdwatching. Your job, your primary purpose in your society, is as a builder, but you can still birdwatch in your spare time.
Still - this has no bearing on gender. Still, as long as we agree that one's tastes are not defined by gender.
What about choice of identification? If a canon Space Marine identified as female, are they still a Space Marine? After all, you did just imply that ONLY men could have the "apperance, values and behaviors" of a Space Marine.
That's actually a good question for you. I would say yes, a Space Marine who identify as a women would still be a Space Marine (and would be a women). That could break GW position of only men can be Space Marines though. Values and behavior, no, apperance, yes, considering that they dress in masculine fashion and don't go through any form of gender reassignment therapy they do look like men. Does it mean they are, not necessarly, but it gives strong hints than yes.
So, hints.
In which way do they dress masculinely? Armour? FeMarines would wear the same armour most likely. Their robes outside of armour? Females wear robes too.
Gender re-assignment? In what way? They're already chemically castrated, why would they need to have an artificial vagina implanted? They're not even biologically male per say - only that they were once male, and are now completely castrated. If anything, they are agender, leaving us with (in some views) Male, Female and Astartes, as a gender to itself.
After all, they are PostHuman.
However, look at some of the other Scouts - very muscular and hopped up.
Not to mention that Space Marines are all very tall (seven feet is average) and must still be in proportion. Alternatively, look at images of other Space Marines outside of armour - not just Scouts.
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
They look VERY bulky to me.
Again, all your examples are Scouts, who may not have undergone the full transformation of the Biscopea. Two of my examples are full Space Marines, and are very large.
Why would a woman not look the same?
They do look strong, some more than others. You wanted me to show non-bulky Space Marines and I did. Did I say they couldn't be bulky? No, I said their look is varied. Some are others not so much. Some are probable smaller than 7 foot tall (the average of the Space Marines) while others are much bigger than that. All Space Marines look strong. Space Marine men look strong, some look even like musclebound monsters, others much less so. Space Marine would look strong. Strong women don't look like men. They look like women. Some will look very feminine, others not just like for the male counterparts. Some images of Blood Angels picture them as very feminine in terms of facial traits, Sanguinius is a prime example of that.
Sanguinius is a Primarch - not a Space Marine.
So if you admit then that they can be varied, then surely we can have slim males and bulky females?
Again, a strong women =/= not an Astartes. A strong women may not have has all the implants, surgery, therapy to be an Astartes. If we see what that surgery does to a boy, why would it be different for a girl?
If your whole point is "there's different body types", that's great! But then we should have slim Astartes and bulky Astartes - not bulky men and slim girls. Gender should be a non-issue with this.
But why based on men and women? If we can have the more slight frames of women, why can men of a slight bent be taken in? Wouldn't they look more like the women then? What about women who outstrength those men? Would they not look like the typical men?
You can look feminine and be extremely strong. Even stronger than a men. I know several women who are stronger than men who are themselves quite strong. They don't look like men at all. I have clearly mentionned that Space Marine men can have a more slender shape and proved it with artworks. There is body diversity within the Adeptus Astartes that you include women or not.
Exactly. So if your whole reason for wanting FeMarines is "I want body diversity", you've just admitted that you don't need women for it.
And again, any strong women you know are still not Astartes. Given what we know the procedure does to young boys, why would it make young girls any different physically?
If you want different frames and variety in your Space Marines, like more athletic ones, then why stratify that on gender? At the moment, you're implying that men MUST be big, and women MUST be more slight, when there are notable exceptions either side.
I don't stratify be gender. I firmly believe there is variety in the apperence and performance of Space Marine men within the same Chapter. The same would applie to Space Marine women.
Just so we agree on that. Therefore, why are women needed for aesthetic difference?
If strength wasn't a factor, then why would the Biscopea be implanted?
Because Space Marines are a power fantasy. They are akin to superheroes. They are not an acurate representation of how a futuristic super soldier would look like. Strength in a superhero is important. The good thing is that Space Marine women would be inhumanly strong thanks to the Biscopea and their power armor.
Agreed. FeMarines, provided they pass all checks from recruitment, should be just as strong as their male comrades.
If strength wasn't a factor, then why even screen for the strongest recruits, if you're only after their hardiness? Lucius was still very strong, and his agility came from skill - not from his lack of strength or biology. One can be skilled and strong - it's not mutually exclusive.
Of course, the very best Space Marines will be strong, fast, resistent, determined, charismatic, agile, flexible, stealthy, perceptive, intelligent, adaptable and wise in equal amount.
Precisely. If a girl beats the male competition (and can survive the implantation), then there's no reason she shouldn't be considered.
Except that women are useless in the current tests, because they simply can't survive it. They don't meld with the geneseed. Why bother having female recruits when you know that they won't make it?
Indeed, now there is no use to invite girls in Space Marine recruitment tests, but should there be women amongst the New Marines, they will be. Right now, though, if I was in command of a Space Marine Chapter I would still test girls and pick those who would be Space Marine worthy and train them as Chapter serfs and squires this way, my Chapter would have a lot of talent.
Yes, I don't disagree. However, I'm saying that with the old Astartes, women are useless to test and trial.
Real world women bodybuilders, heavyweights and welterweights are not pumped full of foreign organs, hormones, drugs and quite literally transformed into superhumans. Even male bodybuilders wouldn't necessarily look like Space Marines, but as we see in the art, we DO see Space Marines looking like bodybuilders. Therefore, it's not unreasonable to assume that a woman who undergoes the same procedure would look the same.
Considering that Space Marine men currently look like real bodybuilder, heavyweight and welterweigths male athlete, why would Space Marine women, look any different than real bodybuilder, heavyweight, welterweight female athlete?
Is your vision plausible, certainly. Is mine also plausible certainly. Mine has the extra virtue of bringing more to the hobby and remaining more consistent. If hormonal change make women turned into giant creature almost identical to men, why arent men looking like half gorilla creatures (like smaller Ogryn for example)?
Males don't look like male bodybuilders because they're male. They look like that because of the construction process of a Space Marine. The sheer amount of drugs and hormones they pump in happens to create that image, only scaled massively upwards.
Women would look the same, because it's not a case of Male-->Male Bodybuilder/Female-->Female Bodybuilder. It's a case of Male-->Astartes physique/Female-->Astartes physique.
What does your bring to the hobby? As you said, the aesthetic differences such as slimness should exist regardless of gender. So what else is there?
How can yours be consistent? I'm saying "they'd look the same". You're saying "they'd look different". How does that promote consistency?
Again, the process isn't proportionate. Let me put it into numbers. 1 is Female. 2 is Male. 6 is Astartes.
In order for a Male to be turned into a Space Marine, it is either multiplied by 3, or 4 is added. You believe that the implantation process is akin to multiplication, so a male is multiplied by three. However, if a female is multiplied by three, they are inferior to a Male Astartes.
I believe it is more akin to an automatic transformation. I believe that 6 is the limit, but the initial recruit is augmented by whatever number needed to reach that limit. Therefore, a male would need 4, but a female would need 5. However, the creation process allows for that, because it makes Astartes all generally equal, up to the limit of the hypothetical 6.
TL;DR - You believe that the implantation process is a multiplying factor. I believe it levels all applicants out to a set value.
I don't see a difference in aesthetic at all - given that it takes the implantation procedure to turn a 12 year old into something that would make the strongest man ashamed, why would a 12 year old girl not turn out the same?
If you're suggesting that there's different brackets of a Space Marine's strength, then why would that be stratified on gender?
Since the adult version of a Space Marine looks just like a highly trained adult men, an adult Space Marine women would probably look like a highly trained women. The potential bracket and difference was if you wanted to preserve gender dimorphism of normal human which makes men larger, heavier and stronger on average, but women more agile and perceptive.
Again, I beg to differ. I believe that a Space Marine is not reflective of one's previous gender. I believe that "Space Marine" is just the default physical appearance. It just happens to look like a male bodybuilder. That's not because of the original gender.
Take for example, replacing Space Marine with a snail. A male transformed becomes a snail. A female transformed becomes the same snail. There is no gender to these snail - it's just a snail. The gender is meaningless, and they look identical. Now imagine that this snail just happens to look like an adult male bodybuilder. That's how I see Space Marine transformation. The original gender doesn't matter. You all end up looking roughly the same (with hair, eye and skin colour being different).
Scuplted abs means nothing about their sexuality? It might just be their choice of art - it may mean nothing else.
Saying someone is "beautiful" doesn't have to imply sexuality or even love. I can look at a sword and say "dang, that's a beautiful weapon" - it doesn't mean I want to stick it somewhere or have feelings for it.
No, but considering this particular art style is borrowed from greek warrior culture, a culture that emphasis homosexual love and pederasty as part of team building and military life, it makes me raise an eyebrow. That's also the point of homoerotism, it's all suggestive and nothing concrete. They glorify male beauty and strength and bathe in the most viril and macho institution in the 40K universe. The inuendo are far too easy to make. There's a reason why "Space Marines are gay" jokes are so common.
So you admit then that there's no actual confirmation or evidence to confirm it.
.
Regardless if it's psuedo-scientific bullgak, it's psuedo-scientific bullgak that's canon.
Since there is no pseudo-scientific explanation for how Space Marine women look like talking about the value of canon is pointless.
Yes, but we can take what we do know about the process, and assume that, despite all different physiques of the applicant men, they all turn out roughly the same, why would women (if they could survive) look any different?
Actually, a Tactical Marine is expected to do double duty - hence that they are only promoted to Tactical when they've mastered both shooting and assault.
Yes, but one of this double duty is more important on average than the other and that's shooting as proven by their standard equipment.
On average, yes. That still doesn't mean that strength is a negligible factor in a Space Marine's biology.
But, going back to your point on women being in the lower tier of Space Marine strength, would that not mean that there are men in that category too? If so, then why do you need female marines when male ones could also fit that slim look you prefer? Would that not be enough for personalisation? What specifically about women would grant that? Boobplate? Long hair?
Yes, in pure terms of variety of models it would be enough to have more variety in body representation amongst men to bring more aethetic choices and personalisation. Of course, simply making lighter and slimer male Space Marines would not bring all the other points bellow. Idealy, I would go for both. Slimer Space Marines AND female Space Marines. That way I can make nimble guys and gals in addition to the super buff guys and gals.
So you then admit that the only reason for having females is because of the below points, and not the aesthetic, as you said before?
So, that means that aesthetic is not really a valid reason for difference then.
Is that worth rewriting the lore of the standard Space Marines? Could those same Amazonians not be achieved through Catachans (who certainly fit the aesthetic) or Sisters of Battle - perhaps Sisters recruited from a planet like Catachan?
I am only talking about the New Marine. Not standard Space Marines. Personnaly, I don't have any special attachment the details of the canon of 40K. I don't mind the idea that some Orks might not be green, some Eldar might worship chaos, some Tyranid might hold and cultivate planets (or at least live in ecological balance there), or some Space Marines are women and operate in Chapters that count more than a 1000 Space Marines. These are rather small details to me. So yes, I wouldn't bat an eye at this change, but I can understand your love for such little details.
So really, the lore means nothing to you. That's all fine. However, that doesn't mean your ideas are canon, or that other people need to accept them as such.
However, yes, I do believe that the NuMarines, seeing as we don't know how they're made, easily have the capacity for female members. I don't think they should look too different though, as I have pointed with my above reasons.
OldMarines are, on the other hand, off limits, for canon reasons.
To answer your question, no Sisters of Battle from a jungle world wouldn't cut it for me. I love Sisters of Battle, but for different reasons than Space Marines.
Why wouldn't Sister from a jungle cut it? Let me just affirm, the only difference between Sisters and Space Marines is that one of them is genetically engineered, and the other has divine protection.
Why is genetic engineering so important for these Amazons (who also, funnily enough, were not genetically engineered)?
Are you suggesting that ONLY Space Marines can be macho? That Sisters of Battle can't possess the same traits?
After all the only actual difference, aside from faith and doctrine, is that Space Marines are genetically engineered and rare, and Sister are not genetically engineered and are more common. Aside from those two features, they are the same - monogender factions that wield bolters and power armour, fighting for the Imperium fanatically and with great skill.
Is genetic modification necessary for the "Vasquez"?
You might want to review the tropes of SoB. They are the epidemy of the rather sexist and conventional heroine.
Or alternatively, I see them as an army of the pious faithful. Their sex means nothing, other than a loophole (showing the underhanded methods of the Imperial Church).
Sisters of Battle are built to lose with grace. Martyrdom is at the core of their identity. Space Marines are meant to win and almost constantly do in novels and stories.
So what about the novels where Space Marines lose?
SoB are highly sexualised both in the fluff (they used to be bodyguards and sex toys for a tyrant) and in models (the very obvious armored lingery and boob plate style).
Sex toys for a tyrant? Could I have a quote on that? I know they served for Vandire, in domestic roles, but to the extent of sex? I'll accept this if I see a quote on it.
Sisters of Battle are also rarer than Space Marines. The last estimate of their total force was around 50K, far from 1000000.
There are 15000 Sisters from the Order of the Martyred Lady in the Calixis Sector ALONE.
I doubt that over 25% of all Sisters are located in one single Sector.
Sisters of Battle are penitent, value humility and belong to the Sisterhood which mostly provide care (education, medecine and religious service) to the population. This is completly opposed to machismo which define itself (amongst other thing) by pride and bravado. Some Chapter are more penitent and humble than others of course, but none like the Sisters of Battle. Sisters of Battle are used as support character to Space Marines in the setting, only very rarely as heroes of a story (or as a feared main antagonist). They have been used at least twice as victims to spurn the real heroes to greater feats of bravery. They are also "worfed" more frequently. SoB are a very feminine army and not only because its made of exclusively of women. The two armies are very different in term of style.
Again, are you saying there's no way that Sisters (who tackle the same threats as the Astartes do WITHOUT all the implants) could ever been seen with bravado and courage?
You say that there are some exceptions for Space Marines (being penitent and humble), so why can't the inverse be true for Sisters?
Again, I believe that Sisters need more lore showing their victories. That's not a rewrite - that's actually making them out as the fierce, dedicated militant wing of the Church.
Space Marines aren't the ONLY macho army in the Imperium. The Imperial Guard also is and, yes, even the Sisters of Battle have a few macho elements (like Saint Mina and the Bloody Rose Order). The fact is that the Adeptus Astartes are the MOST macho of them all and the Sister of Battle the least. If you want a clearly macho character, you better search amongst Space Marines than Sisters. Sisters of Battle are too sexualised and not macho enough in general to make place for all the subtypes and styles of "macho women" that Space Marine women could bring. Guard women could make good macho women character too.
So you freely admit that Sisters can be macho - how then, is the Vasquez stereotype not possible for Sisters? Does the Vasquez NEED to be genetically enhanced? Who's to say that women would even be macho when put in the Adeptus Astartes?
Sisters are sexualised because the only reason they exist in the setting is because of the sex. Canonically, their sex is important. I don't see it as unreasonable to assume that the Ecclesiarchy would show off this sex, emphasising that they can still have female warriors. A taunt, almost - a symbol.
Why are Guardsmen able to be macho and Sisters not? How about Assassins? Sisters of Silence? Is it just all-women armies that can't be macho for you?
Judging from many responses, it seems that this one isn't widely supported.
Indeed, but since its not mandatory, why deprive the minority from its like since it comes at no cost to yours? The same goes for the entire issue of New Space Marine women. If you don't want them in your army, you can declare that your army doesn't have any. If you want a lot you can, if you want a few you can to. Plus, if you have variety between slightly more slender and slightly bigger marines you can quadrupal the changes you can make to your Space Marines (Big male, big female, small male and small female instead of the current one size fits all or two with only male).
So, in the same vein, do you believe that Male Sisters should be a thing? After all, if you don't believe they should be a thing, then you can just say that your Sororitas don't have any males.
Canon exists because of rules in the setting. If you ignore all the setting rules and limits of 40k, what makes it unique? If we ignore setting rules, what stops a Star Wars Death Star coming in and blowing up Terra? What stops the Covenant glassing Macragge? How about Guardsmen Conscripts easily killing Space Marine Chapter Masters in close combat?
If you want to ignore all the rules of the setting, that's up to you. However, it seems that a lot of people want to keep canon. Your minority wants to change the canon - that's not what the majority wants. If you change the canon to allow for normal FeMarines, then that's counter to the majority wishes.
And again - what aesthetic difference would Females bring to the Space Marines? The slim body type is also present in males, as you say, so what else is there?
GodDamUser wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Well see the difference here is the fluff reasoning.. of why each is single Gender
Sisters of Battle, are all Female as an exploit of the Charter that the Church cannot have any 'Men at Arms'
Spacemarines, are all Male.. because.. Reasons unclear... Appears to be a No Girls Allowed Club.....
The reason is clear. The reason is that geneseed does not work on the female body.
You can ignore that reason all you want, but it's just as valid as "Men aren't allowed to fight for the Church."
Why do you think it's okay to ignore that given circumstance?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Nobody asked because some of us don't like putting well established fluff on the chopping block.
Personally, that all the figures the Sisters of Battle obey are male is to me even more "offensive" that only male Space Marines But whell, thats their fluff. The Brides of the Emperor were originally the sex-bodyguards of Vandire.
Quote for being sex-slaves? I see evidence for them being nurses and servants, but sex-slaves? Could I see a quote for that?
Also, not all the figures the Sisters follow are male. Their Canonesses, female Inquisitors and High Lords are/can be female. In fact, when it comes to female Inquisitors and HIgh Lords, even Space Marines (who are all male) follow orders from.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Tactical_Spam wrote: Of all the things that are distinct about Glory, femininity is not one of them.
Well she definitely looks like a woman, not a man.
She is definitely too strong to be a space marine though. Maybe she could be more like the equivalent of a primarch?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So do we get male Sisters Of Battle if we get female Space Marines?
Nobody ever answers that question.
Nah people keep answering that rhetorical questions that is only motivated by whataboutism ^^.
I don't understand. Why is it acceptable to ignore Space Marine fluff to have female Marines, but not okay to ignore Sisters fluff to have male Sororitas?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Nah people keep answering that rhetorical questions that is only motivated by whataboutism ^^.
I don't understand. Why is it acceptable to ignore Space Marine fluff to have female Marines, but not okay to ignore Sisters fluff to have male Sororitas?
I don't understand either. How is saying “We don't need to add male models in the Sisters army because there already are some” interpreted by you as saying “It's not okay to ignore Sisters's fluff to add male models in their army”?
Id rather them throw some female heads/arms/etc into whatever the new guard kit will be, and bring sororitas to the forefront a bit more, rather than arbitrarily saying women can be space marines now, fluff be damned.
The people clamboring for female marines seems to be a small subset of the people clamboring for sisters... so...
Exaclty why not have Marines as the 'All-male army' then have Sisters as the'All-Female' army, then have mechanicus, guard, inquistion and all other aspects of the imperium go the mixed gender route.
In the case of Xenos, just add more mixed groups in Eldar. The other races either dont make it obvious or just dont have them.
Vulkan Fran'cis wrote: Exaclty why not have Marines as the 'All-male army' then have Sisters as the'All-Female' army, then have mechanicus, guard, inquistion and all other aspects of the imperium go the mixed gender route.
In the case of Xenos, just add more mixed groups in Eldar. The other races either dont make it obvious or just dont have them.
Are the Mechanicum even human enough for us to distinguish male from female?
Vulkan Fran'cis wrote: Exaclty why not have Marines as the 'All-male army' then have Sisters as the'All-Female' army...
Plastic Space Marine infantry kits: 23 (includes Deathwatch/GK, doesn't include "kit X with a conversion frame" or "two of kit Y in one box").
Plastic Sisters of Battle infantry kits: 0
(Personally I'd be happier if the Sisters got a real Codex and a couple of plastic kits (seriously, GW, you need two (Retributors/Dominions/Celestians/Sisters and an updated tank that doesn't come with two pounds of solid pewter chunks) and 80% of the Codex is covered) than if than if someone decided to take the "no girls allowed" sign off the Astartes treehouse, but holding up the existence of the Sisters as an example of GW's inclusiveness always seems ridiculous to me when they haven't gotten a new model or an actual Codex (as opposed to a half-assed White Dwarf patch that took away more things than it provided) in, what, twelve years?)
Crazyterran wrote: Id rather them throw some female heads/arms/etc into whatever the new guard kit will be, and bring sororitas to the forefront a bit more, rather than arbitrarily saying women can be space marines now, fluff be damned.
The people clamboring for female marines seems to be a small subset of the people clamboring for sisters... so...
Not their fault. They have an army that seems to have little love fluff wise, as well as limited models of the army as well. Asking for plastics of the sisters seems to go on deaf ears, having to pay for overpriced metal that has little to change it up. As well, being a weak army list back to back through edition doesn't help either.
SM are the polar opposite to the SoB, getting all the goods and tons of models and plenty of good fluff. If they can't get more SoB, female SM is the next best thing. They have a right to be jealous, Hell, they are scared half the time GW will cut the army.
BTW, it isn't even all of them that want such to happen with SM.
I don't know if any of you know this, but a woman in body armor looks just like a man in body armor. So, in theory you could run a guards army that is all female and you would be correct, As for SM, they have even more armor, so who is to say that some of them are sporting boobies under those chest plates? There is no need for new models in either of those cases.
All it would take to make female SM is a simple lore change, the question is "how many people would get upset about that"
KayTwo wrote: I don't know if any of you know this, but a woman in body armor looks just like a man in body armor. So, in theory you could run a guards army that is all female and you would be correct, As for SM, they have even more armor, so who is to say that some of them are sporting boobies under those chest plates? There is no need for new models in either of those cases.
All it would take to make female SM is a simple lore change, the question is "how many people would get upset about that"
It is the 40k community.... that should give you an idea on what to expect if such occurs, and how many would numbers wise.
Crazyterran wrote: Id rather them throw some female heads/arms/etc into whatever the new guard kit will be, and bring sororitas to the forefront a bit more, rather than arbitrarily saying women can be space marines now, fluff be damned.
The people clamboring for female marines seems to be a small subset of the people clamboring for sisters... so...
Not their fault. They have an army that seems to have little love fluff wise, as well as limited models of the army as well. Asking for plastics of the sisters seems to go on deaf ears, having to pay for overpriced metal that has little to change it up. As well, being a weak army list back to back through edition doesn't help either.
SM are the polar opposite to the SoB, getting all the goods and tons of models and plenty of good fluff. If they can't get more SoB, female SM is the next best thing. They have a right to be jealous, Hell, they are scared half the time GW will cut the army.
BTW, it isn't even all of them that want such to happen with SM.
Like I said, a small portion of the smallest group in the community.
My post did say they should bring Sisters to the fore a bit more.
Crazyterran wrote: Id rather them throw some female heads/arms/etc into whatever the new guard kit will be, and bring sororitas to the forefront a bit more, rather than arbitrarily saying women can be space marines now, fluff be damned.
The people clamboring for female marines seems to be a small subset of the people clamboring for sisters... so...
Not their fault. They have an army that seems to have little love fluff wise, as well as limited models of the army as well. Asking for plastics of the sisters seems to go on deaf ears, having to pay for overpriced metal that has little to change it up. As well, being a weak army list back to back through edition doesn't help either.
SM are the polar opposite to the SoB, getting all the goods and tons of models and plenty of good fluff. If they can't get more SoB, female SM is the next best thing. They have a right to be jealous, Hell, they are scared half the time GW will cut the army.
BTW, it isn't even all of them that want such to happen with SM.
Like I said, a small portion of the smallest group in the community.
My post did say they should bring Sisters to the fore a bit more.
More, yes more, and the SoB community is larger than you think. Being an SoB player is like being in an abusive relationship that keeps taking your money away and then takes the children away from you. As well others kick you in the face and say, "Deal with it."
More, yes more, and the SoB community is larger than you think. Being an SoB player is like being in an abusive relationship that keeps taking your money away and then takes the children away from you. As well others kick you in the face and say, "Deal with it."
...This is entirely about tiny models in a space fantasy game, this isn't even close.
More, yes more, and the SoB community is larger than you think. Being an SoB player is like being in an abusive relationship that keeps taking your money away and then takes the children away from you. As well others kick you in the face and say, "Deal with it."
...This is entirely about tiny models in a space fantasy game, this isn't even close.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I don't understand. Why is it acceptable to ignore Space Marine fluff to have female Marines, but not okay to ignore Sisters fluff to have male Sororitas?
There's actually a pretty solid reason in the lore why the Ecclesiarchy doesn't have a fighting force of male warriors at its disposal. The Age of Apostasy is one of the most important events in the Imperium's history, second only to the Horus Heresy, and the Decree Passive (barring the Ecclesiarchy from controlling "men under arms") was a direct result. It's grounded in the narrative. Whereas, the reason there aren't female Space Marines amounts to "Just because".
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I don't understand. Why is it acceptable to ignore Space Marine fluff to have female Marines, but not okay to ignore Sisters fluff to have male Sororitas?
There's actually a pretty solid reason in the lore why the Ecclesiarchy doesn't have a fighting force of male warriors at its disposal. The Age of Apostasy is one of the most important events in the Imperium's history, second only to the Horus Heresy, and the Decree Passive (barring the Ecclesiarchy from controlling "men under arms") was a direct result. It's grounded in the narrative. Whereas, the reason there aren't female Space Marines amounts to "Just because".
So what I am reading here is that your facts from the lore are better than their facts from the lore? Why is the fact that there was a law passed to prevent males from being part of the sisters of battle any more true than the geneseed of male primarchs cannot be implanted in females?
KayTwo wrote: I don't know if any of you know this, but a woman in body armor looks just like a man in body armor. So, in theory you could run a guards army that is all female and you would be correct, As for SM, they have even more armor, so who is to say that some of them are sporting boobies under those chest plates? There is no need for new models in either of those cases.
All it would take to make female SM is a simple lore change, the question is "how many people would get upset about that"
The last time we had this discussion some pictures were posted of female and male US Army soldiers standing in their body armor/full kit. The hair and the occasional soft featured were the only thing distinguishing them. Now shrink that down to tabletop size, which means look at those same soldiers from a distance of 50 meters or so. Indistinguishable. But it doesn't matter, the crux is that there should never be all male anything ever in ANYTHING, but all female armies/teams/whatever are fine if not encouraged. THAT is the agenda you will meet no matter WHAT logic you throw at it. And you will never defeat that belief with facts. Why, you ask? People have never been beaten to death with multiple rocks over a fact. Millions have died that way over the years due to beliefs.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I don't understand. Why is it acceptable to ignore Space Marine fluff to have female Marines, but not okay to ignore Sisters fluff to have male Sororitas?
There's actually a pretty solid reason in the lore why the Ecclesiarchy doesn't have a fighting force of male warriors at its disposal. The Age of Apostasy is one of the most important events in the Imperium's history, second only to the Horus Heresy, and the Decree Passive (barring the Ecclesiarchy from controlling "men under arms") was a direct result. It's grounded in the narrative. Whereas, the reason there aren't female Space Marines amounts to "Just because".
So why is one lore better than the other? Why is one "more valid"?
Hell, I could just reword your argument:
There's actually a pretty solid reason in the lore why the Space Marines don't have a fighting force of female warriors at its disposal. The creation of Space Marines is one of the most important events in the Imperium's history, and the inability of women to be implanted with geneseed was a direct result. It's grounded in the narrative. Whereas, the reason there aren't male Adeptas Sororitas amounts to "Just because".
Why do you pretend like one isn't important, or negligible? They're both canon, and both supported by GW. I fully support the idea of Sisters being monogender. However, it support that idea because of the lore, in the same way I support monogender Space Marines.
GW have retconned stuff before. (Which annoys me.)
The Decree Passive might be revoked in the face of that massive new warp rift.
NuMarines may not use the daft progenoid system.
Heck, at the rate long lost folk are making comebacks we might see the two missing legions pitch up....Astral Amazons and the Void Valkyries. :Rollseyes:
If GW can write an interesting story as to why we now have female marines all well and good...but I would rather they do something with Sisters of Battle.
I suspect that instead of that we will see them work on Sisters of Silence instead.
Souleater wrote: GW have retconned stuff before. (Which annoys me.)
The Decree Passive might be revoked in the face of that massive new warp rift.
NuMarines may not use the daft progenoid system.
Heck, at the rate long lost folk are making comebacks we might see the two missing legions pitch up....Astral Amazons and the Void Valkyries. :Rollseyes:
If GW can write an interesting story as to why we now have female marines all well and good...but I would rather they do something with Sisters of Battle.
I suspect that instead of that we will see them work on Sisters of Silence instead.
truthfully if I had my way I'd have folded sisters of silence into the sisters of battle codex as an elite choice. they're not the same orginization no, but given their background (both provided secruity on the black ships IIRC) as well as their war gear. it'd be something that could work.
Souleater wrote: GW have retconned stuff before. (Which annoys me.)
The Decree Passive might be revoked in the face of that massive new warp rift.
NuMarines may not use the daft progenoid system.
Heck, at the rate long lost folk are making comebacks we might see the two missing legions pitch up....Astral Amazons and the Void Valkyries. :Rollseyes:
If GW can write an interesting story as to why we now have female marines all well and good...but I would rather they do something with Sisters of Battle.
I suspect that instead of that we will see them work on Sisters of Silence instead.
truthfully if I had my way I'd have folded sisters of silence into the sisters of battle codex as an elite choice. they're not the same orginization no, but given their background (both provided secruity on the black ships IIRC) as well as their war gear. it'd be something that could work.
Sisters of Silence and Custodes being their own faction/codex is the most absurd thing out there. They should be rolled in Adeptus Astartes/Sisters of Battle codex, or into a "Agents of the Empire" type of thing. I prefer the first option.
GW tried to hard to give them different units types, but no, Sisters of Silence are just Sisters of Silence, it doesn't matter if they have swords, flamers or bolters.
Souleater wrote: GW have retconned stuff before. (Which annoys me.)
The Decree Passive might be revoked in the face of that massive new warp rift.
NuMarines may not use the daft progenoid system.
Heck, at the rate long lost folk are making comebacks we might see the two missing legions pitch up....Astral Amazons and the Void Valkyries. :Rollseyes:
If GW can write an interesting story as to why we now have female marines all well and good...but I would rather they do something with Sisters of Battle.
I suspect that instead of that we will see them work on Sisters of Silence instead.
truthfully if I had my way I'd have folded sisters of silence into the sisters of battle codex as an elite choice. they're not the same orginization no, but given their background (both provided secruity on the black ships IIRC) as well as their war gear. it'd be something that could work.
Sisters of Battle had nothing to do with the Black Ships.
Space Marines have the birth sex of men, yes. However, they are then chemically castrated. Their birth sex means nothing when you're pumped full of Astartes implants and hormones.
Apparently yes, they develop all the phenotypes associated with humen males. Looking at an image of a Space Marine (alone), everybody would tell you they are muscular humen males. Only in comparison with normal humen would their transhumen natue be revealed due to their size, yet their appearence would still mark them as males much like when you see male eldar, giant, gnome, etc. you call them men and not agender.
So, male pronouns define them as male? How about I give male pronouns to a car? To a toaster? Is that toaster male? Is that car male? How about a snail? Snails are hermaphroditic - they have no male/female.
Amongst other yes, people who are male use male pronouns, people who are female uses female pronouns. Toasters, snails and cares use the gender neutral pronoun of ''it''. Transexual generaly uses the pronoun of the sex they identify to or use the gender pronouns ''they'' (or push for the adoption of a new one to describe them). Space Marine refer to themselves as males.
Sexual identity: So, you say if it looks like something, then it is that sex? So, a sculpture of a woman is an actual woman, and has a sex?
At this point your starting to be obtuse in an effort to not lose a point. A sculpture of a person is a representation of that said person. What it represent can have a sex. The sculpture is just a medium. While looking at the drawings of Space Marines you said they were muscular? Are drawings full of muscles? absolutly not, thet represent people with muscle. Yes, you can use a medium to gain information about someone appearence, which include their sex.
How about transsexuals? Some can quite easily look like the opposite gender. However, just because they look like X gender, they ARE X gender?
If they don't tell you otherwise, that's exactly what happens. When you encounter an unknown man you will refer to him as a man even if there is a possibility he might be a, pre-operation, transexual who is, in fact, a women. If you don't know anything about a person perception of his/her sexual identity, you will judge them based on their apperence and expect them to not suffer from things like gender dysphoria because they are very rare.
To clarify, let's take a robot, or statue. I give male pronouns to it, and it looks like a male. It's birth gender means nothing, either because it has none, or because it has been removed/altered. Is that statue/robot a man?
That statue/robot would represent a men. We have are frequetly of calling anthropomorphic robots malebots or fembots depending on the sex they are representing. Bender in Futurama is a malebot and he states it very clearly. In the same show, he dates fembots. Yes, they have been sexed by their creator. Their sex serves only a social function in a society where men and women are expected to look and behave in different ways, not a reproductive function.
But only Space Marines in the entire 40k universe should be masculine?
Considering that I have denied such a thing at least five times and very clearly I find it odd to have to repeat it again. No, Space Marines aren't the only masculine army. in fact most of the stuff in 40K is macho and masculine as hell. Space Marines are simply the most macho and masculine thing in the entire 40K universe.
They percieve themselves with male pronouns. That doesn't make them men. It makes them agender, who use masculine pronouns.
They are transhuman, we are told that as an outright fact in the canon.
Being trasnhuman from a monogender group doesn't prevent them from having a gender. Space Marine still relate to humanity. The only thing transhuman about Space Marines is their capacity. Their appearance is almost perfectly identical to human. Most abhuman and mutants, who are also humans are way more freeky than them. Their behavior completly identical to member of the culture they grew up in when they were kids at a few exceptions.
Again - Loken can appreciate the beauty of Little Horus, Horus and Tarvitz, but at the same time we also see Space Marines appreciate the beauty of war, their wargear, destruction, etc etc. Is a bolter a symbol of masculine beauty?
According to Freud, yes. Bolters would be a symbol of masculinity and strongly phallic. Admiration of the beauty of such object by a man would be expressing a subconcsious homoerotic desire and attraction which is suposed to be rather common. I personnaly don't place to much trust in Freud theories on human sexuality, but he would say yes.
Personnaly, I would say that admiring the beauty of a weapon and that of a person aren't an apt comparison making your argument rest on a false equivalence.
Again, that isn't confirmation. Speculation, yes, in universe speculation even better. But it's not confirmation, which is what I asked for.
Torgaddon's lament with that can also be attributed with brotherhood and friendship - not necessarily love.
If I see canon love, actually confirmed, I'll accept your point.
You'll never have it. The point is that it must remain subbtle and insinuated. If you state it outright, the drama unfolds and everybody loses interest about it. If its revealed outright, its no longer homoerotic, its simply becomes homosexual.
So, hints.
In which way do they dress masculinely? Armour? FeMarines would wear the same armour most likely. Their robes outside of armour? Females wear robes too.
That sort of robes and togas worn by Space Marines are men robes and togas. Women wear pants and men wear skirts, but you and I can make the difference between men and women pants or skirts. The style isn't the same.
Gender re-assignment? In what way? They're already chemically castrated, why would they need to have an artificial vagina implanted? They're not even biologically male per say - only that they were once male, and are now completely castrated. If anything, they are agender, leaving us with (in some views) Male, Female and Astartes, as a gender to itself.
After all, they are PostHuman.
That's the point, even if a Space Marines was to suffer from gender dysphoria before is induction in the Chapter, he would not be cured by chemical castration. Being castrated or sterile doesn't change your gender. My ex-girlfirend was sterile after having a massive overian infection that forced her to have both ovaries removed when she was 14. She no longuer has menses, will never have children and has a disturbed sexual hormonal production and is still very much a women. Space Marines are transhumen, but not transgender.
that's great! But then we should have slim Astartes and bulky Astartes - not bulky men and slim girls. Gender should be a non-issue with this.
I totally agree with that. The only reason for it otherwise would be if you want Space Marine women to look very different than Space Marine men which you can provided you give an explanation for it and since its a fictionnal thing, its not really hard to come up with many reasons.
Exactly. So if your whole reason for wanting FeMarines is "I want body diversity", you've just admitted that you don't need women for it.
No, I don't need women to have body diversity, bit I need women if I want MORE body diversity. You just admitted that women and men don't look alike even when they have the same capacities, thus adding women provide MORE body diversity. Do you have body diersity without it, sure, but less of course.
And again, any strong women you know are still not Astartes. Given what we know the procedure does to young boys, why would it make young girls any different physically?
Because we want them to look different because that's more interesting for the public who consume Space Marines product.
Males don't look like male bodybuilders because they're male. They look like that because of the construction process of a Space Marine. The sheer amount of drugs and hormones they pump in happens to create that image, only scaled massively upwards.
Women would look the same, because it's not a case of Male-->Male Bodybuilder/Female-->Female Bodybuilder. It's a case of Male-->Astartes physique/Female-->Astartes physique.
What does your bring to the hobby? As you said, the aesthetic differences such as slimness should exist regardless of gender. So what else is there?
How can yours be consistent? I'm saying "they'd look the same". You're saying "they'd look different". How does that promote consistency?
Again, the process isn't proportionate. Let me put it into numbers. 1 is Female. 2 is Male. 6 is Astartes.
In order for a Male to be turned into a Space Marine, it is either multiplied by 3, or 4 is added. You believe that the implantation process is akin to multiplication, so a male is multiplied by three. However, if a female is multiplied by three, they are inferior to a Male Astartes.
I believe it is more akin to an automatic transformation. I believe that 6 is the limit, but the initial recruit is augmented by whatever number needed to reach that limit. Therefore, a male would need 4, but a female would need 5. However, the creation process allows for that, because it makes Astartes all generally equal, up to the limit of the hypothetical 6.
TL;DR - You believe that the implantation process is a multiplying factor. I believe it levels all applicants out to a set value.
We don't know that, you believe that. Any excuse for Space Marine appearence can be made. We never had to question the appearence of Space Marines women since there are none, we can make them look however we want now and then explain later why they look like so. Its a completly fictional process. The greater consistency is derived from art consistency. Space Marine men look like men, Space Marine women look like women. The powers they have is invisible at the nacked eye.
I bring very little to the hobby by making New Space Marine women that look like women. What do you bring to the hobby by making New Space Marine women look just like men? In my opinion, nothing. A little bit is better than nothing thus my vision has more value since it brings more to the hobby.
Yes, but we can take what we do know about the process, and assume that, despite all different physiques of the applicant men, they all turn out roughly the same, why would women (if they could survive) look any different?
Because it would be more interesting and there is no reason not to be MORE interesting.
Sisters of Battle are also rarer than Space Marines. The last estimate of their total force was around 50K, far from 1000000.
There are 15000 Sisters from the Order of the Martyred Lady in the Calixis Sector ALONE.
I doubt that over 25% of all Sisters are located in one single Sector.
You just came to speed with a Canon conflict that's well known by SoB fans. Most chose to disregard Fantasy Flight material in that specific situation.
Why are Guardsmen able to be macho and Sisters not? How about Assassins? Sisters of Silence? Is it just all-women armies that can't be macho for you?
An army to be macho must present macho virtues at its core. It needs to be the norm of its culture not the exception. Guards are macho culture since they are equivalent to any modern millitary, they most macho thing on Earth right now (with possible exception of Wrestling, I'm not sure). Sisters of Battle aren't macho because its most macho element are minor. Feminine elements (faith, obediance (to a male figure of course). martyrdom, penence, kindness, well only to loyalists of course, etc.) are central to the identity of the army. Callidus are very feminine (they are frequently used has erotic asssassins), but not Eversor, Cullexus and Vindicare are pretty gender neutral. Sister of Silence are pretty neutral when you think about it. I don't know enough about them though to have a strong opinion on it.
So, in the same vein, do you believe that Male Sisters should be a thing? After all, if you don't believe they should be a thing, then you can just say that your Sororitas don't have any males.
I have made male Sisters of Battle. Once 8th drops, I will integrate them in expension in my SoB fandex. They are called the Bortherhood of Thor. They are a non macho male subfaction.
Canon exists because of rules in the setting. If you ignore all the setting rules and limits of 40k, what makes it unique? If we ignore setting rules, what stops a Star Wars Death Star coming in and blowing up Terra? What stops the Covenant glassing Macragge? How about Guardsmen Conscripts easily killing Space Marine Chapter Masters in close combat?
If you want to ignore all the rules of the setting, that's up to you. However, it seems that a lot of people want to keep canon. Your minority wants to change the canon - that's not what the majority wants. If you change the canon to allow for normal FeMarines, then that's counter to the majority wishes.
And again - what aesthetic difference would Females bring to the Space Marines? The slim body type is also present in males, as you say, so what else is there?
That's a slippery slope argument. Ignoring some elements of the Canon doesn't mean we elliminate all Canon or that it gives opportunity to destroy all Canon. One must provide reason to change a part of the canon. The larger the change is the better the reason need to be. This is a very small change and since its an update due to the rise of the New Space Marines (retconning the past was never in question in this thread). Of course male and female bodies, no matter their style are different, thus if we make Space Marine women look different than Space Marine men (and we totally can if we want to), they bring a more aethetic diversity than purely men or men-looking Space Marine.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Most people do agree that Blood angels and Dark Angels could be rolled into the Vanilla codex and not much of value would be lost.
They can be rolled into vanilla and still have fluff that says they are the all-male chapter.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I don't understand. Why is it acceptable to ignore Space Marine fluff to have female Marines, but not okay to ignore Sisters fluff to have male Sororitas?
There's actually a pretty solid reason in the lore why the Ecclesiarchy doesn't have a fighting force of male warriors at its disposal. The Age of Apostasy is one of the most important events in the Imperium's history, second only to the Horus Heresy, and the Decree Passive (barring the Ecclesiarchy from controlling "men under arms") was a direct result. It's grounded in the narrative. Whereas, the reason there aren't female Space Marines amounts to "Just because".
And even that was a case of "obeying the letter of the law, but ignoring the spirit of the law". The same goes with all-male or mixed fighting forces the Ecclesiarchy uses along with the Sororitas, such as the Crusader Orders and Frateris Militia.
As for the topic if the thread......
I'm of the school of thought that female Astartes should be a big no-no for lore reasons, while the Sororitas should get more love and support from Games Workshop. As far as the Guard goes, I would have no problem with female options as long as a given Guard force has females serving in the lore. But that's just my opinion.
I guess I don't understand why there is such a fuss over this.
If someone wants overly female appearing "Space Marines"...run Sisters of Battle or kit-bash your own and just say they're Space Marines. I don't think the fluff/lore makes any point of supporting that, but who cares - do your own thing.
If someone wants not overly female appearing Space Marines...run Space Marines and toss on some female heads (available from heaps of 3rd party supplies). You don't need boob armour to be female...hell if your'e wearing a helmet you can be female. As mentioned, the bulked up, super-juiced/bio-enhanced nature of a normal Space Marine means that women would be barely distinguishable in final form from male marines. Even less so in armour.
I don't think there is a business/sales need for the tiny minority of people who would be crying out for female Space Marines.
I've seen a lot of "I'd like them to add females to Guard/Admech/etc but only if they do it with class" and I'd like a clarification if "with class" only means no boob-plate. From what I've seen in other threads, it's rather hard to make an explicitly female sculpt in 28mm without the boob-plate indicator. What if GW made female sculpts but they had boob-plate? Would there be outrage or would you be ok with your female models or somewhere in the middle of those two?
(Personally, Guard needs a new poster child regiment since Cadia got Alderaan'd and it doesn't make any sense for Admech to make female parts since their whole schtick is to be less human.)
Boob plate is an acceptable result provided the rest of the model is dressed sensibly. It's when you get into the chainmail bikini stuff that it goes pear shaped.
Vulkan Fran'cis wrote: Exaclty why not have Marines as the 'All-male army' then have Sisters as the'All-Female' army
Because it should be Dark Angels. Dark Angels should be the all-male army, and every other army should be mixed.
Most people do agree that Blood angels and Dark Angels could be rolled into the Vanilla codex and not much of value would be lost.
Mildly off topic though.
No please, I love my Deathwing Knights and special chaplains
Your Special Chaplain is basically a Chaplain with Captain stats. Pretty sure that's something most people want access to.
I have never understood people that want LESS variation. Yeah, I know, as a Tau player is very easy to vitrol to the Space Marines "grrr, why they have 5 codexs to slighly different flavours of the same armies but my Orks can't have different rules for their Clans!", but... making the Space Marines player losing variation isn't gonna give your armies more of it.
People should emphatize more with others. I hate the "poster childs" as any other, but personally I want more variation to OTHER armies, not less to them.
Crimson Devil wrote: Boob plate is an acceptable result provided the rest of the model is dressed sensibly. It's when you get into the chainmail bikini stuff that it goes pear shaped.
Vulkan Fran'cis wrote: Exaclty why not have Marines as the 'All-male army' then have Sisters as the'All-Female' army
Because it should be Dark Angels. Dark Angels should be the all-male army, and every other army should be mixed.
Most people do agree that Blood angels and Dark Angels could be rolled into the Vanilla codex and not much of value would be lost.
Mildly off topic though.
No please, I love my Deathwing Knights and special chaplains
Your Special Chaplain is basically a Chaplain with Captain stats. Pretty sure that's something most people want access to.
I have never understood people that want LESS variation. Yeah, I know, as a Tau player is very easy to vitrol to the Space Marines "grrr, why they have 5 codexs to slighly different flavours of the same armies but my Orks can't have different rules for their Clans!", but... making the Space Marines player losing variation isn't gonna give your armies more of it.
People should emphatize more with others. I hate the "poster childs" as any other, but personally I want more variation to OTHER armies, not less to them.
Crimson Devil wrote: Boob plate is an acceptable result provided the rest of the model is dressed sensibly. It's when you get into the chainmail bikini stuff that it goes pear shaped.
Tactical_Spam wrote: I've seen a lot of "I'd like them to add females to Guard/Admech/etc but only if they do it with class" and I'd like a clarification if "with class" only means no boob-plate. From what I've seen in other threads, it's rather hard to make an explicitly female sculpt in 28mm without the boob-plate indicator. What if GW made female sculpts but they had boob-plate? Would there be outrage or would you be ok with your female models or somewhere in the middle of those two?
(Personally, Guard needs a new poster child regiment since Cadia got Alderaan'd and it doesn't make any sense for Admech to make female parts since their whole schtick is to be less human.)
Boobplates are a bit useless, you can make an armor more feminine without it anyway simply by making the male version of the armor more viril (large shoulder, barrel chest, large feet, legs standing appart, small head, etc.). If you were to take a current Space Marine armor and add boobplates on top of it, I would say no. The chest would look hillariously to large and the overall design would lose its touch. The overall result would be pretty ugly. On the other side, the SoB armor, while still having the infamous boobplate, is still a rather nice armor and so is the Sister of Silence one. Ironicly, I prefer both those armor to that of the Space Marines (I think they look stupid with feets larger than their head). They idea is not to have a too tacky end result.
Vulkan Fran'cis wrote: Exaclty why not have Marines as the 'All-male army' then have Sisters as the'All-Female' army
Because it should be Dark Angels. Dark Angels should be the all-male army, and every other army should be mixed.
Most people do agree that Blood angels and Dark Angels could be rolled into the Vanilla codex and not much of value would be lost.
Mildly off topic though.
No please, I love my Deathwing Knights and special chaplains
Your Special Chaplain is basically a Chaplain with Captain stats. Pretty sure that's something most people want access to.
I have never understood people that want LESS variation. Yeah, I know, as a Tau player is very easy to vitrol to the Space Marines "grrr, why they have 5 codexs to slighly different flavours of the same armies but my Orks can't have different rules for their Clans!", but... making the Space Marines player losing variation isn't gonna give your armies more of it.
People should emphatize more with others. I hate the "poster childs" as any other, but personally I want more variation to OTHER armies, not less to them.
Crimson Devil wrote: Boob plate is an acceptable result provided the rest of the model is dressed sensibly. It's when you get into the chainmail bikini stuff that it goes pear shaped.
QFT
I'm telling you that as a Space Marine player.
I have 0 problems with people having access to the rules of other chapters, but I really like the special units that chapters receive, not for the rules but for the models. I know, I know, wulfen are blergh, but the Sanguinar Guard for example, the DeathWing Knights, the Interrogator-Chaplain, to me are all beautiful models that, if every marine chapter was exactly the same but with different colour and some rules, probably never existed.
Well. Let's look at it from different point of view.
This is Briggette Bigbossom, a lady that has joined the ranks of Skitarii forces. Does she look any different from other Vanguards? No. Does anybody care that was female? No.
She looks exactly the same as others, because she was rebuilt to serve a certain purpose. Now it is genderless killing machine, with no other meaning of existence.
Spoiler:
Now look at Wendy Widehips. She was also born as female and then got recruited into Space Marine chapter. Does she look any different from other marines? No. Does anybody care she is female? No. She looks exactly the same as others, because she was rebuilt to serve a certain purpose. Now she is genderless killing machine, with no other meaning of existence and it would also only cause misundertandings as her fellow battle-brothers wouldn't know how to call each other, because there is a battle-sister somewhere among them. Not mentioning that some may be confused by it, becuase the don't see any Adepta Sororitas around.
Spoiler:
Now let's face it. What the point of changing the 30 years old and well justified fluff for having female space marines, when they would all look and act identicaly to male marines? What's the point of making a difference in it?
- Is it because of some moral greater good of equality? Let me tell you something. Men and women aren't equal. Not in biological point of view. We are different and both sexes have characteristics and abilities in which they are better than the other, and vice versa. (I'm not going to write down all the differences, sane person would have little problem searching for them.) And if you want to pursue the greater good, go play Tau. They have females. (which are mostly clad in armour so person who looks at them for the first time cannot tell that they are female.)
- Or is it because random neckbeard wants to claim: "I have a all female space marine chapter (which looks the same as any other marines) and it's canon." while his opponent says: "Yeah, whatever..."
- Or is it because feminists want to enforce their agenda of females being biologically equal or superior to males in all ways? (which is again, completely delusional and it smells after feminazism)
Thus having males as the strongest warriors known to humanity in the 40k is extremely evil and needs to be torn down?
- Or is it because some people need to complain about things, exactly like they need to breathe for living?
What's the point of having female space marines, while men are actually better suited for physical performance and combat in general? In course through history, men were the hunters, the fighters, the conquerors. (Well, sometimes women fought too, but that's more cultural thing, or some from of despair (Looking at you, Soviet Union)) Do you thing it was because somebody once told "All males shall be the hunters!" just because?
Have you ever heard people complaining that there are no female Necrons? No female Orks? No female Tyranids? And what do they have in common? They are all genderless, bioengineered killing machines with no other meaning of existance, exactly like Skitarii or Space Marines are.
I can now create a thread where I will complain about Orks not having females (Please, do not post that picture again) and what answer will I get? "Orks are fungus and they do not reproduce sexually blah blah blah." We all know what's going on. And this thread (and all other complaining about lack of lady marines) is exactly the same thing. "The transformation works only on male chromosomes blah blah blah..." You are given a canonical statement why it is like it is. You can dislike it, you can find your way around it, but why complain about it again and again, specially when you know it will (most probably) not change.
Have you ever heard real people complaining that females cannot serve in military Special Forces? I have not. So why they are complaining about the exact same thing in fictional universe?
Bro tip If you had not spent the time complaining about SM lacking female models, you would have nice female SM army converted and justified by now . If you want to have female space marines, yeah, go for it. Nothing holds you back. Nothing, really. I belive you can justify why it works on ladies too, there is just no need to constantly complain about it.
Bro tip 2 If you find something lacking, try to find the way around it. Then try to find an alternative. And if both of the previous fail, then complain. Complain somewhere, where your words can be heard by somebody who has any form of power over the things thet you found lacking.
Isn't the imperium a dictatorship based on religious fanatism? It seems very realistic that women are only allowed to fight as sisters of battles then.
Dark eldar are free people, raiders and pirates, don't make comparisons between those factions.
Female tau should be considered more, instead.
It's also not convenient for GW to update one of their kits with new parts that only serve an aesthetic role, while the majority of players don't care about them or probably don't even want them.
If you really want female marines sculpt some boobs with green stuff and add long hair on SM heads without helmets.
Galas wrote: I have never understood people that want LESS variation. […]
People should emphatize more with others. I hate the "poster childs" as any other, but personally I want more variation to OTHER armies, not less to them.
Well, you have people that would be angry if Space Marines kits included a few optional female heads so yeah apparently some people want less variation even if it doesn't remove anything for them…
Hawky wrote: (which is again, completely delusional and it smells after feminazism)
You wrote feminazism so your argument is invalid.
Blackie wrote: Isn't the imperium a dictatorship based on religious fanatism?
Also one that had female members at the highest ranks (Inquisitors and, well, High Lords of Terra) since at least second edition. Oh I forgot to mention, first edition had female space marines.
They also have assassins that are female and yet way better, stronger, faster than Space Marines.
Blackie wrote: Isn't the imperium a dictatorship based on religious fanatism?
Also one that had female members at the highest ranks (Inquisitors and, well, High Lords of Terra) since at least second edition. Oh I forgot to mention, first edition had female space marines.
They also have assassins that are female and yet way better, stronger, faster than Space Marines.
High lord of terra and Inquisitors are not Astartes. What's the point of the argument?
Callidus assassin, also not a Space Marine. What's the point of the argument again?
Female Space marine from the 2nd ed... Well...
Spoiler:
Just change to question to "Can females become Space Marines?"
That seems pretty clear to me. Your argument is invalid.
A poor choice of expression perhaps but I think his point is valid - female marines certainly shouldn't be added for the furtherance of some kind of sociocultural agenda. You could say "that obviously isn't the reason" but it's not as though the culture wars don't pervade most aspects of popular culture already - and irrespective of one's political views I would really prefer not to see 40k get dragged into it.
That seems pretty clear to me. Your argument is invalid.
A poor choice of expression perhaps but I think his point is valid - female marines certainly shouldn't be added for the furtherance of some kind of sociocultural agenda. You could say "that obviously isn't the reason" but it's not as though the culture wars don't pervade most aspects of popular culture already - and irrespective of one's political views I would really prefer not to see 40k get dragged into it.
It makes sense now. Thank you. I don't think it is the reason, like you said, but since an article about sexism in 40k that has been released some time ago, I presumed that 40k community isn't completely clear of such things, so I added it as a possibility.
Enigma of the Absolute wrote: A poor choice of expression perhaps but I think his point is valid - female marines certainly shouldn't be added for the furtherance of some kind of sociocultural agenda.
Why?
mrhappyface wrote: Unfortunately no one else sees the clarity in disregarding his argument because of his political position.
Well, his point is invalid whether or not you understand why it is invalid.
Enigma of the Absolute wrote: A poor choice of expression perhaps but I think his point is valid - female marines certainly shouldn't be added for the furtherance of some kind of sociocultural agenda.
Why?
This was explained in the remainder of my post. I could go into much further detail but this isn't the place to open that can of worms.
But there are obvious reasons that needn't honestly require any explanation - it simply isn't necessary for a fictional universe to try to adhere to prevailing sociocultural norms especially when the setting of said universe purposely sets out to invert progressive notions about human society and human nature.
You ask why not? Well why should it? If something that is well established is to be changed in a non arbitrary fashion the burden falls on the person making the change to justify the change.
Hawky wrote: Well. Let's look at it from different point of view.
This is Briggette Bigbossom, a lady that has joined the ranks of Skitarii forces. Does she look any different from other Vanguards? No. Does anybody care that was female? No.
She looks exactly the same as others, because she was rebuilt to serve a certain purpose. Now it is genderless killing machine, with no other meaning of existence.
Spoiler:
Now look at Wendy Widehips. She was also born as female and then got recruited into Space Marine chapter. Does she look any different from other marines? No. Does anybody care she is female? No. She looks exactly the same as others, because she was rebuilt to serve a certain purpose. Now she is genderless killing machine, with no other meaning of existence and it would also only cause misundertandings as her fellow battle-brothers wouldn't know how to call each other, because there is a battle-sister somewhere among them. Not mentioning that some may be confused by it, becuase the don't see any Adepta Sororitas around.
Spoiler:
Now let's face it. What the point of changing the 30 years old and well justified fluff for having female space marines, when they would all look and act identicaly to male marines? What's the point of making a difference in it?
The point of making a difference is sometime just that: making a difference. Difference = good for modelling. There are no Space Marine women, we can thus make them act and look like we want and then rationalise it later like for everything else in fiction.
PS: we aren't retconning anything. We are adding the following sentence:" after 10000 years, women can, for the first time, become Space Marines`'. No change to information, just addition of new information.
- Is it because of some moral greater good of equality? Let me tell you something. Men and women aren't equal. Not in biological point of view. We are different and both sexes have characteristics and abilities in which they are better than the other, and vice versa. (I'm not going to write down all the differences, sane person would have little problem searching for them.) And if you want to pursue the greater good, go play Tau. They have females. (which are mostly clad in armour so person who looks at them for the first time cannot tell that they are female.)
That's not really pertinent to Space Marines women abilities. They can offer the same performance than their men counterparts in every area and still look like bikini supermodel if we want to for all we care because we are in fictionnal setting. We just need a pseudo-scientifical bs that sound just as good: "those guys have fused rib-cage, but can still breath and don't die of overeating like turtles". Something like ''Space Marine women muscle are lighter, but more performant thus can develop just as much strength''.
- Or is it because random neckbeard wants to claim: "I have a all female space marine chapter (which looks slightly[/color] different than any other marines) and it's canon." while his opponent says: "Yeah, whatever..."
What's the point of having female space marines, while men are actually better suited for physical performance and combat in general? In course through history, men were the hunters, the fighters, the conquerors. (Well, sometimes women fought too, but that's more cultural thing, or some from of despair (Looking at you, Soviet Union)) Do you thing it was because somebody once told "All males shall be the hunters!" just because?
Oversimplification aside, Space Marines are super heroes. You can have your super heroes have all sorts of abilities and make them however you want for any reason. This makes this point the mother of all non sequitur argument. BTW, isn't the Imperium even more desperate than the Soviet Union or any other nation that extansively used women in fighting units (which is almost all of them when you start to cout them). Wouldn't the Imperium look more engaged in a mortal and desperate fight for survival if there were more women models everywhere (I would even add kids models, but Space Marines already have them covered, many scouts are 16 years old).
Have you ever heard people complaining that there are no female Necrons? No female Orks? No female Tyranids? And what do they have in common? They are all genderless, bioengineered killing machines with no other meaning of existance, exactly like Skitarii or Space Marines are.
Orks are strongly male gendered (refer to themselves as Boyz, soccer hooligans parody, etc.) even if they are genderless, Tyranid are strongly female gendered (Insectoid monsters, influence of Alien xenomorphs, etc.) even if genderless too.
Necrons are both male and female in mind if not body.
I can now create a thread where I will complain about Orks not having females (Please, do not post that picture again) and what answer will I get? "Orks are fungus and they do not reproduce sexually blah blah blah." We all know what's going on. And this thread (and all other complaining about lack of lady marines) is exactly the same thing. "The transformation works only on male chromosomes blah blah blah..." You are given a canonical statement why it is like it is. You can dislike it, you can find your way around it, but why complain about it again and again, specially when you know it will (most probably) not change.
Have you ever heard real people complaining that females cannot serve in military Special Forces? I have not. So why they are complaining about the exact same thing in fictional universe?
I know one woman who are pist about that right now (she would have made it, but it was openned for her to late, now all Canadian women can ap how the apply in the Special Force) and two dozens who have written letters and article about that as we speak. This argument is thus false and non sequitur since how we handle things doesn't mean that's how the Imperium handles things (there are women in the Imperium Special Force for example).
Bro tip If you had not spent the time complaining about SM lacking female models, you would have nice female SM army converted and justified by now . If you want to have female space marines, yeah, go for it. Nothing holds you back. Nothing, really. I belive you can justify why it works on ladies too, there is just no need to constantly complain about it.
Bro tip Assume people know that and in many case did it
Bro tip 2 If you find something lacking, try to find the way around it. Then try to find an alternative. And if both of the previous fail, then complain. Complain somewhere, where your words can be heard by somebody who has any form of power over the things thet you found lacking.
Bro tip If you don't want to hear complaining (or arguments or ideas) about this subject don't clic on the thread. If we like complaining we will do so thank you. If you don't what to read about it, don't. If you want to,you are welcome.
Cool thread. Make me finally register my account here.
On topic: Female Space Marines would allow writers (and gamers) to incorporate some cultural themes that otherwise would be pretty unavailable. There were some women warrior cultures that could be incorporated as aesthetic and fluff base for female marines:
- Amazons. Aside from Minotaurs there isn't any "Greek" theme based Space Marines Chapter. Also, Athena was goddes of war in greek myths.
- Celtic Warriors. As in greek mythology we have a war goddes. Also, you could take tropes from Boudica, Muirisic, Scathach - to name a few.
- Dahomey Amazons - all-women military from West Africa (Benin).
- Onna Bugeisha - female samurai. Also unused in current SM chapters, depicted with kaiken and naginatas.
GW could make them more "agile" (in fluff), gave them chainspears and chainglaives (to fully embrace "spear warriors" vibe) and voila: we get power armoured female warriors that are visually distinct from both Space Marines and Sisters of Battle.
- Celtic Warriors. As in greek mythology we have a war goddes. Also, you could take tropes from Boudica, Muirisic, Scathach - to name a few.
There's a fair bit of crossover in iconography and aesthetic between norse and celts in the Space Wolves; since a lot of the image difference at the time period was the kind of armour, and everyone's wearing power armour, there's not much to notice, unless you're in for NAKED SPACE MARINE WARRIORS which opens a whole new can of worms.
Not really, the rest of your post said that you wouldn't want that.
Enigma of the Absolute wrote: But there are obvious reasons that needn't honestly require any explanation - it simply isn't necessary for a fictional universe to try to adhere to prevailing sociocultural norms especially when the setting of said universe purposely sets out to invert progressive notions about human society and human nature.
So, you put down a strawman. Ok.
Enigma of the Absolute wrote: If something that is well established is to be changed in a non arbitrary fashion the burden falls on the person making the change to justify the change.
The burden doesn't exist .
GW (i.e. the one that will make the change in case your forgot) will do whatever they want to do and they have no “burden” that “falls” on them. Have you seen their “burden” about introducing numarines? No burden just decisions, good or bad!
As for people outside of GW, If they want to convince GW of changing/not changing the existence of femarines, they are welcome to try but this is not their burdenlol.
In general the whole “burden of proof” thingy is just incredibly silly. You can do whatever you want*! No burden**!
It's just overly used by people that care more about feeling like they are factually right than about convincing others. But it's not needed really, you (general you I mean) already feel like you are right lol.
mrhappyface wrote: Yes! Please explain yourself to formally prove that it is invalid!
No, sorry, I don't do formal proof unless they can be formulated in Coq. Well, I don't do them either when they could be formulated in Coq most of the time .
I guess you will just have to take me at my words .
* Limitations may apply.
** With regards to discussion on the internet, and most debates in real life that are not of professional nature.
mrhappyface wrote: Yes! Please explain yourself to formally prove that it is invalid!
No, sorry, I don't do formal proof unless they can be formulated in Coq. Well, I don't do them either when they could be formulated in Coq most of the time .
I guess you will just have to take me at my words .
Show us your Orwell's Ministry of Truth ID card. Then we will respect your statement about my argument being invalid.
Nuriel-666 wrote: Cool thread. Make me finally register my account here.
On topic: Female Space Marines would allow writers (and gamers) to incorporate some cultural themes that otherwise would be pretty unavailable. There were some women warrior cultures that could be incorporated as aesthetic and fluff base for female marines:
- Amazons. Aside from Minotaurs there isn't any "Greek" theme based Space Marines Chapter. Also, Athena was goddes of war in greek myths.
- Celtic Warriors. As in greek mythology we have a war goddes. Also, you could take tropes from Boudica, Muirisic, Scathach - to name a few.
- Dahomey Amazons - all-women military from West Africa (Benin).
- Onna Bugeisha - female samurai. Also unused in current SM chapters, depicted with kaiken and naginatas.
That's a great argument. Though it would be better imho to include some of those directly into existing chapters. Valkyries for Space Wolfes maybe, for instance.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hawky wrote: Show us your Orwell's Ministry of Truth ID card. Then we will respect your statement about my argument being invalid.
People, stop. This thread ended with a very good feeling between all the people on it because we discuss evading political discussiong and thread us with respect even if we disagree.
But no, we are here now.
And about the Imperium of Man being a fascists Holy Roman Empire style of goverment to prohibit womens from joining the military, thats isn't just how it is. The Imperium of Humanity isn't sexist or racist (At least not with humans ).
Personally, I'll had 0 problems with female space marines, but at the same time I have 0 urges for them. I don't see the need to eliminate the Male-brotherhood trope of the Space Marines, just as the Female-Sisterhood of the Sisters of Battle to include males.
But the lack of proper female models and female special characters where they should be by fluff, thats is alarming. I can understand it years ago. Games Workshop was a bunch of british men selling toys to men, but times changes, and they need to offer a product that, respecting the lore, is inclusive to people.
But maybe I'm biased because (Yeah, surprise) where I live, in our club, we have more female players than male players (13 females vs 6 males), and I can see how they normally prefer games and miniature ranges with a good mix between males and females, so normally the mayority prefer to play games like Malifaux or Infinity.
And Tyranids. Really, I don't know why, but 5 of the 13 girls in our group have Tyranids armies. I don't know what exactly they see in them to love them so much. Maybe is because the mayority of them are in school doing masters degrees and doctorades of biology
So, the point of increasing gender representation in 40K is not to further some feminist agenda, it's to make the game appeal more to female gamers. It's understandable that GW didn't pay much attention to appealing to female gamers back in the 80s, because they were kind of rare at that point, but now they represent a sizable percentage of the nerd population - if it's not in the vicinity of 50% now, it will be in the not too distant future. So, if GW isn't making an effort to appeal to a more diverse nerd population, they are leaving money on the table.
Some argue that there's no need for Femarines because 40K has the Sisters of Battle, making essentially a separate-but-equal argument. There's a few problems with that line of logic however. First, even if it were just Space Marines on one side and Sisters of Battle on the other, Sisters of Battle have been woefully neglected by GW since 40th edition - not getting any new models until last year, and barely even getting enough rules support to stay playable. Space Marines, by comparison keep getting new stuff and revamping of kits that were already pretty adequate in the first place. There's no way anyone could look at that comparison and consider it equal.
Second, it's not just Space Marines on one side and SoBs on the other. It's Space Marines, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves, Grey Knights, and now Deathwatch on one side, and Sisters of Battle on the other. That's 6 armies who all get constant updates vs one GW has barely bothered to support for over a decade. Even if GW were supporting the SoBs as well as, say, the Eldar, that'd still be a huge disparity in how well the Sisters are supported vs how well the Space Marines are supported.
Is there a reason to change the minis beyond maybe some head swaps? Well, no from a realism point of view, but yes from an aesthetics point of view. My introduction to 40K was 3rd edition, and the rulebook explicitly stated that an army's HQ choice represented the player on the tabletop. Players might like to be able to make their personal avatars resemble themselves - or perhaps idealized versions of themselves. That being the case, having some Space Marine minis that are more feminine in appearance would help to sell Space Marines and 40K in general to an increasingly-female audience. Boob plate isn't necessary either.
[url]
https://www.dakkadakka.com/s/i/at/2011/3/24/439b9ca522525e11c65523b0d912f14f_39273.jpg__thumb[/url]
As far as the fluff goes, yes, the fluff has stated for quite some time that the process of creating a Space Marine only works on men (well, boys really). Leaving aside the fact that the fluff is not immutable, GW could easily introduce FeMarines without contradicting pre-established fluff - the technique was recently rediscovered, or held back on purpose for one reason or another. For that matter, FeMarines could be introduced with the NuMarines. I doubt GW will take advantage of the opportunity, but it's there.
Is there a reason to change the minis beyond maybe some head swaps? Well, no from a realism point of view, but yes from an aesthetics point of view. My introduction to 40K was 3rd edition, and the rulebook explicitly stated that an army's HQ choice represented the player on the tabletop. Players might like to be able to make their personal avatars resemble themselves - or perhaps idealized versions of themselves. That being the case, having some Space Marine minis that are more feminine in appearance would help to sell Space Marines and 40K in general to an increasingly-female audience. Boob plate isn't necessary either.
[url]
https://www.dakkadakka.com/s/i/at/2011/3/24/439b9ca522525e11c65523b0d912f14f_39273.jpg__thumb[/url]
Please, god, no. Female marines are one thing as long as they don't violate the trope of super-masculine knightly monks in space, which as we've already gone over would have to be done very delicately.
Feminine marines are a no-go. They completely invalidate nearly all of the thematic elements of Space Marines.
Also, I field an Interrogator Chaplain, not because I think he represents me as a person, but because he's an optimal choice in-game and he satisfies the rule of cool for me. I like painting and playing Space Marines because I think they are cool and I (sometimes ironically) enjoy many things about their central tropes and characterizations, not because I want them to be representative of me. Their characterization as strictly masculine is an important part of their identity as a faction, and I sincerely have to question if someone who wants that identity to change in order to reflect themselves might be better off finding something that is more representative of them in the first place.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, as has been noted several times, if you truly want to have an avatar on the table then nothing is stopping you from converting a miniature that represents you exactly and fielding it as say a Captain.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: My introduction to 40K was 3rd edition, and the rulebook explicitly stated that an army's HQ choice represented the player on the tabletop.
I guess I've always been a bit of a Hive Tyrant with some Slann Mage Priest thrown in.
mrhappyface wrote: Yes! Please explain yourself to formally prove that it is invalid!
No, sorry, I don't do formal proof unless they can be formulated in Coq. Well, I don't do them either when they could be formulated in Coq most of the time .
I guess you will just have to take me at my words .
If it's all the same to you I won't blindly take your word that his argument is invalid. You've managed to construct an argument for everything else so far, so why do you not have an argument for why his argument is invalid?
mrhappyface wrote: If it's all the same to you I won't blindly take your word that his argument is invalid.
I'm at peace with that.
mrhappyface wrote: You've managed to construct an argument for everything else so far, so why do you not have an argument for why his argument is invalid?
I have constructed arguments? Nice! Were they valid in your opinion?
mrhappyface wrote: If it's all the same to you I won't blindly take your word that his argument is invalid.
I'm at peace with that.
mrhappyface wrote: You've managed to construct an argument for everything else so far, so why do you not have an argument for why his argument is invalid?
I have constructed arguments? Nice! Were they valid in your opinion?
Of course! They were all perfectly reasonable arguments that conveyed your point very well. However I must inform you that all of your arguments are completely invalid.
Aww, man. That chapter name would be so much better if the last S was dropped. The Emperor's Shadows sounds like a World of Warcraft guild. The Emperor's Shadow sounds ominous and makes a lot more sense. The emperor should only be dropping one shadow, and even if he did drop several, each of the marines is not worthy to be a singular shadow of the Emperor. Together, though, yeah one giant shadow of the emperor.
Space Marines have the birth sex of men, yes. However, they are then chemically castrated. Their birth sex means nothing when you're pumped full of Astartes implants and hormones.
Apparently yes, they develop all the phenotypes associated with humen males. Looking at an image of a Space Marine (alone), everybody would tell you they are muscular humen males. Only in comparison with normal humen would their transhumen natue be revealed due to their size, yet their appearence would still mark them as males much like when you see male eldar, giant, gnome, etc. you call them men and not agender.
Again, phenotype associated with males. My point is that looking like males =/= male. As far as I see, a male recruit would look like a Space Marine now. A female recruit would turn out the same. They would cease to function by their former gender, essentially becoming trans, and instead all going by a male pronoun.
Again, are we suggesting that something that looks like a man, and used to be a man, is a man? I'm not talking phenotype. I'm talking genotype, and that the genotype of a female recruit would be altered to the same point where the phenotype would look identical to a current Space Marine.
So, male pronouns define them as male? How about I give male pronouns to a car? To a toaster? Is that toaster male? Is that car male? How about a snail? Snails are hermaphroditic - they have no male/female.
Amongst other yes, people who are male use male pronouns, people who are female uses female pronouns. Toasters, snails and cares use the gender neutral pronoun of ''it''. Transexual generaly uses the pronoun of the sex they identify to or use the gender pronouns ''they'' (or push for the adoption of a new one to describe them). Space Marine refer to themselves as males.
Excuse me? Many people refer to even inanimate objects with gendered terms. To use a pop culture example, take the Millenium Falcon of Star Wars. It's just a modified Corellian YT-1300f Light Freighter. However, what is it referred as, with pronouns? "She." Let's take a quote, when we first see it. "She'll make point five past lightspeed. She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts, kid. I've made a lot of special modifications myself." So, under your terms, because it's addressed with "she", the Millennium Falcon is female?
Just because a Space Marine uses male pronouns, it doesn't mean they're gendered. Why would a gender matter to them?
Sexual identity: So, you say if it looks like something, then it is that sex? So, a sculpture of a woman is an actual woman, and has a sex?
At this point your starting to be obtuse in an effort to not lose a point. A sculpture of a person is a representation of that said person. What it represent can have a sex. The sculpture is just a medium. While looking at the drawings of Space Marines you said they were muscular? Are drawings full of muscles? absolutly not, thet represent people with muscle. Yes, you can use a medium to gain information about someone appearence, which include their sex.
I'm not losing a point. I'm emphasising that just because something looks like X, and uses pronouns associated with X, it doesn't make it X. You're saying that because it goes by male pronouns (perhaps by dogma and doctrine - much like how soldiers nowadays, despite being multigender, are still referred to as a brotherhood and as brothers-in-arms) and looks like a male make it male.
How about transsexuals? Some can quite easily look like the opposite gender. However, just because they look like X gender, they ARE X gender?
If they don't tell you otherwise, that's exactly what happens. When you encounter an unknown man you will refer to him as a man even if there is a possibility he might be a, pre-operation, transexual who is, in fact, a women. If you don't know anything about a person perception of his/her sexual identity, you will judge them based on their apperence and expect them to not suffer from things like gender dysphoria because they are very rare.
Will I? Or will I not use gender neutral terms? They, for example? Especially in modern english language, guy is being used far more as a gender-neutral term.
That's your opinion and action, but that doesn't apply to everyone.
To clarify, let's take a robot, or statue. I give male pronouns to it, and it looks like a male. It's birth gender means nothing, either because it has none, or because it has been removed/altered. Is that statue/robot a man?
That statue/robot would represent a men. We have are frequetly of calling anthropomorphic robots malebots or fembots depending on the sex they are representing. Bender in Futurama is a malebot and he states it very clearly. In the same show, he dates fembots. Yes, they have been sexed by their creator. Their sex serves only a social function in a society where men and women are expected to look and behave in different ways, not a reproductive function.
Yes, but are they male or female? Are they actually that gender, or just a representation of it? As you said in my statue analogy, the real thing and representation don't match.
But only Space Marines in the entire 40k universe should be masculine?
Considering that I have denied such a thing at least five times and very clearly I find it odd to have to repeat it again. No, Space Marines aren't the only masculine army. in fact most of the stuff in 40K is macho and masculine as hell. Space Marines are simply the most macho and masculine thing in the entire 40K universe.
Yes. However, that does not mean for a moment that other factions can't be, nor that it would detract from their masculinity. Catachans, for example. I would see them and actually find them MORE masculine looking than Space Marines. Even by your view, I don't see how the Catachans can't be considered macho, even if the Space Marines are moreso.
Using this, I believe it's perfectly capable to have macho women, a la your Vasquez trope, in the Sisters or Guardsmen.
They percieve themselves with male pronouns. That doesn't make them men. It makes them agender, who use masculine pronouns. They are transhuman, we are told that as an outright fact in the canon.
Being trasnhuman from a monogender group doesn't prevent them from having a gender. Space Marine still relate to humanity. The only thing transhuman about Space Marines is their capacity. Their appearance is almost perfectly identical to human. Most abhuman and mutants, who are also humans are way more freeky than them. Their behavior completly identical to member of the culture they grew up in when they were kids at a few exceptions.
Are you suggesting that there's no women who would match the Space Marines' behaviour? Not even certain Sisters of Battle, in some of the more zealous orders?
Again, a Space Marines' appearance is human. That doesn't make them human.
Again - Loken can appreciate the beauty of Little Horus, Horus and Tarvitz, but at the same time we also see Space Marines appreciate the beauty of war, their wargear, destruction, etc etc. Is a bolter a symbol of masculine beauty?
According to Freud, yes. Bolters would be a symbol of masculinity and strongly phallic. Admiration of the beauty of such object by a man would be expressing a subconcsious homoerotic desire and attraction which is suposed to be rather common. I personnaly don't place to much trust in Freud theories on human sexuality, but he would say yes.
So if guns are a symbol of homoeroticism, then I guess the entire 40k universe be masculine and homoerotic. I mean, every faction has guns, even Tyranids! Also, if you're saying that loving guns is masculine, then that makes Sisters of Battle masculine, no? - they love the Bolter, Flamer and Meltagun.
Personnaly, I would say that admiring the beauty of a weapon and that of a person aren't an apt comparison making your argument rest on a false equivalence.
Again, that isn't confirmation. Speculation, yes, in universe speculation even better. But it's not confirmation, which is what I asked for.
Torgaddon's lament with that can also be attributed with brotherhood and friendship - not necessarily love.
If I see canon love, actually confirmed, I'll accept your point.
You'll never have it. The point is that it must remain subbtle and insinuated. If you state it outright, the drama unfolds and everybody loses interest about it. If its revealed outright, its no longer homoerotic, its simply becomes homosexual.
So, you fully admit that you can't prove love between Space Marines. As it stands, because we have no solid evidence to support that theory, that closes that topic.
So, hints. In which way do they dress masculinely? Armour? FeMarines would wear the same armour most likely. Their robes outside of armour? Females wear robes too.
That sort of robes and togas worn by Space Marines are men robes and togas. Women wear pants and men wear skirts, but you and I can make the difference between men and women pants or skirts. The style isn't the same.
Are they? Their tabards are practically identical, the Dialogus wears the same robes as the Dark Angels often do.
Gender re-assignment? In what way? They're already chemically castrated, why would they need to have an artificial vagina implanted? They're not even biologically male per say - only that they were once male, and are now completely castrated. If anything, they are agender, leaving us with (in some views) Male, Female and Astartes, as a gender to itself. After all, they are PostHuman.
That's the point, even if a Space Marines was to suffer from gender dysphoria before is induction in the Chapter, he would not be cured by chemical castration. Being castrated or sterile doesn't change your gender. My ex-girlfirend was sterile after having a massive overian infection that forced her to have both ovaries removed when she was 14. She no longuer has menses, will never have children and has a disturbed sexual hormonal production and is still very much a women. Space Marines are transhumen, but not transgender.
I would beg to differ. Gender has no meaning to a Space Marine. They use male pronouns, but that doesn't define their gender.
However, because GW haven't really made a thesis on this, we can't know.
that's great! But then we should have slim Astartes and bulky Astartes - not bulky men and slim girls. Gender should be a non-issue with this.
I totally agree with that. The only reason for it otherwise would be if you want Space Marine women to look very different than Space Marine men which you can provided you give an explanation for it and since its a fictionnal thing, its not really hard to come up with many reasons.
And I'm providing reasons why not.
You're literally making up reasons to justify this decision. We don't know if women would look any different. You say so. I disagree. In truth, we don't know what they'd look like. Under that same reasoning, saying "Well, this idea's good because X" doesn't hold up because X isn't actually confirmed. If you say "Well, X could be true because Y", I can still turn round and say "X might be false, because Z".
Exactly. So if your whole reason for wanting FeMarines is "I want body diversity", you've just admitted that you don't need women for it.
No, I don't need women to have body diversity, bit I need women if I want MORE body diversity. You just admitted that women and men don't look alike even when they have the same capacities, thus adding women provide MORE body diversity. Do you have body diersity without it, sure, but less of course.
How do you know women would create more diversity? Yes, I did admit that men and women don't look alike when they have the same capacities - however, this argument is about Space Marines, not normal humans.
And again, any strong women you know are still not Astartes. Given what we know the procedure does to young boys, why would it make young girls any different physically?
Because we want them to look different because that's more interesting for the public who consume Space Marines product.
Do we? Do we want to make them look different? Interesting is subjective. If you're going to make a statement for the public, could I see some statistics that support that?
To me, I might find the idea of Space Marines taking all genders in as recruits (in a world where the geneseed actually works for women) and them still looking the same, furthermore sacrificing themselves to be moulded in the godly shape of the Space Marines. But hey, that's just my opinion.
Just so we agree on that. Therefore, why are women needed for aesthetic difference?
They are needed because they litteraly double the quantity of diversity in aesthetic differences.
That is, IF they look different. You assume they would look different. I assume they would look the same. Neither of us are right - we can only provide reasonings for our alternate viewpoints. However, it does means that statements like this can't be made as fact, because we simply don't know.
Males don't look like male bodybuilders because they're male. They look like that because of the construction process of a Space Marine. The sheer amount of drugs and hormones they pump in happens to create that image, only scaled massively upwards. Women would look the same, because it's not a case of Male-->Male Bodybuilder/Female-->Female Bodybuilder. It's a case of Male-->Astartes physique/Female-->Astartes physique.
What does your bring to the hobby? As you said, the aesthetic differences such as slimness should exist regardless of gender. So what else is there? How can yours be consistent? I'm saying "they'd look the same". You're saying "they'd look different". How does that promote consistency?
Again, the process isn't proportionate. Let me put it into numbers. 1 is Female. 2 is Male. 6 is Astartes. In order for a Male to be turned into a Space Marine, it is either multiplied by 3, or 4 is added. You believe that the implantation process is akin to multiplication, so a male is multiplied by three. However, if a female is multiplied by three, they are inferior to a Male Astartes.
I believe it is more akin to an automatic transformation. I believe that 6 is the limit, but the initial recruit is augmented by whatever number needed to reach that limit. Therefore, a male would need 4, but a female would need 5. However, the creation process allows for that, because it makes Astartes all generally equal, up to the limit of the hypothetical 6.
TL;DR - You believe that the implantation process is a multiplying factor. I believe it levels all applicants out to a set value.
We don't know that, you believe that. Any excuse for Space Marine appearence can be made. We never had to question the appearence of Space Marines women since there are none, we can make them look however we want now and then explain later why they look like so. Its a completly fictional process.
Exactly. It's completely fictional, and not only that, but unexplained. Therefore, the most either of us can do is hypothesis various ideas and theories. Until confirmed, neither is right.
The greater consistency is derived from art consistency. Space Marine men look like men, Space Marine women look like women. The powers they have is invisible at the nacked eye.
Do Space Marine women look like women? You don't know. I don't know. Why? Because they don't exist (yet or not).
I bring very little to the hobby by making New Space Marine women that look like women. What do you bring to the hobby by making New Space Marine women look just like men? In my opinion, nothing. A little bit is better than nothing thus my vision has more value since it brings more to the hobby.
Unless that little bit either: 1) Lessens the quality of existing work 2) Upsets a lot of the fanbase
I'm not saying your idea does either. However, just saying "well, this idea brings something, so let's do it!" isn't always brilliant. As far as I'm concerned, I don't see a need for female Astartes. Aesthetically, I believe them to look the same, so would add nothing to the appearance if they did exist. I believe that having them look the same would further indicate the level of self-sacrifice: emphasising the point that all previous genders and personalities mean nothing as they are stripped back and you are elevated to the godly status of Space Marine. You are no longer simply male or female. You are Astartes, a Brother to all other Astartes, and a demi-god to mankind.
After all, handing over your own gender and self to be essentially become posthuman in every way sounds far cooler and more sacrificial, at least to me.
Yes, but we can take what we do know about the process, and assume that, despite all different physiques of the applicant men, they all turn out roughly the same, why would women (if they could survive) look any different?
Because it would be more interesting and there is no reason not to be MORE interesting.
Again, interesting is subjective. I personally like my idea, but I wouldn't categorically say "It's the most interesting, as a matter of fact". On the subject of interesting, how about my new lore that Orks are actually the pacifist rulers of the galaxy, being peace-loving looking after their baby Orklings, and every other faction is purely imaginary, living out an alternate reality dream in the mind of an Orkling who has a tummy ache and went to bed early.
Existentialism, and all that jazz. I mean, I know it removes all sense of motivation and suspense in the universe, but it's interesting.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: There are 15000 Sisters from the Order of the Martyred Lady in the Calixis Sector ALONE. I doubt that over 25% of all Sisters are located in one single Sector.
You just came to speed with a Canon conflict that's well known by SoB fans. Most chose to disregard Fantasy Flight material in that specific situation.
Could you provide a more accurate size for the Sisters then? With a source, if you please.
Why are Guardsmen able to be macho and Sisters not? How about Assassins? Sisters of Silence? Is it just all-women armies that can't be macho for you?
An army to be macho must present macho virtues at its core. It needs to be the norm of its culture not the exception. Guards are macho culture since they are equivalent to any modern millitary, they most macho thing on Earth right now (with possible exception of Wrestling, I'm not sure). Sisters of Battle aren't macho because its most macho element are minor. Feminine elements (faith, obediance (to a male figure of course). martyrdom, penence, kindness, well only to loyalists of course, etc.) are central to the identity of the army. Callidus are very feminine (they are frequently used has erotic asssassins), but not Eversor, Cullexus and Vindicare are pretty gender neutral. Sister of Silence are pretty neutral when you think about it. I don't know enough about them though to have a strong opinion on it.
Let's go through all of those feminine elements: Faith - Most of the Imperium is based on faith. Hell, the Black Templars take this to an extreme. Obedience - Again, a virtue shared by everyone in the Imperium, and all to the same male figure (however, of course, they all still take orders from the High Lords too, of which some are female) Martyrdom - Black Templars, the Patron Saint of the Imperial Guard (Ollanius Pius), and - huh. The Wall of Martyrs, made up of Guardsman bodies. Penance - Heard of the Pain Gauntlet? Or Penitence Crusades? Space Marine things. Kindness - One might say that Exterminatus is a kindness against corruption. However, the Salamanders, Lamenters, Ultramarines and Raven Guard Chapters are all noted to be very kind to their human charges, especially so for the Salamanders.
So, does this make them all feminine now?
How can the Sisters of Silence be gender neutral, when they're exclusively made up of women, a la the Sisters of Battle? They're monogender, no less so. Just because they don't have feminine traits like Sisters, Black Templars, Imperial Guard, Salamanders etc etc doesn't make them not female.
So, in the same vein, do you believe that Male Sisters should be a thing? After all, if you don't believe they should be a thing, then you can just say that your Sororitas don't have any males.
I have made male Sisters of Battle. Once 8th drops, I will integrate them in expension in my SoB fandex. They are called the Bortherhood of Thor. They are a non macho male subfaction.
How can they exist in canon? Are they fully integrated, clad in power armour, part of the same units and priories?
Canon exists because of rules in the setting. If you ignore all the setting rules and limits of 40k, what makes it unique? If we ignore setting rules, what stops a Star Wars Death Star coming in and blowing up Terra? What stops the Covenant glassing Macragge? How about Guardsmen Conscripts easily killing Space Marine Chapter Masters in close combat?
If you want to ignore all the rules of the setting, that's up to you. However, it seems that a lot of people want to keep canon. Your minority wants to change the canon - that's not what the majority wants. If you change the canon to allow for normal FeMarines, then that's counter to the majority wishes.
And again - what aesthetic difference would Females bring to the Space Marines? The slim body type is also present in males, as you say, so what else is there?
That's a slippery slope argument. Ignoring some elements of the Canon doesn't mean we elliminate all Canon or that it gives opportunity to destroy all Canon. One must provide reason to change a part of the canon. The larger the change is the better the reason need to be. This is a very small change and since its an update due to the rise of the New Space Marines (retconning the past was never in question in this thread). Of course male and female bodies, no matter their style are different, thus if we make Space Marine women look different than Space Marine men (and we totally can if we want to), they bring a more aethetic diversity than purely men or men-looking Space Marine.
So, firstly, we don't actually know if FeMarines would actually look female or not, so we can't use that as an argument. I've provided reasons why not, as have you. At the end of the day, it's out of our control.
However, onto the slippery slope: you did actually say "Personnaly, I don't have any special attachment the details of the canon of 40K. I don't mind the idea that some Orks might not be green, some Eldar might worship chaos, some Tyranid might hold and cultivate planets (or at least live in ecological balance there), or some Space Marines are women and operate in Chapters that count more than a 1000 Space Marines. These are rather small details to me. So yes, I wouldn't bat an eye at this change, but I can understand your love for such little details."
You said you didn't care for it. Either way, seeing as I've rather enjoyed this discussion, I will provide as reason, as you said: I think it would be interesting.
Nuriel-666 wrote:Cool thread. Make me finally register my account here.
On topic: Female Space Marines would allow writers (and gamers) to incorporate some cultural themes that otherwise would be pretty unavailable. There were some women warrior cultures that could be incorporated as aesthetic and fluff base for female marines:
Just to address this: there is nothing stopping you having female warriors in your army. None at all. However, female Space Marines are not a thing. That doesn't mean that there's no way you could ever have female soldiers fighting for the Imperium. If you wanted the easiest approach, there would be a Guardsmen Regiment for everything. They range from the Elysians, to the Tanith, to the Karak Skull-Takers, to the Praetorians, to the Tallarn, to the Drookians, etc etc. There's more than enough room for an all-female guard regiment based on any of your ideas. If power armour and bolters is the pivotal issue (odd, because none of the below have either) then there's the Sisters and Space Marines.
There are two differences between the Sisters of Battle and Adeptus Astartes. One is genetically engineered, and the other is more numerous. They fight the same threats, with roughly the same wargear. Sisters from a minor Order, akin to a lesser known Chapter, could easily fit any of the below ideas. If the Sororitas won't do, why not? Is being genetically enhanced essential to these ideas? If so, why? None of the sources relied on this?
It's perfectly possible to have a female army based on any of the below without breaking Space Marine lore.
- Amazons. Aside from Minotaurs there isn't any "Greek" theme based Space Marines Chapter. Also, Athena was goddes of war in greek myths.
Ultramarines. Also, wasn't Ares another God of War? (Him being the savage strength aspect, and Athena being the tactical aspect?) If anything, Amazons would have more in common with Ares, and the Ultramarines more with Athena.
- Celtic Warriors. As in greek mythology we have a war goddes. Also, you could take tropes from Boudica, Muirisic, Scathach - to name a few.
Celtic imagery can be seen in: Space Wolves Tanith First and Only Drookian Fen Guard. Plenty of room in the Tanith and Drookians, or make up a regiment or Order.
- Dahomey Amazons - all-women military from West Africa (Benin).
Perfect material for a Guard regiment!
- Onna Bugeisha - female samurai. Also unused in current SM chapters, depicted with kaiken and naginatas.
Space Marine Samurai have been seen in the Emperor's Shadows, at least. Could be done in a Minor Order of Sisters, or a very elite Guard/Tempestus regiment.
GW could make them more "agile" (in fluff), gave them chainspears and chainglaives (to fully embrace "spear warriors" vibe) and voila: we get power armoured female warriors that are visually distinct from both Space Marines and Sisters of Battle.
Why do they need to be distinct? And anyway, I thought wanted them to be a variant of Space Marines - the way you put it, you want a new faction entirely?
The number of people saying that Ultramarines, that are clearly Roman, are the "Greeks" Space Marines made me stir in my chair!
Is like saying that Chinese, Japanese and Korean are the same. No, they aren't!
ing it up are so small it's not worth it.
) They will give them a more aproppiate look with their fluff.
"
