For me, the singular reason against was that it would break canon. You would need to rewrite the Horus Heresy and almost all of the lore to explain this. However, this is based on the universes rule that the Emperors creation was perfect and could not be improved upon. If anything, it’s implied that the marines weakened over time. But once Cawl made the Primaris this assumption goes away. It means that the technology can be improved upon and changed. It’s not something written in stone. If anything, the Primaris are a far greater change to the lore of 40k (turning the Imperium from a regressive society into one that improves upon the Emperors work) than any theoretical change to the old lore that “oh the glands always worked on women.” or “oh the Emperor actually made female Primarches”. Those are really superficial changes by comparison. What Cawl did and what he represents is a lot more fundamental.
The main reason you would want to add female space marines is simple. Generally speaking, there’s a noted preference for seeing romanticised depictions of powerful warrior women in fiction. Because marines are 40k: they have the most factions, the bulk of the lore is about them and the core narrative centers almost exclusively on the a civil war between space marines. So if you wanted to include them then it makes sense to do it in the most popular armies.
Now there’s two arguments against this:
1) It would change the character of marines
2) You already have Sisters of Battle.
Now, there’s basically one answer to both of these questions. Each chapter or legion has its own distinct character and that is what is a large part of the appeal of Space Marines. This means that a female marine would be distinct from a Sister of Battle. For example, Marines are secular whereas the Sisters are not. The Sisters are explicitly an all female order whereas female marine would be part of a mixed force. So a female Black Templar might be pretty similar to a Sister. Although even here the Templars have a much greater Knightly/Crusader character than the Sisters do. It wouldn’t invalidate the Sisters reason to exist if you had female marines because they are a distinct army.
I’ll take one example. Space Wolves. Think about how popular Vikings is right now. People love their Norse mythology and that is absolutely what the appeal of the Wolves is. Part of Vikings appeal is that people quite like Lagatha and the other warrior maidens on that show. So, how would adding that into the Space Wolves undermine the core Viking character of the faction when its broadly an okay thing in something like Vikings? It’s also quite distinct from Sisters of Battle who are all about religious fantaticism. Just because it’s a warrior woman doesn’t mean it’s the same. Like wise, it wouldn’t change the essential character of the Space Wolves if they did this. They’re still Space Vikings regardless of if some of them are women.
You can basically apply this rationale to any other army be it Blood Angels or Ultramarines. The character of a chapter is distinct enough that you can apply it to any female warrior and they would still be distinct from Sisters of Battle.
Oh look this thread again, guess its about that time of year. Ill just go ahead and post my copy past response as to my stance of why im not for the idea of female space marines.
So the reason im against the female space marines is because it does not really make sense in the setting of the imperium, where they are fighting a galactic war. Making a female space marine would requier more time and energy. Think of it like trying to make a tuner car. If you start with a WRX, you are going to get a better performing car then if you started with a corolla. Thats not to say the corolla wont be able to perform just as good as a wrx, but its gonna need a lot more work.
Second the space marines were all based off the primarchs which were based off of the Big E, which was a dude.
Third, and this one i personally was told and i find it really interesting. The reason they dont have female space marines is because of the risk of them becoming fertile. If you have a male and female space mairne that have the ability to produce off spring you could potentially make space marines via natural birth, which then comes to the problem of space marines could reach a point of, why the feth do we need regular humans? Or even in general, if you could have male and female all be space marine, why not turn all of humanity into them? The space marines were not meant to be a replacement for humanity.
Thats my copy pasta, always like to get my two cents in but, i putting 5 bucks on this thread going down the tubes by page 3.
Every time this thread comes up I feel compelled to say the same thing: Yes, I would absolutely love that, and it would actually compel me to buy some loyalist scum!
It would allow people who wanted to add them to their army to be able to do so without expensive and laborious conversions. And if you didn't want female marines, you don't buy them. It's win/win!
The other issues are the amount of people who would freak out about it. I imagine a vocal minority would throw a right fit.
The other problem is that like it or not it's a significant change to the lore and for it to be something that isn't a giant mess it needs to be done properly. Do you trust GW to do that?
Personally the only thing I have to complain about is what you'd replace the term battle brother would as brother seems to be the most common way for them to refer to each other and that's an easy fix.
I just don't think GW's capable of handling it.
If you want to model and paint you Space Marines as female then do it. No one is stopping you.
The only benefit I see in GW producing Female Space Marine models is the bitz. My Orks require new heads as tropes to decorate their WAAAAAGH Banners..
Diversity is pointless if it's restricted to human diversity in a setting as large as Warhammer 40,000.
I would much prefer more Xenos races over more human anything.
Like the usual answer to these threads. No. You can have diversity plenty throughout the galaxy, but the only real reason for it to be SM is to forcefully shoehorn it in.
warhead01 wrote: If you want to model and paint you Space Marines as female then do it. No one is stopping you.
The only benefit I see in GW producing Female Space Marine models is the bitz. My Orks require new heads as tropes to decorate their WAAAAAGH Banners..
Diversity is pointless if it's restricted to human diversity in a setting as large as Warhammer 40,000.
I would much prefer more Xenos races over more human anything.
Well if you look at Stormcasts then they would look different.
Pretty sure they already have an army called sisters of battle - they are literally female space marines.
If you so desire - you can just use those models (being updated next year) with space marine stats. No one will have a problem with it. Were pretty much done here right?
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Like the usual answer to these threads. No. You can have diversity plenty throughout the galaxy, but the only real reason for it to be SM is to forcefully shoehorn it in.
warhead01 wrote: If you want to model and paint you Space Marines as female then do it. No one is stopping you.
The only benefit I see in GW producing Female Space Marine models is the bitz. My Orks require new heads as tropes to decorate their WAAAAAGH Banners..
Diversity is pointless if it's restricted to human diversity in a setting as large as Warhammer 40,000.
I would much prefer more Xenos races over more human anything.
Well if you look at Stormcasts then they would look different.
I'm not seeing how that connects to what I posted.
Xenomancers wrote: Pretty sure they already have an army called sisters of battle - they are literally female space marines.
They are literally not space marines at all.
Not the same armor, not the same genetic changes, not the same organization, not the same mentality.
The only thing they have in common in they use the same bolters...
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Like the usual answer to these threads. No. You can have diversity plenty throughout the galaxy, but the only real reason for it to be SM is to forcefully shoehorn it in.
I didn’t use the word diversity.
There was no argument otherwise then just "Let's have some powerful warrior women, so lets change the fluff because they are the most common army" rather then say.. "Lets add more powerful women"
warhead01 wrote: If you want to model and paint you Space Marines as female then do it. No one is stopping you.
The only benefit I see in GW producing Female Space Marine models is the bitz. My Orks require new heads as tropes to decorate their WAAAAAGH Banners..
Diversity is pointless if it's restricted to human diversity in a setting as large as Warhammer 40,000.
I would much prefer more Xenos races over more human anything.
Well if you look at Stormcasts then they would look different.
I'm not seeing how that connects to what I posted.
Because it would take a lot of work to convert existing stuff and the end result likely wouldn’t be as good as if GW made the stuff. It would also cost more to make in monetary terms as well as just time. So it’s not just a case of getting out a file shaving some plastic off or a headswap.
The Stormcast models are a good case where people started doing that with a head swap and then they came out with the models that were very distinct. So you then have the added risk of investing all that time and effort only to have it invalidated.
There are costs and risks of making your own stuff.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Like the usual answer to these threads. No. You can have diversity plenty throughout the galaxy, but the only real reason for it to be SM is to forcefully shoehorn it in.
I didn’t use the word diversity.
There was no argument otherwise then just "Let's have some powerful warrior women, so lets change the fluff because they are the most common army" rather then say.. "Lets add more powerful women"
It doesn’t change the fluff if Cawl invents something new with the Primaris. That’s advancing the story.
They aren’t just the most common army, Marines are Warhammer 40K.
No I quote examples with the Space Wolves and compare it to Vikings. That’s an argument.
The fact you’ve assumed I am arguing from a position of encouraging diversity means you haven’t read my post.
I'm almost surprised they didn't go there with primaris. Cawl has already improved marines in many ways, and fixed some gene flaws (Space Wolves can have successors now, apparently). It wouldn't even be a retcon since primaris are distinct from the old marines in the fluff. Personally I'm not bothered either way, although I'd prefer to see female models for the guard and/or mechanicus as that wouldn't cause as many arguments on the internet.
Frankly, I'm not sure I like how the female Stormcast were handled, (though I'm pleased that they exist at all) and I definitely wouldn't want the female space marines (would such thing ever happen) to be handled in the same way. I mean that the female Stormcast are much more dainty than the males, they have shoulderpads of half the size. And the boobplate, though in that bothers me less than the daintyness, considering that the male Stormcast have chest muscle breastplates, so it kinda matches.
But if there were female marines, I'd want them to just have different heads.
(Oh, and Statuesque Miniatures makes excellent female marine heads.)
But yeah, regardless of whether one thinks that this is a good idea, Guilliman returning is definitely a way bigger setting change.
It doesn’t change the fluff if Cawl invents something new with the Primaris. That’s advancing the story.
They aren’t just the most common army, Marines are Warhammer 40K.
No I quote examples with the Space Wolves and compare it to Vikings. That’s an argument.
The fact you’ve assumed I am arguing from a position of encouraging diversity means you haven’t read my post.
Quite a few people weren't happy with how the Primaris were introduced either.
Also the Space Wolves Viking is.. Not so much an argument given that your hypothesis is "They won't change because they are vikings and vikings have the appeal of Warrior Maidens so nothing would really change about the core viking character". I mean sure, they might not change in that fashion. But it's a major change fluffwise as a Space Marine faction. And sure.. We could, but why though? Aside from "Space Marines are popular, add females through them"
It doesn’t change the fluff if Cawl invents something new with the Primaris. That’s advancing the story.
They aren’t just the most common army, Marines are Warhammer 40K.
No I quote examples with the Space Wolves and compare it to Vikings. That’s an argument.
The fact you’ve assumed I am arguing from a position of encouraging diversity means you haven’t read my post.
Quite a few people weren't happy with how the Primaris were introduced either.
Also the Space Wolves Viking is.. Not so much an argument given that your hypothesis is "They won't change because they are vikings and vikings have the appeal of Warrior Maidens so nothing would really change about the core viking character". I mean sure, they might not change in that fashion. But it's a major change fluffwise as a Space Marine faction. And sure.. We could, but why though? Aside from "Space Marines are popular, add females through them"
Yeah im still booty bothered by cawl marry sue.
Also daily reminder, old school space wolf lore, they had shield maidens at one point. They were not warriors they were just there for space wolves to bump ugly with.
warhead01 wrote: If you want to model and paint you Space Marines as female then do it. No one is stopping you.
The only benefit I see in GW producing Female Space Marine models is the bitz. My Orks require new heads as tropes to decorate their WAAAAAGH Banners..
Diversity is pointless if it's restricted to human diversity in a setting as large as Warhammer 40,000.
I would much prefer more Xenos races over more human anything.
Well if you look at Stormcasts then they would look different.
I'm not seeing how that connects to what I posted.
Because it would take a lot of work to convert existing stuff and the end result likely wouldn’t be as good as if GW made the stuff. It would also cost more to make in monetary terms as well as just time. So it’s not just a case of getting out a file shaving some plastic off or a headswap.
The Stormcast models are a good case where people started doing that with a head swap and then they came out with the models that were very distinct. So you then have the added risk of investing all that time and effort only to have it invalidated.
There are costs and risks of making your own stuff.
Where is your dedication?
Costs? you do know how expensive this hobby is right? Head swaps would be acquitted wouldn't they? If you are modeling your entire collection because it is important to you then how would it be invalidated. But I think this goes back to a lack of dedication.
Now before you get upset at what I just said, I am thinking about true scale marines. There are several members of the B&C who model their miniatures that way because it's what they want out of their models.
It's not a short term project so no instant rewards. But with some green stuff to make masters you could produce your own torso variants at a low const and add a head swap to finish the models off.
If it is important to you then with a littl planning and a little money all those dreams of Female Space Marines can come true!
GW already makes female Space Marines. Go check out the Stormcast Eternal model line. There are some females mixed in there. They actually aren't too bad either. Typically you expect huge boob-armour, tiny waists and that sort of thing, but GW has apparently figured out how to be more subtle about it recently. Just slap some bolters and power packs on them and you are done.
I'm all for more female representation in the fluff but I just don't see the purpose of trying to force a change in the established canon to make female space marines. Same holds true for trying to allow male Sisters of Battle. It doesn't really add anything and it just seems to step on the established canon more than augmenting the setting.
I wonder if space marines where a relatively minor faction in 40k instead of the poster child of the setting, would this even be an issue?
Let's be real here for a second. The only reason GW does (or doesn't do) anything is because of the perceived effect on the bottom line. GW is one of the most ruthlessly commercial organisations that exists. If they believe there is money to be made they will do something.
What GW are probably trying to balance on this particular subject is the possible extra sales generated by female Marines against the losses incurred by those who are so offended they leave the hobby. The offended parties aren't just 'female hating space marine players' either. As a xeno player I would be pissed to see more resource poured into models of the Imperium.
Personally I don't think there is enough demand to justify female marines, hence why Sisters players have had to wait until now for an update and hence why there are no female guardswomen lines. I assume that female storm casts and daughters of khaine are a market test exercise in the viability of female lines.
Also if they decide to do a female marine type range, I really hope they have a purpose and aren't just shoehorned in to existing chapters for no obvious reason other than to appease certain demographics. There needs to be a story element.
I wonder if space marines where a relatively minor faction in 40k instead of the poster child of the setting, would this even be an issue?
That is definitely a big part of the issue. You argue that it is equality that there is one all male faction (Marines) and one all female faction (the Sisters) but that really is not the case as there are like five thousand variant marine armies and the fluff is like 90% about them. Which really is a problem even outside the gender issue...
Why I don't want them?
Simple, I know GW and they'll take the limited time the designers have to make new Ork models and dedicate that time to make even more Space Marine models that we don't need more of.
The other option is just to say you have female space marines. I mean realistically they would be the same genetically modified hulking space marines...
And the female armour boob plate thing is a myth anyways. Male and female space marines would wear the exact same armour anyways so with the helmets on you couldn't tell.
Even with helmets off you might not be able to tell. With all the potential testosterone and other added hormones used to make the modifications "stick" it's not likely for a female marine to look very feminine. They also aren't likely to have longer hair or wear make-up.
Attractive female models are best left to Eldar and Elves imo.
Flamephoenix182 wrote: The other option is just to say you have female space marines. I mean realistically they would be the same genetically modified hulking space marines...
And the female armour boob plate thing is a myth anyways. Male and female space marines would wear the exact same armour anyways so with the helmets on you couldn't tell.
Ork players play a race that don't have a gender. In fact, when you kinda think of it we're all masculine females because we do give borth to more Orks. So really I couldn't care less but it would honestly piss me off if GW brought out new female space marine models right now... there are so many other factions begging for models and marines (who are getting a full army update anyway) don't need any more! Hell, give IG female heads in a booster pack for Goro sake! Or give us that Buggy we want! Or let the sisters of battle come out and just make them large and say "hey, they're basically space marines now!" All of this would mean everyone gets the models they want but just giving marines new female models would satisfy such a small minority of players it would seriously upset the rest of us. Maybe in 5 years when we all get what we wnat marines can have them. XD
The male body is superior to the female body in most all regards useful for warfare. The genetic modification is already strenuous enough on the body. To try it on a woman with this lore precedent would be a waste of resources.
Xenomancers wrote: Pretty sure they already have an army called sisters of battle - they are literally female space marines.
They are literally not space marines at all.
Not the same armor, not the same genetic changes, not the same organization, not the same mentality.
The only thing they have in common in they use the same bolters...
Their lore is a little different.
They are in female power armor with boob armor that gets the exact same 3+ save as power armor. Instead of genetic enhancements they have super faith, they are organized about the same - 5-10 man squads.
They use basically the same vehicals (with some different weapons). Not even all space marine chapters have the same organization or mentality. Some are vampires, some are ware-wolves, sisters are just space marine space nuns.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Apple Peel wrote: The male body is superior to the female body in most all regards useful for warfare. The genetic modification is already strenuous enough on the body. To try it on a woman with this lore precedent would be a waste of resources.
Well this argument is super relevant. We should just stick to the fact that there are already female space marines. Adept Soriatas.
Flamephoenix182 wrote: The other option is just to say you have female space marines. I mean realistically they would be the same genetically modified hulking space marines...
And the female armour boob plate thing is a myth anyways. Male and female space marines would wear the exact same armour anyways so with the helmets on you couldn't tell.
Ork players play a race that don't have a gender. In fact, when you kinda think of it we're all masculine females because we do give borth to more Orks. So really I couldn't care less but it would honestly piss me off if GW brought out new female space marine models right now... there are so many other factions begging for models and marines (who are getting a full army update anyway) don't need any more! Hell, give IG female heads in a booster pack for Goro sake! Or give us that Buggy we want! Or let the sisters of battle come out and just make them large and say "hey, they're basically space marines now!" All of this would mean everyone gets the models they want but just giving marines new female models would satisfy such a small minority of players it would seriously upset the rest of us. Maybe in 5 years when we all get what we wnat marines can have them. XD
Xenomancers wrote: Pretty sure they already have an army called sisters of battle - they are literally female space marines.
They are literally not space marines at all.
Not the same armor, not the same genetic changes, not the same organization, not the same mentality.
The only thing they have in common in they use the same bolters...
Their lore is a little different.
They are in female power armor with boob armor that gets the exact same 3+ save as power armor. Instead of genetic enhancements they have super faith, they are organized about the same - 5-10 man squads.
They use basically the same vehicals (with some different weapons). Not even all space marine chapters have the same organization or mentality. Some are vampires, some are ware-wolves, sisters are just space marine space nuns.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Apple Peel wrote: The male body is superior to the female body in most all regards useful for warfare. The genetic modification is already strenuous enough on the body. To try it on a woman with this lore precedent would be a waste of resources.
Well this argument is super relevant. We should just stick to the fact that there are already female space marines. Adept Soriatas.
Flamephoenix182 wrote: The other option is just to say you have female space marines. I mean realistically they would be the same genetically modified hulking space marines...
And the female armour boob plate thing is a myth anyways. Male and female space marines would wear the exact same armour anyways so with the helmets on you couldn't tell.
Ork players play a race that don't have a gender. In fact, when you kinda think of it we're all masculine females because we do give borth to more Orks. So really I couldn't care less but it would honestly piss me off if GW brought out new female space marine models right now... there are so many other factions begging for models and marines (who are getting a full army update anyway) don't need any more! Hell, give IG female heads in a booster pack for Goro sake! Or give us that Buggy we want! Or let the sisters of battle come out and just make them large and say "hey, they're basically space marines now!" All of this would mean everyone gets the models they want but just giving marines new female models would satisfy such a small minority of players it would seriously upset the rest of us. Maybe in 5 years when we all get what we wnat marines can have them. XD
Orks are Fungus - they are A sexual.
Honestly, I say this a lot, why would you even want female space marines when Sisters of Battle exist? They're seriously awesome... and no joke. When the new models come out I will buy buying them (depending on price) because I love the idea of such strong soldiers who don't need all that marine cheating stuff.
And Orks are what ever gender they want to be! I remember when we used to get outninto the desert and mother our young in the old lore...
You couldn’t tell Phasma was a woman until she opened her mouth - and that could have been easily dubbed if the director wanted.
I’ve stopped caring whether we get female space marine models or not, and GW can take it’s take on the lore and shove it. There’s plenty of headswap options for models and I can always use the cursed 13th founding to state that was why my marine chapter is all female.
Xenomancers wrote: Pretty sure they already have an army called sisters of battle - they are literally female space marines.
They are literally not space marines at all.
Not the same armor, not the same genetic changes, not the same organization, not the same mentality.
The only thing they have in common in they use the same bolters...
Their lore is a little different.
They are in female power armor with boob armor that gets the exact same 3+ save as power armor. Instead of genetic enhancements they have super faith, they are organized about the same - 5-10 man squads.
They use basically the same vehicals (with some different weapons). Not even all space marine chapters have the same organization or mentality. Some are vampires, some are ware-wolves, sisters are just space marine space nuns.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Apple Peel wrote: The male body is superior to the female body in most all regards useful for warfare. The genetic modification is already strenuous enough on the body. To try it on a woman with this lore precedent would be a waste of resources.
Well this argument is super relevant. We should just stick to the fact that there are already female space marines. Adept Soriatas.
Flamephoenix182 wrote: The other option is just to say you have female space marines. I mean realistically they would be the same genetically modified hulking space marines...
And the female armour boob plate thing is a myth anyways. Male and female space marines would wear the exact same armour anyways so with the helmets on you couldn't tell.
Ork players play a race that don't have a gender. In fact, when you kinda think of it we're all masculine females because we do give borth to more Orks. So really I couldn't care less but it would honestly piss me off if GW brought out new female space marine models right now... there are so many other factions begging for models and marines (who are getting a full army update anyway) don't need any more! Hell, give IG female heads in a booster pack for Goro sake! Or give us that Buggy we want! Or let the sisters of battle come out and just make them large and say "hey, they're basically space marines now!" All of this would mean everyone gets the models they want but just giving marines new female models would satisfy such a small minority of players it would seriously upset the rest of us. Maybe in 5 years when we all get what we wnat marines can have them. XD
Orks are Fungus - they are A sexual.
Honestly, I say this a lot, why would you even want female space marines when Sisters of Battle exist? They're seriously awesome... and no joke. When the new models come out I will buy buying them (depending on price) because I love the idea of such strong soldiers who don't need all that marine cheating stuff.
And Orks are what ever gender they want to be! I remember when we used to get outninto the desert and mother our young in the old lore...
Honestly this, i dont understand the want and or need for a female space marine as it will jsut pull away from the already struggling SoB and SoS forces.
I wonder if space marines where a relatively minor faction in 40k instead of the poster child of the setting, would this even be an issue?
That is definitely a big part of the issue. You argue that it is equality that there is one all male faction (Marines) and one all female faction (the Sisters) but that really is not the case as there are like five thousand variant marine armies and the fluff is like 90% about them. Which really is a problem even outside the gender issue...
It's not equality and nothing about 40k is equal except that all lives are basically expendable in the IoM. Sisters have the fluff of being an all female organization just as howling banshees are all female. Changing that is just taking away that identity without really adding anything of substance to those groups. Same for Space Marines due to the established fluff states it needs to be a male in order to be able to undergo the Space Marine transformation process. It has nothing to do with wanting a boys only club (that's 8th edition Orks currently :p ) but just that it doesn't feel worthwhile to change the fluff to check off some equality boxes. But in all honestly the changes to having primaris marines bothers me more than if they said they figured out a way to make female marines. At least with female marines it doesn't invalidate all the existing models or most narratives where as primaris tends to step on everything established to try and sell newer models.
Yeah I know, I know, it's sacrelage to post links to wikipedia, but its refence section give us a nice body of works to study to further our knowledge on the important field of Ork sexuality.
From an in-universe point of view, the given reason is, as has been stated, the fact that SM are based of Primarch DNA, which is in turn based of the Emperor's DNA. Fundamentally, this means that the entirety of the SM 'Upgrade' is encoded at a the level of chromosomes - of which females are incompatible with at least 50% of said implanted DNA, being as it's based off a male DNA sample. Hence, if the genome is implanted into a female, not only will 50% of the intended genetic information be unable to be accessed (Because of the way the chromosomes link together to form DNA, 95% of the Y Chromosome is unable to recombine with an X chromosome), but it may also lead to severe damage to the existing DNA - resulting in genetic mutation and severe health problems.
So, there is a bit of a reason behind it.
As for Cawl being able to 'invent' Primaris marines - he did not. Primaris marines are not the result of 'new' technology. They are simply a tweaked form of the Emperor's original creation, with the difference that the geneseed has been optimised for an exaggeration in traits (Increased intellect, strength, speed etc.). Even the addition of the 3 new organs is a relatively simple splice into existing DNA - things that we can do even today on a primitive level. What Cawl's creation cannot do, is radically alter the way in which human DNA reacts with each other (Aforementioned chromosome thing). And, despite being presented as being 'new' creations - it is still fundamentally derived from the Emperor's original work. Yes, it 'improves' upon it - but it does not supersede it. I'm not even going to touch on how gene-seed is also psychic in nature, and is attuned to the Emperor's psychic signal. That may also have a hand in things.
From an out of universe stance:
There is no need for female marines. Unfortunately, IMHO, this is the result of the ridiculous need to forcibly insert 'equality' into every conceivable situation, simple to satisfy ever-changing external social demands. The Universe of Warhammer 40k already has women in numerous positions of power and authority, with many of them having interesting characterisations. There are female Planetary Governors, Regimental Commanders, Mechanicus Magos, Inquisitors, Arbites Commanders, Navy Captains, Navigators, Psykers etc. etc. etc. These are all massive and serious roles, and positions in which women are equally as 'plausible/able' to undertake as male characters. If anything, what we need is not more women characters or special snowflake all-female units, but a better representation and fleshing out of those already present - because they are a huge aspect of the setting (In most regards, the fault lies with the overwhelming focus on SM themed novels. Even one new IG novel series could rectify the problem somewhat and show how the rest of the IoM is rather more balanced).
In terms of 'needing' FSM - there is no need, because that niche is already filled by the Sisters of Battle and the Sisters of Silence, two exclusively female units. Do we hear anybody crying out that there needs to be male Sisters of Battle, because some men are also really fervent worshippers? No, because we accept that there is a plausible reason not to do so in the setting (No Men at Arms for the Ecclesiarchy) What about the Sisters of Silence? There are male blanks - Ferik Jurgen (Ibram Gaunt's aide) was one. So why don't we fluff-hammer some males into the Sisters of Silence. Because again, there is no need. We appreciate that it's stated that most blanks are female for some reason. We don't need the reason why this is so, we just accept it as part of the setting and move on.
Basically, SMs are based off the Knightly Orders of the Crusades - who were all male. SoB's are based of the Nun Orders - who were all female. There doesn't need to be any mixing of the two. Both have power armour, bolters, faith. The only thing SoB don't have is geneseed - but they happen to turn into living-fething-saints if they pray/fight hard enough. SM don't get that.
You didn't address why we would NEED female marines though. Because you could make it "work" isn't a valid reason to do it (just as "we want to sell new miniatures" wasn't a good reason to create Primaris marines imho but that's not the debate). I would be interested to know why marines SHOULD have women in their ranks other than "warrior women are cool" since we can have (and we already have) women in any other army (well... not necron, tyranids etc, ok).
Marines being the most known figure of 40k doesn't mean they have to include women characters.
And it doesn't make sense anyway since part of the imagery for marines IS this all male thing as while they are more or less secular, they're based on a monastic way of life and monastic communities were more often than not restricted to a single sex afaik. So, I wouldn't really agree with adding female into male chapters. I wouldn't be bothered if it happened though, as long as the minis are great and don't distract from the original imagery (which would probably mean you would barely be able to tell the mini represent a female anyway).
You could probably create a new legion with females only and keep the monastic aspect though. But you are entering sister of battle territory as they are based on the same imagery, only with the religious aspect turned to eleven.
And if the reason is "we need powerful women figures" we have some. We even have female inquisitors giving orders to these marines sometimes. Sure, we could have more but maybe not in this particular army.
Xenomancers wrote: Pretty sure they already have an army called sisters of battle - they are literally female space marines.
They are literally not space marines at all.
Not the same armor, not the same genetic changes, not the same organization, not the same mentality.
The only thing they have in common in they use the same bolters...
Their lore is a little different.
They are in female power armor with boob armor that gets the exact same 3+ save as power armor. Instead of genetic enhancements they have super faith, they are organized about the same - 5-10 man squads.
They use basically the same vehicals (with some different weapons). Not even all space marine chapters have the same organization or mentality. Some are vampires, some are ware-wolves, sisters are just space marine space nuns.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Apple Peel wrote: The male body is superior to the female body in most all regards useful for warfare. The genetic modification is already strenuous enough on the body. To try it on a woman with this lore precedent would be a waste of resources.
Well this argument is super relevant. We should just stick to the fact that there are already female space marines. Adept Soriatas.
Flamephoenix182 wrote: The other option is just to say you have female space marines. I mean realistically they would be the same genetically modified hulking space marines...
And the female armour boob plate thing is a myth anyways. Male and female space marines would wear the exact same armour anyways so with the helmets on you couldn't tell.
Ork players play a race that don't have a gender. In fact, when you kinda think of it we're all masculine females because we do give borth to more Orks. So really I couldn't care less but it would honestly piss me off if GW brought out new female space marine models right now... there are so many other factions begging for models and marines (who are getting a full army update anyway) don't need any more! Hell, give IG female heads in a booster pack for Goro sake! Or give us that Buggy we want! Or let the sisters of battle come out and just make them large and say "hey, they're basically space marines now!" All of this would mean everyone gets the models they want but just giving marines new female models would satisfy such a small minority of players it would seriously upset the rest of us. Maybe in 5 years when we all get what we wnat marines can have them. XD
Orks are Fungus - they are A sexual.
Honestly, I say this a lot, why would you even want female space marines when Sisters of Battle exist? They're seriously awesome... and no joke. When the new models come out I will buy buying them (depending on price) because I love the idea of such strong soldiers who don't need all that marine cheating stuff.
And Orks are what ever gender they want to be! I remember when we used to get outninto the desert and mother our young in the old lore...
Honestly this, i dont understand the want and or need for a female space marine as it will jsut pull away from the already struggling SoB and SoS forces.
That should be solved by SOB's rerelease and honestly SOS are always going to struggle as they're one of the factions GW added for monies.
Apple Peel wrote: The male body is superior to the female body in most all regards useful for warfare.
If by warfare you mean hand to hand combat while basically naked. Power armor and laser rifles renders that pretty irrelevant. Males were used in warfare because they're more expendable. If half your males die in battle, your replacement rate doesn't really change - one guy is fully capable of reproducing with dozens of women in the time for a single pregnancy cycle. If half your women die, you've cut your replacement rate in half.
One of the big drivers of warfare has always been about getting rid of surplus males, because women died in childbirth and that left you with surplus men without mates and that causes trouble. Far better you go kill some other tribe and take their women, you deal with the problem on both ends (fewer surplus males on your tribe, and/or more available females).
Power armor doesn't solve this issue, though arguably in 40k artificial womb technology certainly could. Also, tweaking human genetics to put women on rough physical par with men should be basically trivial on the time scales 40k deals with. There are tons of species where the female is far superior in terms of combat ability.
That said, I'm not arguing for female space marines, it's just that the logic that "Men are bigger/stronger" isn't compelling given the available military and genetic technology. Genetically engineering female supersoldiers would actually be easier (no dealing with the Y chromosome at all, less work).
Personally, I assume that the Emperor ran on old school logic - turn surplus men (especially the undesirable criminal elements) into brainwashed, expendable supersoldiers, leaving your female population to reproductive duties that don't require precious technological resources, just plain old biology. Earth had been ravaged by years of conflict at that point, so shoring up Terra's populace was probably relevant given how many people he was going to drag off to the crusade (not just Space Marines, lots and lots of regular human soldiers too).
Cawl making female space marines...why bother? Cawl was reinventing the wheel, but it was still a wheel. It was also a process meant to be applied to improve normal space marines as well. Bothering to include women in the design was entirely unwarranted.
Apple Peel wrote: The male body is superior to the female body in most all regards useful for warfare.
If by warfare you mean hand to hand combat while basically naked. Power armor and laser rifles renders that pretty irrelevant. Males were used in warfare because they're more expendable. If half your males die in battle, your replacement rate doesn't really change - one guy is fully capable of reproducing with dozens of women in the time for a single pregnancy cycle. If half your women die, you've cut your replacement rate in half.
One of the big drivers of warfare has always been about getting rid of surplus males, because women died in childbirth and that left you with surplus men without mates and that causes trouble. Far better you go kill some other tribe and take their women, you deal with the problem on both ends (fewer surplus males on your tribe, and/or more available females).
Power armor doesn't solve this issue, though arguably in 40k artificial womb technology certainly could. Also, tweaking human genetics to put women on rough physical par with men should be basically trivial on the time scales 40k deals with. There are tons of species where the female is far superior in terms of combat ability.
That said, I'm not arguing for female space marines, it's just that the logic that "Men are bigger/stronger" isn't compelling given the available military and genetic technology. Genetically engineering female supersoldiers would actually be easier (no dealing with the Y chromosome at all, less work).
Personally, I assume that the Emperor ran on old school logic - turn surplus men (especially the undesirable criminal elements) into brainwashed, expendable supersoldiers, leaving your female population to reproductive duties that don't require precious technological resources, just plain old biology. Earth had been ravaged by years of conflict at that point, so shoring up Terra's populace was probably relevant given how many people he was going to drag off to the crusade (not just Space Marines, lots and lots of regular human soldiers too).
Cawl making female space marines...why bother? Cawl was reinventing the wheel, but it was still a wheel. It was also a process meant to be applied to improve normal space marines as well. Bothering to include women in the design was entirely unwarranted.
Bigger and stronger and more likely to survive the process of becoming a marine. Which if I recall correctly - only 1-100 men survive the process.
It doesn’t change the fluff if Cawl invents something new with the Primaris. That’s advancing the story.
They aren’t just the most common army, Marines are Warhammer 40K.
No I quote examples with the Space Wolves and compare it to Vikings. That’s an argument.
The fact you’ve assumed I am arguing from a position of encouraging diversity means you haven’t read my post.
Quite a few people weren't happy with how the Primaris were introduced either.
Also the Space Wolves Viking is.. Not so much an argument given that your hypothesis is "They won't change because they are vikings and vikings have the appeal of Warrior Maidens so nothing would really change about the core viking character". I mean sure, they might not change in that fashion. But it's a major change fluffwise as a Space Marine faction. And sure.. We could, but why though? Aside from "Space Marines are popular, add females through them"
Yeah im still booty bothered by cawl marry sue.
ONCE AGAIN, just because you don't like a powerful character, it doesn't make them a Mary Sue. Learn your terms before throwing them all around nillywilly.
always find it so strange when this topic comes up, it would be like me making a post "we want female gandalfs and an entire male eldar line, and identifiabley male necrons with long hair because i have long hair!!!
each race since the 90s has expanded its lore and backstory you can just go *slam gender here*
are space marines even men? do they even have gender? most are hairless, eunuchs, they are simply muscle and genetic modification, the term battle brothers is simply a metaphor as they are no longer human, they wouldnt need breasts, or makeup, or specific bone structures or anything that makes you put down your bolter and go hey... what gender are you, and since its based on our own history.. men are the war race, hence why the alien races and orders differ (eldar, adeptus)
also, if you take both the men and women from planets you conquer.... planets run by children and the infrim??
buy alternate heads they are plenty of female websites, dont let GW re release the entire line in female version, rather than focusing on armies that actually need releases and updates (orks, chaos, imperial guard, adeptus, both eldars)
Space Marines does not come with a gender, they are miniatures made of styrene plastic. If you want them to be female, then they are female. If you want them to be shemale then that is what they are. Its not like you can inspect their styrene genitals anyway.
It doesn’t change the fluff if Cawl invents something new with the Primaris. That’s advancing the story.
They aren’t just the most common army, Marines are Warhammer 40K.
No I quote examples with the Space Wolves and compare it to Vikings. That’s an argument.
The fact you’ve assumed I am arguing from a position of encouraging diversity means you haven’t read my post.
Quite a few people weren't happy with how the Primaris were introduced either.
Also the Space Wolves Viking is.. Not so much an argument given that your hypothesis is "They won't change because they are vikings and vikings have the appeal of Warrior Maidens so nothing would really change about the core viking character". I mean sure, they might not change in that fashion. But it's a major change fluffwise as a Space Marine faction. And sure.. We could, but why though? Aside from "Space Marines are popular, add females through them"
Yeah im still booty bothered by cawl marry sue.
ONCE AGAIN, just because you don't like a powerful character, it doesn't make them a Mary Sue. Learn your terms before throwing them all around nillywilly.
Powerful is one thing,
Going against the emperors decree for screwing with genetics
Pulling grav tech outta his rear despite lore wise it being lost since the heresy
Fixing the defects in the gene seed
Making a super suit for guliman
Sat on all this tech and was a relative literally who and no one questioned it.
able to hide this all from the inquisition for 10k years despite them being able to know if a nurgling farts a system away
OTHER THEN THAT, yeah i guess he is not a marry sue.
Apple Peel wrote: The male body is superior to the female body in most all regards useful for warfare.
If by warfare you mean hand to hand combat while basically naked. Power armor and laser rifles renders that pretty irrelevant. Males were used in warfare because they're more expendable. If half your males die in battle, your replacement rate doesn't really change - one guy is fully capable of reproducing with dozens of women in the time for a single pregnancy cycle. If half your women die, you've cut your replacement rate in half.
One of the big drivers of warfare has always been about getting rid of surplus males, because women died in childbirth and that left you with surplus men without mates and that causes trouble. Far better you go kill some other tribe and take their women, you deal with the problem on both ends (fewer surplus males on your tribe, and/or more available females).
Power armor doesn't solve this issue, though arguably in 40k artificial womb technology certainly could. Also, tweaking human genetics to put women on rough physical par with men should be basically trivial on the time scales 40k deals with. There are tons of species where the female is far superior in terms of combat ability.
That said, I'm not arguing for female space marines, it's just that the logic that "Men are bigger/stronger" isn't compelling given the available military and genetic technology. Genetically engineering female supersoldiers would actually be easier (no dealing with the Y chromosome at all, less work).
Personally, I assume that the Emperor ran on old school logic - turn surplus men (especially the undesirable criminal elements) into brainwashed, expendable supersoldiers, leaving your female population to reproductive duties that don't require precious technological resources, just plain old biology. Earth had been ravaged by years of conflict at that point, so shoring up Terra's populace was probably relevant given how many people he was going to drag off to the crusade (not just Space Marines, lots and lots of regular human soldiers too).
Cawl making female space marines...why bother? Cawl was reinventing the wheel, but it was still a wheel. It was also a process meant to be applied to improve normal space marines as well. Bothering to include women in the design was entirely unwarranted.
Bigger and stronger and more likely to survive the process of becoming a marine. Which if I recall correctly - only 1-100 men survive the process.
Space Marine training includes things like "go and fight trolls, trek miles through a Death World environment and fight fire breathing salamanders". I think that inflicts casualties more than anything and a man gets eaten just as easily as a woman no?
There are a few issues I have with pushing female marines:
- MOAR MEHRINE KITS, meanwhile Guard sit there with 15-20 year old kits. - On a biological level hormones are the only thing that really change gender, in the womb all babies/fetuses go through a phase where they have both male and female organs, it is only with the introduction of male/female hormones that fetuses differentiate between male and female. So, women exposed to increased amounts of testosterone/steroids/etc... start to build very masculine features. Squarer jaw, denser/larger bones/muscles etc... And this is because the stereotypical buff dude look is what the body looks like at peak strength. So if a woman were to reach absolute human peak strength, such as a marine, she would look more masculine than most men.
- Marines being a brotherhood is a huge draw to many players, including myself. Changing this would reduce the appeal of marines for many players, just look at the number of people against the change. Fundamentally they just don't want female marines, and they use fluff arguments to defend their point because that's what matters to them. Why should your desire to include female marines trump another player's desire to keep them all male?
Dandelion wrote: There are a few issues I have with pushing female marines:
- MOAR MEHRINE KITS, meanwhile Guard sit there with 15-20 year old kits. - On a biological level hormones are the only thing that really change gender, in the womb all babies/fetuses go through a phase where they have both male and female organs, it is only with the introduction of male/female hormones that fetuses differentiate between male and female. So, women exposed to increased amounts of testosterone/steroids/etc... start to build very masculine features. Squarer jaw, denser/larger bones/muscles etc... And this is because the stereotypical buff dude look is what the body looks like at peak strength. So if a woman were to reach absolute human peak strength, such as a marine, she would look more masculine than most men.
- Marines being a brotherhood is a huge draw to many players, including myself. Changing this would reduce the appeal of marines for many players, just look at the number of people against the change. Fundamentally they just don't want female marines, and they use fluff arguments to defend their point because that's what matters to them. Why should your desire to include female marines trump another player's desire to keep them all male?
It would be like saying all college fraternities now must take girls. Kinda defeats the point of calling them a fraternity
Backspacehacker wrote: Adeptus Soriatas arnt space marines, they dont have the gene seed gland, big difference.
Plus their stat line is drastically inferior - Strength 3, Toughness 3 (a big one), Initiative 3 back when Initiative was a stat. 1 Wound where eventually all Space Marines will get base Wounds of 2 just like Primaris.
Sisters are LITERALLY just Guardsmen with better equipment. NOT Space Marines.
Backspacehacker wrote: Adeptus Soriatas arnt space marines, they dont have the gene seed gland, big difference.
Plus their stat line is drastically inferior - Strength 3, Toughness 3 (a big one), Initiative 3 back when Initiative was a stat. 1 Wound where eventually all Space Marines will get base Wounds of 2 just like Primaris.
Sisters are LITERALLY just Guardsmen with better equipment. NOT Space Marines.
If it was changed, I don't think I'd care that much. Female Stormcast are great, and they're basically the Space Marine of AoS.
That said, I see no reason that it should change. There are very few niches that would ONLY be possible to do if Femarines were a thing. Moreover, the real problem is that other factions, and the female aspects within them, are not pushed further into the limelight, and that Space Marines occupy a very large place of the GW IP.
There is nothing* that can be achieved by Femarines that can't already be done without changing the existing canon. Therefore, I see no reason to change it. If it was changed, I don't think I'd care, aside from the general act of retconning. Nor do I have an issue with people modelling Femarines. I know it's non-canon, they know it's non-canon, it's all good.
TL;DR, I don't care, but there's very little need to change the existing canon.
*the only thing that can actually be uniquely Femarine is being an extremely genetically modified super soldier in power armour. And only if these aspects are together - any single one of these traits is not Space Marine, but as a whole, are.
The only real reason to keep SM all male is because the fluff from back in the 80s and 90s changed to that they could only be male. The process of creating a SM makes about as much sense as a god hammers a person's soul into the right shape. But testosterone! But magic space organ that lets you spit acid, so I think we can stop using "science" in this argument. You can pull out things like men are physically superior or are disposable but this is set far in the future where humanity has colonized a sizable percent of the galaxy. There are probably plenty of worlds were women are more numerous than men or are superior physically to their male populations due to a number of factors because it is all make believe. The only logical argument against female SM is because at some point between RT and 40K, someone thought it was a good idea to make SM boys only.
Now I'm not saying that wanting to keep fluff the way it is is a bad thing. I think it is a product of its time though. If 40K was developed any later in the 90s then 40k might have tried to take itself way too serious, Bolters would have been 50% bigger, pouches would have doubled at least, and SM would have to be XYY "super predators". By the time DnD 3.0 came out though we were finally moving away from the idea that table top games of various stripes were boys only. If 40K was released now, we wouldn't be having this argument. I think the longer GW keeps staying the course, the worse it's going to look when you have competitors who put out female models in their lines as regular troops and heroes while GWs line remains all male. Times change, things that people didn't bat an eye at at one point, like smoking, might get more and more flak as time goes on. Now GW can keep going as is but this might have more and more negative connotations pile up on your brand. They could do a retcon, but that will upset a portion of your player base that might even cause the loss of some of your existing base. Personally I think the best option would be to, as much as I hate Primaris, start putting female Primaris models followed by female models into new kits, that aren't Orks, Nids, and Necrons. Old SM can keep all male and be a thing that still exists but shows that GW is changing with the time.
So now we get into the what about the SoB and SoS. Well personally I think the SoS are kind of stupid as all female as you take the part that makes them important and then cut their pool of recruits in half. I think the Order of Silence would work better. You also won't alienate as large a player base than the player base you would changing the SoB.. Now with SoB we need to address the fact that nuns with guns are not space knights. Also they do not compare as a faction with the sheer scope of the SM. They would be best compared to a specific chapter like DA or BA. They have different stats, abilities, and play styles. Now I personally wouldn't have problem with having boys brought into SoB, after all there is only one thing that needs to be cut to get around that legal loophole . But the reality is you can still keep gender specific armies the problem is scale. It would be more appropriate to have a SM chapter like the DA are like "No, we're hardcore warrior knights" while the SW are like "she punched me now we're friends". I do want to make a eunuchs of battle army now though.
In the end, most make armies as a representation of them. Their big hero model represents them leading an army. Yes, you could just model that character despite the setting saying that that doesn't exist. I personally think that it's a better idea to just let that character exist as a canon choice, after moving ahead from the previous restriction. As much as people might rant about diversity, it is a valid business concern and companies like Coca-Cola showing that it can be profitable (it was a huge part of promotion and expansion strategies).
It sort of matters a little, but it doesn't matter a lot. It would be fine. Still thought the introduction of Primaris would have been a decent time to do it.
It's funny that we have this thread pop up every week but I never read "why sisters of battle need to be changed to people of battle to incorporate everyone"
There is no need for female space marines and it would be an immense retcon as every book up to this point wouldn't make any sense. If you really want female SM simply make some by adding a female head.
The absolute worse thing about the idea of FM space marines is that it would make 0 sense for the Imperium to ever make female SM. You would now be working with a smaller than average frame, with on average less aggressive mindset, On average less prone to violence and requiring more hormone therapy then already required, all to make an on average less effective soldier. For some reason, the Imperium that has 0 shortage of people is going to make the hard process of creating a super soldier even harder all for the sake of political correctness.
Not to mention that all you would need to create a female SM would be a head swap (as any female that survived the genetic augmentation would look exactly like a male except slightly smaller on average which we couldn't represent on the models because that would be sexist). So at the end of the day, you would have GW wasting time rewriting the SM entire fluff, all so you could release a new kit that would really amount to a simple head swap.
Asmodios wrote: It's funny that we have this thread pop up every week but I never read "why sisters of battle need to be changed to people of battle to incorporate everyone"
There is no need for female space marines and it would be an immense retcon as every book up to this point wouldn't make any sense. If you really want female SM simply make some by adding a female head.
The absolute worse thing about the idea of FM space marines is that it would make 0 sense for the Imperium to ever make female SM. You would now be working with a smaller than average frame, with on average less aggressive mindset, On average less prone to violence and requiring more hormone therapy then already required, all to make an on average less effective soldier. For some reason, the Imperium that has 0 shortage of people is going to make the hard process of creating a super soldier even harder all for the sake of political correctness.
Not to mention that all you would need to create a female SM would be a head swap (as any female that survived the genetic augmentation would look exactly like a male except slightly smaller on average which we couldn't represent on the models because that would be sexist). So at the end of the day, you would have GW wasting time rewriting the SM entire fluff, all so you could release a new kit that would really amount to a simple head swap.
Just want to take a second to point out here that nobody is complaining about adding men to the sororitas because sororitas effectively don't exist, and haven't existed for many years.
When the newest model in the range is well over a decade old, you might as well ask why you don't hear people complaining that GW doesn't release female squats.
So 40k that "makes zero sense" should make less sense because..... PC?
actually, reply to a single point I made. There would be absolutely no reason for the Imperium to ever make a female SM. There is no part of the process that would be easier and there would be no gain to it as women are on average worse than men at everything that a SM is designed to do. I also have to question the motives for people that push for FM SM when their only argument ever is that "GW fluff is crap".... well if its crap go play a game set in a fictional universe that isn't "crap".
Asmodios wrote: It's funny that we have this thread pop up every week but I never read "why sisters of battle need to be changed to people of battle to incorporate everyone"
There is no need for female space marines and it would be an immense retcon as every book up to this point wouldn't make any sense. If you really want female SM simply make some by adding a female head.
The absolute worse thing about the idea of FM space marines is that it would make 0 sense for the Imperium to ever make female SM. You would now be working with a smaller than average frame, with on average less aggressive mindset, On average less prone to violence and requiring more hormone therapy then already required, all to make an on average less effective soldier. For some reason, the Imperium that has 0 shortage of people is going to make the hard process of creating a super soldier even harder all for the sake of political correctness.
Not to mention that all you would need to create a female SM would be a head swap (as any female that survived the genetic augmentation would look exactly like a male except slightly smaller on average which we couldn't represent on the models because that would be sexist). So at the end of the day, you would have GW wasting time rewriting the SM entire fluff, all so you could release a new kit that would really amount to a simple head swap.
Just want to take a second to point out here that nobody is complaining about adding men to the sororitas because sororitas effectively don't exist, and haven't existed for many years.
When the newest model in the range is well over a decade old, you might as well ask why you don't hear people complaining that GW doesn't release female squats.
So yeah you must have missed the big plastic sisters announcement..... glad to see you actively follow the hobby
Asmodios wrote: It's funny that we have this thread pop up every week but I never read "why sisters of battle need to be changed to people of battle to incorporate everyone"
It is because SoB are almost forgotten fringe faction that have been ignored by GW since the 2nd edition. (This thankfully seems finally to be changing.) But if there were shitton of different SOB variant factions and majority of the fluff would be about them, while only marines were some 2nd edition metals, you bet there would be demands for Brother of Battle!
The absolute worse thing about the idea of FM space marines is that it would make 0 sense for the Imperium to ever make female SM. You would now be working with a smaller than average frame, with on average less aggressive mindset, On average less prone to violence and requiring more hormone therapy then already required, all to make an on average less effective soldier. For some reason, the Imperium that has 0 shortage of people is going to make the hard process of creating a super soldier even harder all for the sake of political correctness.
But perhaps female physiology is better suited for gaining memories by eating the flesh of the fallen enemies! (Because all this is totally based on real science, am I right?)
While 40K is first and foremost a tabletop miniatures game, I believe the fluff/lore, etc. has been so well established (in varying degrees of quality) that it is a genuine product in and of itself, a genuine IP. To me, an IP should be beholden to its creators and no one else. It saddens me to see an IP subject to change to either pander to social pressures or to sales demographics.
Obviously this happens all the time, but I do find it sad. An IP should be the domain of its creators regardless of what the IP is. Even if it's offensive, 'unfair', etc. An IP creator should never ever feel required to justify why they created something the way they felt like creating it. An IP should stand on its merits, and the consumers can either take it or leave it - they should never feel entitled to change or impact the IP to suit themselves or their interests.
Sadly we live in the times we live in, where companies will cater to every spare percentage point they can manage to occupy in the market, and that often means diluting a product with unnecessary changes to chase that last sale. We see it in movies, film adaptations of novels, re-makes of classic films, etc. For better or for worse I'm always more interested in the unfiltered exact IP as intended by its original creator.
If you're going to make something fantastic, or something truly awful, I want to see what you wanted to make...not what people wanted you to make.
Space marines are male because of gene splicing, if you want manly manly women (which would no longer be a woman) sure. But we don't need it. Sexual Dimorphism is an issue space marines have already. It would essentially be turning a female into a male. Because of all testrone and physical body changes to be similar to a primarch.
Female Space Marines already exist, they are called the Sisters of Battle or the Sisters of Silence, or hell any other faction in the imperium. The Space Marines can't be female.
I want to make it clear, rereading my stuff again, that I actually wouldn't mind either way if female space marines exist. To me it's just a game... I honestly identify more with women and aliens when it comes to games anyway (I always play a female or alien).
Do we need female space marines? No...
But do we even need male space marines? Honestly, the answer is no... if someone said to you "why do you need male space marines?", when 40k was created for the first time, you would probably answer "they're cool". And why should a person who thinks female space marines are cool be told they don't need them?
Therefore, why do we need female space marines? Why do we need anything? The answer is not because women need representing, not for equality... the answer is it's cool and as humans our imagination for enjoyment is limitless and there is nothing ever wrong with thinking something is cool as long as it doesn't hurt anybody.
The real question is, do we need female space marine models right now? My answer there is no. Because there are so many other female models i want gw to make first and so many alien models I want firts because the idea of them have been cooler for longer.
While 40K is first and foremost a tabletop miniatures game, I believe the fluff/lore, etc. has been so well established (in varying degrees of quality) that it is a genuine product in and of itself, a genuine IP. To me, an IP should be beholden to its creators and no one else. It saddens me to see an IP subject to change to either pander to social pressures or to sales demographics.
Obviously this happens all the time, but I do find it sad. An IP should be the domain of its creators regardless of what the IP is. Even if it's offensive, 'unfair', etc. An IP creator should never ever feel required to justify why they created something the way they felt like creating it. An IP should stand on its merits, and the consumers can either take it or leave it - they should never feel entitled to change or impact the IP to suit themselves or their interests.
Sadly we live in the times we live in, where companies will cater to every spare percentage point they can manage to occupy in the market, and that often means diluting a product with unnecessary changes to chase that last sale. We see it in movies, film adaptations of novels, re-makes of classic films, etc. For better or for worse I'm always more interested in the unfiltered exact IP as intended by its original creator.
If you're going to make something fantastic, or something truly awful, I want to see what you wanted to make...not what people wanted you to make.
But what if the IP creators change their minds? Are they not allowed to do that?
Fluff wise female marines means the tiny tiny chance of self replicating marines, some of you hate the idea of this but if your going to break the lore one way, you must consider this break as a ramification, plenty of characters in universe could make it happen, this is a good reason for the emperor to not have female marines as they were eventually to be discarded like the thunder warriors.
Bigger and stronger and more likely to survive the process of becoming a marine. Which if I recall correctly - only 1-100 men survive the process.
Obviously you'd want to start with the specimens most likely to survive the process, but math says the survival rates have to be fairly high. One space marine makes only so many of the glands used to make the next generation. If the survival rate was 1 in 100, every chapter would collapse in a single generation. Keeping in mind that some marines will die before their glands mature enough to be harvested, and some marines will be outright destroyed without hope of recovering the glands, you're lucky just to replace losses even without geneseed failures. Yet chapters survive, recover losses and even contribute geneseed to found new chapters. Implantation rates have to be fairly high to manage this.
While 40K is first and foremost a tabletop miniatures game, I believe the fluff/lore, etc. has been so well established (in varying degrees of quality) that it is a genuine product in and of itself, a genuine IP. To me, an IP should be beholden to its creators and no one else. It saddens me to see an IP subject to change to either pander to social pressures or to sales demographics.
Obviously this happens all the time, but I do find it sad. An IP should be the domain of its creators regardless of what the IP is. Even if it's offensive, 'unfair', etc. An IP creator should never ever feel required to justify why they created something the way they felt like creating it. An IP should stand on its merits, and the consumers can either take it or leave it - they should never feel entitled to change or impact the IP to suit themselves or their interests.
Sadly we live in the times we live in, where companies will cater to every spare percentage point they can manage to occupy in the market, and that often means diluting a product with unnecessary changes to chase that last sale. We see it in movies, film adaptations of novels, re-makes of classic films, etc. For better or for worse I'm always more interested in the unfiltered exact IP as intended by its original creator.
If you're going to make something fantastic, or something truly awful, I want to see what you wanted to make...not what people wanted you to make.
But what if the IP creators change their minds? Are they not allowed to do that?
Also keep in mind that GW has set up protection for themselves for fluff that gets retconed or goes out of style for their IP.
"What do you mean there are no SM? Chapter Master Andrea of the Dark Knives is right there! Oooooh, you've been listening to Bob, haven't you."
While I won’t be that upset if GW does decide to make female space marines, it is a pretty big fluff departure so at the least I’d like some build up to it or a well thought out explanation, funnily enough like primaris marines. Deliverance Lost back in 2011 actually sets up the concept of “better marines” if not the characters responsible for the 40k version (Cawl). I’d want something similar to be honest, but that’s just cause I’m a big fluff nerd XD. Sure the fluff makes zero sense in some areas, but it’s the fluff we have and the fluff I love. Having said that, male Sororitas would basically be the 80s space beakies reborn with religion, and that is something I can approve.
If anything maybe we’d get Fabius’ new man/woman for chaos to start with? While in the Fabius series not quite as good as a normal marine, my understanding was that the book took place mid Imperium so that’s a lot of time for improvements. You could do either primaris or marine stats but it’d be a nice and organic way of introducing them, and then perhaps the Imperium gets desperate since chaos now has doubled its recruiting pool and turns to Cawl? I’m not sure if it’s the route I’d take but it does explain it.
Frankly I play marines, I love them, but I think I could do without new models for a bit though.
But I'll ask this.
What does having female space marines add?
So GW already put out various new marine kits so that window has been missed for probably another 6 or so years, unless they come out with a unit of specifically female marines that can't mix with other units because reasons.
Then there's also the recon. Like Primaris it's gonna upset people no matter what you do. Release female space marines and the people that love the lore will be pissed that they're either retconned in or forced in. And if you retcon in female space marines GW is basically saying "don't get too attached, your army could change at any given moment"
The lore has been the way it is for what 20+ years? Why not just have a separate faction of female super soldiers made a different way then astartes? Why not push for female models in other factions? I'd love to see a female necron if they even have them, don't think they'd look too different or how about female eldar guardians, that whole unisex Armour bit seems kinda lazy huh?
Most people don't care about a chunk of plastics dangly bits.
Asmodios wrote: It's funny that we have this thread pop up every week but I never read "why sisters of battle need to be changed to people of battle to incorporate everyone"
It is because SoB are almost forgotten fringe faction that have been ignored by GW since the 2nd edition. (This thankfully seems finally to be changing.) But if there were shitton of different SOB variant factions and majority of the fluff would be about them, while only marines were some 2nd edition metals, you bet there would be demands for Brother of Battle!
The absolute worse thing about the idea of FM space marines is that it would make 0 sense for the Imperium to ever make female SM. You would now be working with a smaller than average frame, with on average less aggressive mindset, On average less prone to violence and requiring more hormone therapy then already required, all to make an on average less effective soldier. For some reason, the Imperium that has 0 shortage of people is going to make the hard process of creating a super soldier even harder all for the sake of political correctness.
But perhaps female physiology is better suited for gaining memories by eating the flesh of the fallen enemies! (Because all this is totally based on real science, am I right?)
Once again SOB are getting an entire reboot... why are they getting it? because people love a strong female faction (yup even us guys). Do you know what we hate? poorly shoehorned diversity for the sake of diversity that makes zero sense and adds nothing.
Let's use another famous fantasy setting, you might have heard of it, its called star wars.
Previously SW fans loved their strong female characters like princess leia and the lead in rouge one but all of a sudden the whole SW community is sexist because they dont like Rey.
Do you know why they don't like Rey? it's not because of shes a woman its because she doesn't make any sense (no stating the force doesn't make sense is not a valid argument for her trash character).
People dont like her because with zero training she is the best jedi ever in existence because.... girl power? Yup shortly after ever picking up a lightsaber she wips the current evil bad that's been training his whole life.
Much like the above example a FM SM makes no sense.... yup i know they can eat their enemies to gain memories. Regardless, of some of the whacky stuff, a SM can do it makes no sense for them to ever use FM SM.
1. Smaller
2. Would require much more hormone therapy
3. Less aggressive
4. More emotional
5. Less physically impressive (in every category from endurance to resilience to injury)
Just because its fantasy doesn't make it so that things should happen for no apparent reason other than "we need more diversity" The fact is we already have an amazingly strong female faction that makes sense in the fluff and just needs a bit of love (that they are getting because people like me said they wanted it).
I wish they had made some female Custodes when the 40K version got released. There is not clear background reasons for them to not exist, and then people could have had female super-human warriors if they wanted, while not altering the Space Marines.
Here’s the thing, female marines no, enhanced sisters yes, why screw with something for no reason.
Another question I must ask, is why? What’s the point ? Loads of woman in 40k already, we’re about to get a reboot of sisters that will fly off the shelves as it oozes 40k and fits, so I’m curious as to what the point is of possibly damaging a brand (like marvel, Star Wars etc.) just for the sake of keeping a tiny minority of loud players silent
It doesn’t change the fluff if Cawl invents something new with the Primaris. That’s advancing the story.
They aren’t just the most common army, Marines are Warhammer 40K.
No I quote examples with the Space Wolves and compare it to Vikings. That’s an argument.
The fact you’ve assumed I am arguing from a position of encouraging diversity means you haven’t read my post.
Quite a few people weren't happy with how the Primaris were introduced either.
Also the Space Wolves Viking is.. Not so much an argument given that your hypothesis is "They won't change because they are vikings and vikings have the appeal of Warrior Maidens so nothing would really change about the core viking character". I mean sure, they might not change in that fashion. But it's a major change fluffwise as a Space Marine faction. And sure.. We could, but why though? Aside from "Space Marines are popular, add females through them"
Yeah im still booty bothered by cawl marry sue.
ONCE AGAIN, just because you don't like a powerful character, it doesn't make them a Mary Sue. Learn your terms before throwing them all around nillywilly.
Powerful is one thing,
Going against the emperors decree for screwing with genetics
Pulling grav tech outta his rear despite lore wise it being lost since the heresy
Fixing the defects in the gene seed
Making a super suit for guliman
Sat on all this tech and was a relative literally who and no one questioned it.
able to hide this all from the inquisition for 10k years despite them being able to know if a nurgling farts a system away
OTHER THEN THAT, yeah i guess he is not a marry sue.
Yeah and is Cawl LIKED despite doing those things that are considered flaws, typical for a Mary Sue? Is he potentially going too far and Roboute realizes that, but there's nothing he can do because he's too necessary, unlike Mary Sue's where they're still respected AND liked? Doesn't that actually make him dangerous in the long run, unlike Mary Sues?
The 10k years thing is only gonna be a problem for any new character introduced that's not a Space Marine. That's not a legit problem outside your own mind.
Cawl is a super dangerous necessity, causing a total ruckus and there's nothing anyone can do about it. That's a GOOD disruption of the status quo the Imperium has, because he isn't a Mary Sue.
I mean, already, I'm toying with the idea of "Female Marines" for my homebrew chapter. At least, the closest thing to Female Marines that the setting currently provides.
Due to *reasons* (I'm thinking some kind of geneseed defect, or simply just a need for mass recruitment, such as a recent loss, or Chapter doctrine), my Chapter recruits from the entire available stock. As in, any child of eligible Astartes induction age, male or female. Should they pass the necessary tests required (of which there is no difference between gender - all must complete the same tasks), then they will be inducted. Female aspirants are given hormone/gene therapy to make them effectively male enough for the various implants to function properly. After the various surgeries, implants and physiological changes, they're indistinguishable from their naturally born male brothers, and every member of the Chapter takes on new names upon induction, male or female.
I'd be down for female Marines. My personal preference is that they'd look basically the same (just a little difference in the helmetless peeps) because, you know, heavily modified post-humans probably all have the same body type, more or less.
I do agree with the others who are saying "We don't want lady Marines because Marines already have way too damn much focus on them!" I don't agree with those who are saying, effectively, they don't want cooties.
JNAProductions wrote: I'd be down for female Marines. My personal preference is that they'd look basically the same (just a little difference in the helmetless peeps) because, you know, heavily modified post-humans probably all have the same body type, more or less.
I do agree with the others who are saying "We don't want lady Marines because Marines already have way too damn much focus on them!" I don't agree with those who are saying, effectively, they don't want cooties.
None of this will be an issue once Sisters get their plastic surgery.
JNAProductions wrote: I'd be down for female Marines. My personal preference is that they'd look basically the same (just a little difference in the helmetless peeps) because, you know, heavily modified post-humans probably all have the same body type, more or less.
I do agree with the others who are saying "We don't want lady Marines because Marines already have way too damn much focus on them!" I don't agree with those who are saying, effectively, they don't want cooties.
None of this will be an issue once Sisters get their plastic surgery.
Eh... I don't see that.
One can HOPE that Sisters of Battle will be considered the equal to the Marines in the eyes of the fanbase and GW, but one should well-expect that to NOT be the case. GW loves their poster boys too much.
Let's use another famous fantasy setting, you might have heard of it, its called star wars.
Previously SW fans loved their strong female characters like princess leia and the lead in rouge one but all of a sudden the whole SW community is sexist because they dont like Rey.
Do you know why they don't like Rey? it's not because of shes a woman its because she doesn't make any sense (no stating the force doesn't make sense is not a valid argument for her trash character).
People dont like her because with zero training she is the best jedi ever in existence because.... girl power? Yup shortly after ever picking up a lightsaber she wips the current evil bad that's been training his whole life.
Damn, it is inevitable someone always brings this up if gender it mentioned, and imagine that it is a good example. It's called being a main character. Bloody Anakin destroyed a space station while he was toddler. That was way more ludicrous than anything Rey ever did. And Rey is of course much better character. So yes, people who are upset about Rey, are upset because a girl gets to do silly main character gak that is usually reserved for men. And Kylo is an obvious wimp, so beating him is not a huge achievement.
3. Less aggressive
4. More emotional
So which is it? Isn't aggressiveness an emotion? bs anyway, men are a more emotional, they're just culturally conditioned to not show emotions and bottle it up until they explode.
Stop playing ignorant with this trollbait trying to make it out like we're trying to keep girls out of this hobby. Like this topic has never appeared before and you're the first person in the world to ever entertain the idea.
Do you really want Dr Thunder Marines? As that is basically what you want. Slapping a pair of bolt-ons on top of power armour. Because doing that won't bring the ladies in; in fact it'll probably end up doing the opposite.
JNAProductions wrote: I'd be down for female Marines. My personal preference is that they'd look basically the same (just a little difference in the helmetless peeps) because, you know, heavily modified post-humans probably all have the same body type, more or less.
I do agree with the others who are saying "We don't want lady Marines because Marines already have way too damn much focus on them!" I don't agree with those who are saying, effectively, they don't want cooties.
None of this will be an issue once Sisters get their plastic surgery.
Eh... I don't see that.
One can HOPE that Sisters of Battle will be considered the equal to the Marines in the eyes of the fanbase and GW, but one should well-expect that to NOT be the case. GW loves their poster boys too much.
It all stems from model love. Marines are so focused on that we don't get complaints that Necrons dont have breast plates on their Overlords.
JNAProductions wrote: I'd be down for female Marines. My personal preference is that they'd look basically the same (just a little difference in the helmetless peeps) because, you know, heavily modified post-humans probably all have the same body type, more or less.
I do agree with the others who are saying "We don't want lady Marines because Marines already have way too damn much focus on them!" I don't agree with those who are saying, effectively, they don't want cooties.
None of this will be an issue once Sisters get their plastic surgery.
It won’t matter, a certain... demographic shall we say, will never shut up about female marines, we all know who I’m talking about
JNAProductions wrote: I'd be down for female Marines. My personal preference is that they'd look basically the same (just a little difference in the helmetless peeps) because, you know, heavily modified post-humans probably all have the same body type, more or less.
I do agree with the others who are saying "We don't want lady Marines because Marines already have way too damn much focus on them!" I don't agree with those who are saying, effectively, they don't want cooties.
None of this will be an issue once Sisters get their plastic surgery.
Eh... I don't see that.
One can HOPE that Sisters of Battle will be considered the equal to the Marines in the eyes of the fanbase and GW, but one should well-expect that to NOT be the case. GW loves their poster boys too much.
It all stems from model love. Marines are so focused on that we don't get complaints that Necrons dont have breast plates on their Overlords.
Its the blizzard effect. The only good characters in the warcraft lore are the ones that blizzards forgets about/ does not write about. The less your dudes are talked about the better it is for you in the long run.
Stop playing ignorant with this trollbait trying to make it out like we're trying to keep girls out of this hobby. Like this topic has never appeared before and you're the first person in the world to ever entertain the idea.
Do you really want Dr Thunder Marines? As that is basically what you want. Slapping a pair of bolt-ons on top of power armour. Because doing that won't bring the ladies in; in fact it'll probably end up doing the opposite.
Haha, my partner genuinely thinks the idea is stupid while I actually kinda like the idea of female space marines like the AoS marines. I mean the lore is so mishmashed that there is countless arguments for and against.... but really the answer is do you want or don't want them? The why is normally because you do or don't care/ do or don't find them cool.
But as you say I feel like these topics are made to gather 'evidence' so people can write stories about how boyz are misogynistic and they sit in their basement all day touching themselves to anime girls.
As someone who has spent much of his life trying desperately to show that this dehumanising image is not true - just because a dude does or doesn’t want a plastic women model or a pixel women model does not make him hate a gender as a whole - I get so angry when in recent years when they use this image as an excuse to say people don't deserve a debate. I honestly want female space marines eventually but I'm more than happy to hear from fellow humans why they do not want them.
So... here is the entire topic right now.
Why do we need female space marine?
"Because I want them and I think it would be cool. I do not want them more because I like women more, I do not want them more because I want to fight for equal rights, I want them more because the idea of humans as a whole fighting side by side is super mega tanks armour is cool and i identify with that. I want what i want because I'm human and selfish like all humans." -avarage gamer.
Why do we not need female space marines?
"I don't want to buy the models because I don't think they're cool. I don't hate women, I do not want to ruin other peoples fun or expel people from the game. I just like my dude bros in battle tank mega armour fighting side by side with oil and enemy blood greasing their rusted six packs of glory! I mean would you want your favourite thing to be delayed so someone else could get something they want? No! I'm a human and I am selfish! Like all humans!"
- avarage gamer.
However, everything I just said will be viewed under a light and perspective I couldn't possibly understand and I will be part of the "evidence" for why 40k players are misogynistic. So what do I know...I could debate until the day I die but people have already chosen sides for their own reasons and I respect those reasons. I'm out now.
Let's use another famous fantasy setting, you might have heard of it, its called star wars.
Previously SW fans loved their strong female characters like princess leia and the lead in rouge one but all of a sudden the whole SW community is sexist because they dont like Rey.
Do you know why they don't like Rey? it's not because of shes a woman its because she doesn't make any sense (no stating the force doesn't make sense is not a valid argument for her trash character).
People dont like her because with zero training she is the best jedi ever in existence because.... girl power? Yup shortly after ever picking up a lightsaber she wips the current evil bad that's been training his whole life.
Damn, it is inevitable someone always brings this up if gender it mentioned, and imagine that it is a good example. It's called being a main character. Bloody Anakin destroyed a space station while he was toddler. That was way more ludicrous than anything Rey ever did. And Rey is of course much better character. So yes, people who are upset about Rey, are upset because a girl gets to do silly main character gak that is usually reserved for men. And Kylo is an obvious wimp, so beating him is not a huge achievement.
3. Less aggressive
4. More emotional
So which is it? Isn't aggressiveness an emotion? bs anyway, men are a more emotional, they're just culturally conditioned to not show emotions and bottle it up until they explode.
Aggressiveness is a single emotion that males demonstrate in much larger proportion to females. Females have more empathy, compassion, and emotions that can be generally described as caring. Its why men usually excel in positions where you must be cut off emotionally such as being a soldier while women dominate fields such as child rearing.
Everyone universally agrees the prequels were bad... but you once again deflected without actually analyzing what was said. Diversity for the sake of diversity ends with shallow trash story lines that typically make no sense because they are done simply out of political pressure. Its happened in Star Wars with disastrous consequences and now you have people parroting it for 40k. The fact is once again we already have SOB and SOS that are amazing all female fighting forces. There is no reason to retcon the entire SM fluff with changes that dont make sense just to have a female SM that adds nothing to the lore at all. Instead they should focus on things like
1. More SOB (already in the works)
2. More female IG models (i still have my old female commissar)
There is no need to make the SM fluff actively worse and add more time to a part of the production line that already gets the lion share of the time
Crimson wrote:men are a more emotional, they're just culturally conditioned to not show emotions and bottle it up until they explode.
Don't know about more emotional, but you're absolutely not wrong about bottling up. Anyone who says "women are more emotional/men aren't emotional" is ignoring the elephant in the room that is systemic conditioning of men to shut off their emotional responses. It's not a blanket thing, things rarely are, but it would be remiss of me to say that men are not conditioned to be less emotional.
While 40K is first and foremost a tabletop miniatures game, I believe the fluff/lore, etc. has been so well established (in varying degrees of quality) that it is a genuine product in and of itself, a genuine IP. To me, an IP should be beholden to its creators and no one else. It saddens me to see an IP subject to change to either pander to social pressures or to sales demographics.
Obviously this happens all the time, but I do find it sad. An IP should be the domain of its creators regardless of what the IP is. Even if it's offensive, 'unfair', etc. An IP creator should never ever feel required to justify why they created something the way they felt like creating it. An IP should stand on its merits, and the consumers can either take it or leave it - they should never feel entitled to change or impact the IP to suit themselves or their interests.
Sadly we live in the times we live in, where companies will cater to every spare percentage point they can manage to occupy in the market, and that often means diluting a product with unnecessary changes to chase that last sale. We see it in movies, film adaptations of novels, re-makes of classic films, etc. For better or for worse I'm always more interested in the unfiltered exact IP as intended by its original creator.
If you're going to make something fantastic, or something truly awful, I want to see what you wanted to make...not what people wanted you to make.
But what if the IP creators change their minds? Are they not allowed to do that?
Where did I state that? Or are you just asking sarcastically because it's the internet and you want to be cool?
Aggressiveness is a single emotion that males demonstrate in much larger proportion to females. Females have more empathy, compassion, and emotions that can be generally described as caring. Its why men usually excel in positions where you must be cut off emotionally such as being a soldier while women dominate fields such as child rearing.
Most of this is due cultural conditioning.
Everyone universally agrees the prequels were bad... but you once again deflected without actually analyzing what was said. Diversity for the sake of diversity ends with shallow trash story lines that typically make no sense because they are done simply out of political pressure. Its happened in Star Wars with disastrous consequences and now you have people parroting it for 40k.
So the prequels just happened to be bad movies, but if a movie with a female lead is a bad movie, it is because forced diversity? I smell a double standard here. Not that I agree that the Disney SW films are bad movies, worse than the original trilogy sure, but miles better than Lucas's prequel trash. And of course you're not even with touching distance of reality if you think these films which happen to be some of the most successful films in the history are somehow disastrous.
The fact is once again we already have SOB and SOS that are amazing all female fighting forces. There is no reason to retcon the entire SM fluff with changes that dont make sense just to have a female SM that adds nothing to the lore at all.
Yet Primaris happened...
Instead they should focus on things like
1. More SOB (already in the works)
2. More female IG models (i still have my old female commissar)
I agree that those things should be the priority and are far more important than female marines. But it is not an either-or situation.
There is no need to make the SM fluff actively worse and add more time to a part of the production line that already gets the lion share of the time
That it would make the fluff worse is just you personal opinion. Which is a perfectly fine reason to not want something, but other people have different preferences.
Female Space Marines wouldn't make much sense due to physiology of a geneseed and if implemented into a woman it would physically change them to a degree they would no longer be human or female.
So it wouldn't make sense for the space marines who were female to retain their sexuality.
So no. There wouldn't be a difference and I for one don't think we need that. But maybe a new female / male humongous faction?
Where did I state that? Or are you just asking sarcastically because it's the internet and you want to be cool?
I am cool. But my point was that if they change something how do you know that it was done in order to appease some group or for financial gain, rather than the content makers just thinking that it was a good change for purely creative reasons?
Aggressiveness is a single emotion that males demonstrate in much larger proportion to females. Females have more empathy, compassion, and emotions that can be generally described as caring. Its why men usually excel in positions where you must be cut off emotionally such as being a soldier while women dominate fields such as child rearing.
Most of this is due cultural conditioning.
Actually, no. Testosterone plays a considerable part in aggression; high testosterone tends to lead to more frequent displays of aggression in animals. Its why when you get a pet its advisable to neuter it, especially a large dog, otherwise all that testosterone will make it attack someone someday.
That's why historically soldiers have been men; higher levels of testosterone = more muscle mass = more likely to cave some poor bloke's head in with a rock (and better at it due to the aforementioned muscle mass) if you order him to. Not everything is due to cultural conditioning.
What I find amusing about these topics is that IF the lore was changed an female marines could be a thing, the only thing it would change would be some names, and that occasionally marines would should SISTER instead of BROTHER.
Marines are harvested as children at ideally prepubescence, Generally traits of brutality and blood thirstiness of character are considered desirable, they are recruited in very large numbers because the survival rate of these children is so low.
During the process they are essentially speed grown to adult + frames, receiving massive amounts of growth inducing drugs and hormones, their bones fuse and they get extra organs.
This produces 7-8 foot tall slabs of muscle which are almost as wide as they are tall, with little to no body fat.
If a girl were to go through this procedure and survive, she would end up looking just like every other marine does, she would be barely recognisable as female, her breasts would be basically none existent (look at the general trend in female body builders/athletes and then multiply this by 20ish), and any small difference in the natural width of her hips would be much less pronounced, due to the masses of testosterone that were pumped through her when she would have been developing said feminine features, and the masses and masses of muscle put on her, and she would inherit many of the facial features of her primarch (don't ask me why, but apparently that tends to happen to marines).
My thoughts on the topic (not that they matter any more than anyone elses) are:
1. Female marines would look and act in almost the exact same way as their male counterparts, so why do people want this so badly?
2. Wanting someone you can relate to, from the archetype of a metahuman killing machine is messed up.
3. People that are against the idea seem to be, against the idea of changing something they like. they like it, and to have it changed, not only endangers their liking of it, but it cheapens their perception of it, because it becomes inherently more mutable, and therefore less reliable. I can understand this feeling, its the same reason why primaris marines existence angers me (it cheapens current marines, by taking part of their established character away from them).
If they ever go back on saying no female space marines I would want more.
I would want them to change more of the fluff at this point. No longer just 1,000 marine chapters, make them 50,000 with 10,000 marines in each one. No more gakky techmarine dual loyalty gak, just put damn Admech Techpriests in the Space Marine ranks. The warp being an all corrupting influence? Yea get rid of that, no thanks I hear enough gak about how Chaos will eventually win too much without having to hear that my fething baloney sandwich mutated into a Slaneeshi monstrosity because my deployment had me next to a guy who knew a guy that saw a daemon.
Tyranids being inumerable? No thanks we already know GW is so bad at numbers 100 million may be inumerable because they can't count that high except if its comes to revenue. The Imperium being on the brink all the time? Just break it up already, who gives a gak it's already written as humanity vs. the Universe anyway just make them all worship the Big E.
You want to rewrite the one bit of fluff for... "reasons"; let us rewrite all the gak that makes no sense at this point.
Quickjager wrote: If they ever go back on saying no female space marines I would want more.
I would want them to change more of the fluff at this point. No longer just 1,000 marine chapters, make them 50,000 with 10,000 marines in each one. No more gakky techmarine dual loyalty gak, just put damn Admech Techpriests in the Space Marine ranks. The warp being an all corrupting influence? Yea get rid of that, no thanks I hear enough gak about how Chaos will eventually win too much without having to hear that my fething baloney sandwich mutated into a Slaneeshi monstrosity because my deployment had me next to a guy who knew a guy that saw a daemon.
Tyranids being inumerable? No thanks we already know GW is so bad at numbers 100 million may be inumerable because they can't count that high except if its comes to revenue. The Imperium being on the brink all the time? Just break it up already, who gives a gak it's already written as humanity vs. the Universe anyway just make them all worship the Big E.
You want to rewrite the one bit of fluff for... "reasons"; let us rewrite all the gak that makes no sense at this point.
Actually think about it. it would make sense for space marines to be a larger force, but I do like their dual loyalities for techmarines. But having admech tech priests (like the grey knights have) would be a great idea to help space marines with gear.
But most of this post doesn't seem related to female space marines.
Overall I think we need more sub factions for the imperium. Sorta like the stormcast eternals.
Aggressiveness is a single emotion that males demonstrate in much larger proportion to females. Females have more empathy, compassion, and emotions that can be generally described as caring. Its why men usually excel in positions where you must be cut off emotionally such as being a soldier while women dominate fields such as child rearing.
Most of this is due cultural conditioning.
Actually, no. Testosterone plays a considerable part in aggression; high testosterone tends to lead to more frequent displays of aggression in animals.
Its why when you get a pet its advisable to neuter it, especially a large dog, otherwise all that testosterone will make it attack someone someday.
Sorry, I meant those other emotions mentioned. (Hence 'most'. Hormones certainly play some part.)
I think it might be worthwhile to focus more on chapter serfs. Supposedly they are quite important for a space marine chapter, as they keep everything running whilst the marines pray and fight. So its pretty odd to me that they are hardly mentioned. Whilst its definitively stated in the background that marines could only be male, there is no such restriction for chapter serfs.
Also, if chapter serfs were allowed to be deployed, that would help explain how such a pitiful number of marines could be effective in a large scale engagement; there's only a few marines, but they are supported by a lot more serfs, who are considerably well armed, being associated with the marines and all.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I think it might be worthwhile to focus more on chapter serfs. Supposedly they are quite important for a space marine chapter, as they keep everything running whilst the marines pray and fight. Whilst its definitively stated in the background that marines could only be male, there is no such restriction for chapter serfs.
Also, if chapter serfs were allowed to be deployed, that would help explain how such a pitiful number of marines could be effective in a large scale engagement; there's only a few marines, but they are supported by a lot more serfs, who are considerably well armed, being associated with the marines and all.
So instead of cultists,, serfs? that'd be cool just a huge amount of military assets for the space marines. It would make sense and then increasing the serf count to hundreds of millions that are loyal to the chapter.
Aggressiveness is a single emotion that males demonstrate in much larger proportion to females. Females have more empathy, compassion, and emotions that can be generally described as caring. Its why men usually excel in positions where you must be cut off emotionally such as being a soldier while women dominate fields such as child rearing.
Most of this is due cultural conditioning.
Everyone universally agrees the prequels were bad... but you once again deflected without actually analyzing what was said. Diversity for the sake of diversity ends with shallow trash story lines that typically make no sense because they are done simply out of political pressure. Its happened in Star Wars with disastrous consequences and now you have people parroting it for 40k.
So the prequels just happened to be bad movies, but if a movie with a female lead is a bad movie, it is because forced diversity? I smell a double standard here. Not that I agree that the Disney SW films are bad movies, worse than the original trilogy sure, but miles better than Lucas's prequel trash. And of course you're not even with touching distance of reality if you think these films which happen to be some of the most successful films in the history are somehow disastrous.
The fact is once again we already have SOB and SOS that are amazing all female fighting forces. There is no reason to retcon the entire SM fluff with changes that dont make sense just to have a female SM that adds nothing to the lore at all.
Yet Primaris happened...
Instead they should focus on things like
1. More SOB (already in the works)
2. More female IG models (i still have my old female commissar)
I agree that those things should be the priority and are far more important than female marines. But it is not an either-or situation.
There is no need to make the SM fluff actively worse and add more time to a part of the production line that already gets the lion share of the time
That it would make the fluff worse is just you personal opinion. Which is a perfectly fine reason to not want something, but other people have different preferences.
1. No its because males have much more testosterone as well as brains developed in a way that make men on average more aggressive and prone to violence. Men are not larger and more agressive because society tells them to grow big and fight
2. No, the prequels were terrible because of awful acting (female and male) and truly bad character development all around. It's hard to nail down exactly what made those movies bad because there is just so much that made them bad. The new movies have 2 very simple and easily identifiable reasons why 1. A complete disregard for physics (arching Laser in space and opening bomb doors to drop bombs) 2. Diversity for the sake of diversity A. Rye defeating the strongest jedi in the galazy with no training B. Leia suddenly being able to superman through space despite never using a force power for the dozens of situations she could have in past movies C. tons of more examples like these two but you get the point
3. Primarus happened to up the scale of marines thats
4. It isnt an "either or" its a "fits and doesn't fit". More female guard makes sense from a fluff and business standpoint. More SOB makes sense from a fluff and business standpoint. Female SM doesn't make sense fluff-wise. It would make it necessary to retcon the entire lore of 40kSM as well as having females in SM for no reason. Without completely overhauling what a SM is a theoretical female SM would look identical to a male SM thus unless you wanted to add over sexualized SM it doesnt even make sense from a buisness standpoint. Which if GW makes over sexualized SM then im going to have to sort through the hundreds of dakka posts every week complaining about boob plates on SM
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I think it might be worthwhile to focus more on chapter serfs. Supposedly they are quite important for a space marine chapter, as they keep everything running whilst the marines pray and fight. Whilst its definitively stated in the background that marines could only be male, there is no such restriction for chapter serfs.
Also, if chapter serfs were allowed to be deployed, that would help explain how such a pitiful number of marines could be effective in a large scale engagement; there's only a few marines, but they are supported by a lot more serfs, who are considerably well armed, being associated with the marines and all.
So instead of cultists,, serfs? that'd be cool just a huge amount of military assets for the space marines. It would make sense and then increasing the serf count to hundreds of millions that are loyal to the chapter.
In a way, yes. Serfs would be an interesting counterpart to cultists, as that would play into the concept of traitor marines being the loyalist marines' antithesis. Not sure what they would be equipped with though. Carapace and boltguns seem like a logical choice fluff wise, but not sure how it would work game wise. Or maybe they would have the same equipment as scions. Definitely not multilasers though.
though going through the whole processes muscle building constant unending training and hormones and chems used to super size marines, they would probably ended up losing their breasts and growing a beard.
They are in female power armor with boob armor that gets the exact same 3+ save as power armor. Instead of genetic enhancements they have super faith, they are organized about the same - 5-10 man squads.
They use basically the same vehicals (with some different weapons). Not even all space marine chapters have the same organization or mentality. Some are vampires, some are ware-wolves, sisters are just space marine space nuns.
So, you mean that their fluff is very different, their rules are slightly different, their models are massively different.
Yeah, they are not the same.
lolman1c wrote: Honestly, I say this a lot, why would you even want female space marines when Sisters of Battle exist?
Do you want some potential reasons? I got a few potential reasons.
1) You love vikings and wolves and you want female models in your army. So you want female space wolves, not sisters of battle, of course.
2) You love vampires and you want female models in your army. So you want female blood angels, not sisters of battle, of course.
3) You love bionics and you want female models in your army. So you want female iron hands, not sisters of battle, of course.
4) You love Mongols and you want female models in your army. So you want female white scars, not sisters of battle, of course.
I could go on and on about this.
X) You love [themes and lore of chapter X] and you want female models in your army. So you want female [chapter X], not sisters of battle, of course.
That's what I meant when I say marines are a blank canvas faction. Sisters aren't, and can't easily be made into one.
Everyone comparing Sisters of Battle to Space Marines in general is 100% wrong, didn't think this through, and should be comparing them with Dark Angel instead. Let's keep Dark Angels the all-male space monks and Sisters the all-female space nuns, and have mix-gendered armies of viking, vampire and mongols.
Also this should come alongside with more female IG models, not instead of, but that goes without saying.
They are in female power armor with boob armor that gets the exact same 3+ save as power armor. Instead of genetic enhancements they have super faith, they are organized about the same - 5-10 man squads.
They use basically the same vehicals (with some different weapons). Not even all space marine chapters have the same organization or mentality. Some are vampires, some are ware-wolves, sisters are just space marine space nuns.
So, you mean that their fluff is very different, their rules are slightly different, their models are massively different.
Yeah, they are not the same.
lolman1c wrote: Honestly, I say this a lot, why would you even want female space marines when Sisters of Battle exist?
Do you want some potential reasons? I got a few potential reasons.
1) You love vikings and wolves and you want female models in your army. So you want female space wolves, not sisters of battle, of course.
2) You love vampires and you want female models in your army. So you want female blood angels, not sisters of battle, of course.
3) You love bionics and you want female models in your army. So you want female iron hands, not sisters of battle, of course.
4) You love Mongols and you want female models in your army. So you want female white scars, not sisters of battle, of course.
I could go on and on about this.
X) You love [themes and lore of chapter X] and you want female models in your army. So you want female [chapter X], not sisters of battle, of course.
That's what I meant when I say marines are a blank canvas faction. Sisters aren't, and can't easily be made into one.
Everyone comparing Sisters of Battle to Space Marines in general is 100% wrong, didn't think this through, and should be comparing them with Dark Angel instead. Let's keep Dark Angels the all-male space monks and Sisters the all-female space nuns, and have mix-gendered armies of viking, vampire and mongols.
Also this should come alongside with more female IG models, not instead of, but that goes without saying.
1) A female that goes through the process to become a SW is going to look exactly like a SW 2) A Female that goes through the process to be a BA is going to look exactly like a BA 3) A Female that goes through the process to be a WS is going to look exactly like a WS
What you want is over sexualized versions of SM chapters which would not fit the fluff of what a SM is and how it is created. IF you take a pre-pubescent girl, pump her full of testosterone and do bone grafting to make her a 7 foot tall superhuman she is going to look identical to the male SM. FFS their faces even change to resemble their primarchs
1. No its because males have much more testosterone as well as brains developed in a way that make men on average more aggressive and prone to violence. Men are not larger and more agressive because society tells them to grow big and fight
And I did not suggest anything of the sort. This was about you claiming that women are more emotional, which is bs.
2. No, the prequels were terrible because of awful acting (female and male) and truly bad character development all around. It's hard to nail down exactly what made those movies bad because there is just so much that made them bad. The new movies have 2 very simple and easily identifiable reasons why 1. A complete disregard for physics (arching Laser in space and opening bomb doors to drop bombs)
Sure.
2. Diversity for the sake of diversity A. Rye defeating the strongest jedi in the galazy with no training B.
Said 'strongest jedi' (I mean, I guess it technically counts if you're the only jedi..) newer had any proper lightsabre training either, and was old and out of practice.
Leia suddenly being able to superman through space despite never using a force power for the dozens of situations she could have in past movies C.
In the past movies she didn't even know she was force sensitive. She has obviously learned since then. Also, it is probably relatively easy to fly in zero G, even a minimal amount of power will move you.
tons of more examples like these two but you get the point
Oh, I do get your 'point'... If there are powerful female characters involved, any flaw, real or imaginary, is attributed to that.
3. Primarus happened to up the scale of marines thats
And added several new organs. And fixed some gene flaws. But who's counting.
4. It isnt an "either or" its a "fits and doesn't fit". More female guard makes sense from a fluff and business standpoint. More SOB makes sense from a fluff and business standpoint. Female SM doesn't make sense fluff-wise. It would make it necessary to retcon the entire lore of 40kSM as well as having females in SM for no reason.
Cawl found a way to make the process to work on females. In fact, the plans for it were already in Emperor's notes, but he got stabbed by Horus before he could finidh that part of the work. Done. Certainly way less stupid that many other things that have happened in the fluff recently.
Without completely overhauling what a SM is a theoretical female SM would look identical to a male SM thus unless you wanted to add over sexualized SM it doesnt even make sense from a buisness standpoint. Which if GW makes over sexualized SM then im going to have to sort through the hundreds of dakka posts every week complaining about boob plates on SM
Sure, no boobplate. Merely slightly more feminine heads, that's all.
"Honestly, I say this a lot, why would you even want female space marines when Sisters of Battle exist? They're seriously awesome... and no joke. When the new models come out I will buy buying them (depending on price) because I love the idea of such strong soldiers who don't need all that marine cheating stuff".
Which was a joke saying that marines are lame steroid abusers with all the flavours of a Saturday morning cartoon character, while sisters are awesome. I wasn't comparing the two by saying they were similar. I was saying one is clearly cooler.
Like orks.. why would you even be any race in 40k if Orks exist? They're perfect!
You then go and ignore everything I say afterwards about how I actually like the idea of female space marines.
But as I say... I couldn't care less if a dying Gretchin last hope was to see a female space marine model.. as long as it doesn't take any time or effort away from Orks getting new models I would happily accept it. But if it does then that Dying Grot can suck it!
Quickjager wrote: If they ever go back on saying no female space marines I would want more.
I would want them to change more of the fluff at this point. No longer just 1,000 marine chapters, make them 50,000 with 10,000 marines in each one. No more gakky techmarine dual loyalty gak, just put damn Admech Techpriests in the Space Marine ranks. The warp being an all corrupting influence? Yea get rid of that, no thanks I hear enough gak about how Chaos will eventually win too much without having to hear that my fething baloney sandwich mutated into a Slaneeshi monstrosity because my deployment had me next to a guy who knew a guy that saw a daemon.
Tyranids being inumerable? No thanks we already know GW is so bad at numbers 100 million may be inumerable because they can't count that high except if its comes to revenue. The Imperium being on the brink all the time? Just break it up already, who gives a gak it's already written as humanity vs. the Universe anyway just make them all worship the Big E.
You want to rewrite the one bit of fluff for... "reasons"; let us rewrite all the gak that makes no sense at this point.
Damn straight. Sci fi and fantasy need groundrules, you can't just handwave it and go "well it's fantasy, it's all made up!" If we go down this route then why did the Hobbits walk to Mordor- why didn't Frodo just click his heels 3 times, say "YOLO Swaggins!" and teleport to Mount Doom? It's fantasy! Right? Anything goes!
Why didn't Ned Stark just jump up from the executioner's block and say "Joke's on you. My neck's made of titanium!" Fantasy! Amirite?
So with 40k let's open the floodgates- if not just female marines, why not Ork marines? Eldar marines? Tau marines? Necron marines? Marine marines- oh wait, that last one already exists.
I want them to seriously make Snottlings the creators of Orks. I say screw the Old ones... or the Brian boyz... go back to the orginal plan when Snottlings were smart butwere becoming dumb!
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I think it might be worthwhile to focus more on chapter serfs. Supposedly they are quite important for a space marine chapter, as they keep everything running whilst the marines pray and fight. So its pretty odd to me that they are hardly mentioned.
Whilst its definitively stated in the background that marines could only be male, there is no such restriction for chapter serfs.
Also, if chapter serfs were allowed to be deployed, that would help explain how such a pitiful number of marines could be effective in a large scale engagement; there's only a few marines, but they are supported by a lot more serfs, who are considerably well armed, being associated with the marines and all.
I'm pretty sure Space Wolves have female serfs. They certainly deserve more fluff space.
Women are workers and they can be space marines, can be killed in war just like all workers.
Sisters of battle and all-female or integrated guard regiments, on the other hand, are still human, and they’re still subject to the material conditions of the Imperium, so they have to be sex segregated. The wealthy hierarchies in the imperium perpetuate and benefit from sexism, because they can push the cost of maintaining the men they employ onto unpaid domestic work by women, and because by keeping women on the fringes or the market they can suppress wages paid to men, constantly threatening to let women in to compete with the existing workers. In these circumstances all-female units are a corrective to that effect.
Where did I state that? Or are you just asking sarcastically because it's the internet and you want to be cool?
I am cool. But my point was that if they change something how do you know that it was done in order to appease some group or for financial gain, rather than the content makers just thinking that it was a good change for purely creative reasons?
Crimson is very cool, except that he is has lieutenants. Now lieutenants, that is crappy background and it was nice they got rid of them for six editions.
Can people please stop using "science" to try to try to justify why only men can become SM. A SM becomes one because of mcguffins stuffed in their body causing massive changes to the body beyond just getting bigger and stronger (spitting acid). It's like trying to say only a man can become a classical werewolf, whether the manwolf version or turning into an actual wolf. Getting bit by a radioactive spider will likely only send someone to an ER, depending on the type of spider. You will only get to climb walls and lift 10 tons if you are the character in a fictional world that allows it.
Asmodios wrote: 1) A female that goes through the process to become a SW is going to look exactly like a SW
It's fiction so a woman who goes through the process to become a Space Wolf is going to look exactly… like the person who wrote the fiction intend her to look like. And honestly, if it was me writing the fiction, it would mean different heads, and the rest is the same armor so you don't have any idea if they look different or not. Which, you know, is likely how they would do it, because it is exactly how they did female Tau, and it was awesome. Also this would open for some shieldmaiden/valkyries inspired all-female unit with storm and spears, wouldn't that be cool?
Asmodios wrote: 2) A Female that goes through the process to be a BA is going to look exactly like a BA
It's fiction so a woman who goes through the process to become a Blood Angel is going to look exactly… like the person who wrote the fiction intend her to look like. And honestly, if it was me writing the fiction, it would mean different heads, and the rest is the same armor so you don't have any idea if they look different or not. Which, you know, is likely how they would do it, because it is exactly how they did female Tau, and it was awesome.
Asmodios wrote: 3) A Female that goes through the process to be a WS is going to look exactly like a WS
It's fiction so a woman who goes through the process to become a White Scar is going to look exactly… like the person who wrote the fiction intend her to look like. And honestly, if it was me writing the fiction, it would mean different heads, and the rest is the same armor so you don't have any idea if they look different or not. Which, you know, is likely how they would do it, because it is exactly how they did female Tau, and it was awesome.
Asmodios wrote: What you want is over sexualized versions of SM chapters
1. No its because males have much more testosterone as well as brains developed in a way that make men on average more aggressive and prone to violence. Men are not larger and more agressive because society tells them to grow big and fight
And I did not suggest anything of the sort. This was about you claiming that women are more emotional, which is bs.
2. No, the prequels were terrible because of awful acting (female and male) and truly bad character development all around. It's hard to nail down exactly what made those movies bad because there is just so much that made them bad. The new movies have 2 very simple and easily identifiable reasons why 1. A complete disregard for physics (arching Laser in space and opening bomb doors to drop bombs)
Sure.
2. Diversity for the sake of diversity A. Rye defeating the strongest jedi in the galazy with no training B.
Said 'strongest jedi' (I mean, I guess it technically counts if you're the only jedi..) newer had any proper lightsabre training either, and was old and out of practice.
Leia suddenly being able to superman through space despite never using a force power for the dozens of situations she could have in past movies C.
In the past movies she didn't even know she was force sensitive. She has obviously learned since then. Also, it is probably relatively easy to fly in zero G, even a minimal amount of power will move you.
tons of more examples like these two but you get the point
Oh, I do get your 'point'... If there are powerful female characters involved, any flaw, real or imaginary, is attributed to that.
3. Primarus happened to up the scale of marines thats
And added several new organs. And fixed some gene flaws. But who's counting.
4. It isnt an "either or" its a "fits and doesn't fit". More female guard makes sense from a fluff and business standpoint. More SOB makes sense from a fluff and business standpoint. Female SM doesn't make sense fluff-wise. It would make it necessary to retcon the entire lore of 40kSM as well as having females in SM for no reason.
Cawl found a way to make the process to work on females. In fact, the plans for it were already in Emperor's notes, but he got stabbed by Horus before he could finidh that part of the work. Done. Certainly way less stupid that many other things that have happened in the fluff recently.
Without completely overhauling what a SM is a theoretical female SM would look identical to a male SM thus unless you wanted to add over sexualized SM it doesnt even make sense from a buisness standpoint. Which if GW makes over sexualized SM then im going to have to sort through the hundreds of dakka posts every week complaining about boob plates on SM
Sure, no boobplate. Merely slightly more feminine heads, that's all.
No it's not "any small flaw" with the female character. It's them being able to do things that the background suggests they shouldn't because of... Girl power and stuff. For example the girl from rouge one was a badd . She also had a backstory that explained everything she was able to do. Leia, on the other hand, had dozens of dire situations where she might have died and could have used force powers but all of a sudden boom. Rey picks up a lightsaber and beats a guy that's been training since birth because.... Reasons.
Yes thats the back story for primarus. The were introduced to increase the scale of SM models
So you admit that a head swap is all you would need. And anyone could just headswap if they wanted to get said effect. But nope we should change 20 years of established lore to add women "when we already have an established woman faction" because feminist 40k comes and raids dakka once a weak. Also, we should spend more time doing this switch and remove time that could be added to simply making more SOB and female guardsman
lolman1c wrote: Please learn to qoute me in context.
I said:
"Honestly, I say this a lot, why would you even want female space marines when Sisters of Battle exist? They're seriously awesome... and no joke. When the new models come out I will buy buying them (depending on price) because I love the idea of such strong soldiers who don't need all that marine cheating stuff".
Which was a joke saying that marines are lame steroid abusers with all the flavours of a Saturday morning cartoon character, while sisters are awesome. I wasn't comparing the two by saying they were similar. I was saying one is clearly cooler.
I find Sisters cooler too, but a lot of people seriously argue in this thread that female marines are unneeded because Sisters of Battle replace them just fine. I wanted to show it wasn't the case.
Asmodios wrote: 1) A female that goes through the process to become a SW is going to look exactly like a SW
It's fiction so a woman who goes through the process to become a Space Wolf is going to look exactly… like the person who wrote the fiction intend her to look like. And honestly, if it was me writing the fiction, it would mean different heads, and the rest is the same armor so you don't have any idea if they look different or not. Which, you know, is likely how they would do it, because it is exactly how they did female Tau, and it was awesome. Also this would open for some shieldmaiden/valkyries inspired all-female unit with storm and spears, wouldn't that be cool?
Asmodios wrote: 2) A Female that goes through the process to be a BA is going to look exactly like a BA
It's fiction so a woman who goes through the process to become a Blood Angel is going to look exactly… like the person who wrote the fiction intend her to look like. And honestly, if it was me writing the fiction, it would mean different heads, and the rest is the same armor so you don't have any idea if they look different or not. Which, you know, is likely how they would do it, because it is exactly how they did female Tau, and it was awesome.
Asmodios wrote: 3) A Female that goes through the process to be a WS is going to look exactly like a WS
It's fiction so a woman who goes through the process to become a White Scar is going to look exactly… like the person who wrote the fiction intend her to look like. And honestly, if it was me writing the fiction, it would mean different heads, and the rest is the same armor so you don't have any idea if they look different or not. Which, you know, is likely how they would do it, because it is exactly how they did female Tau, and it was awesome.
Asmodios wrote: What you want is over sexualized versions of SM chapters
How is this over-sexualized?
Spoiler:
So you want GW to release FM space mariens that are really just a head swap that there are already 100s of heads to choose from. Ad no the lore dictates what a person going through that process is going to look like. You would need complete rewriting of the lore and completely change the process of making a SM so it would make sense that female characteristics would for some reason develop under those conditions.
So in essence lets rewrite 20 years of lore for what amounts to a head swap all in a move that wont make GW any more money.
In a game world where half the appeal is designing your own characters for wish fulfillment power fantasy, we're egregiously past the point where there's any real justification for power armored super humans being a boys only club. Half the established power armored super humans are basically a result of talented hobbists inserting their self image on the original blank canvas that is marines. Saying that its okay for marines to be wolves, or vampires, or whatever but not girls is just a decades old mindset at this point.
Why should there be fem marines? There's plenty of female representation in wh40k (SoS, SoB, chaos daemons, eldar, dark eldar, etc.). Will female space marines attract more females to 40k? i think not because they would be here already if they were interested.
Space marines are a brotherhood, a boys club (made out of the emperor --> primarchs --> space marines), it's written in the holy fluff why change it for a fringe of a fringe group.
Caving in to (emotional) blackmail is never good. What prevents all those 1000s upon 1000s of females (ahem.) that would be interested in fem marines to build their marines and say, this is susan and that is betty? do they want boobplates? because that is also a no-no according to feminism.
female marines are unnesscary, what is nesscary is to have more female representation in the factions that allow it, female guardsmen, plastic sisters etc.
Asmodios wrote: The new [Star Wars] movies have 2 very simple and easily identifiable reasons why 1. A complete disregard for physics
I can't stop laughing, that applies to literally every Star Wars movie ever.
No while things like "pew sound" ignore physics in all movies those are clearly added so your not watching a silent film and thinks like lightsabers are there for the rule of cool. Things, like arching laser beams and using open bomb doors and gravity in space, is a bridge too far. Suspension of reality is necessary for any sci-fi film there's a difference between that and just.... well what the most recent star wars was.
BrianDavion wrote: female marines are unnesscary, what is nesscary is to have more female representation in the factions that allow it, female guardsmen, plastic sisters etc.
That I agree with. Its like asking for there to be a male Slayer in buffy the vampire slayer for 'representation' that is not representation that is just hamstringing it. It makes little sense to throw it in.
The only necessary thing is to have more interest factions.
I hate this discussion it always ends up with peoples tribalism getting in the way of good discussion :/
Why should there be fem marines? There's plenty of female representation in wh40k (SoS, SoB, chaos daemons, eldar, dark eldar, etc.). Will female space marines attract more females to 40k? i think not because they would be here already if they were interested.
Space marines are a brotherhood, a boys club (made out of the emperor --> primarchs --> space marines), it's written in the holy fluff why change it for a fringe of a fringe group.
Caving in to (emotional) blackmail is never good. What prevents all those 1000s upon 1000s of females (ahem.) that would be interested in fem marines to build their marines and say, this is susan and that is betty? do they want boobplates? because that is also a no-no according to feminism.
Asmodios wrote: No while things like "pew sound" ignore physics in all movies those are clearly added so your not watching a silent film and thinks like lightsabers are there for the rule of cool. Things, like arching laser beams and using open bomb doors and gravity in space, is a bridge too far. Suspension of reality is necessary for any sci-fi film there's a difference between that and just.... well what the most recent star wars was.
Arching laser beams are there for the rule of cool and gravity in space is fine as long as it's only inside the ships but not fine when it's also out of the ship?
lolman1c wrote: Please learn to qoute me in context.
I said:
"Honestly, I say this a lot, why would you even want female space marines when Sisters of Battle exist? They're seriously awesome... and no joke. When the new models come out I will buy buying them (depending on price) because I love the idea of such strong soldiers who don't need all that marine cheating stuff".
Which was a joke saying that marines are lame steroid abusers with all the flavours of a Saturday morning cartoon character, while sisters are awesome. I wasn't comparing the two by saying they were similar. I was saying one is clearly cooler.
I find Sisters cooler too, but a lot of people seriously argue in this thread that female marines are unneeded because Sisters of Battle replace them just fine. I wanted to show it wasn't the case.
Like I said, it's literally just because Sisters get no attention. Now by next year this won't be an issue and I suspect these threads will die down by 75%.
LunarSol wrote: In a game world where half the appeal is designing your own characters for wish fulfillment power fantasy, we're egregiously past the point where there's any real justification for power armored super humans being a boys only club. Half the established power armored super humans are basically a result of talented hobbists inserting their self image on the original blank canvas that is marines. Saying that its okay for marines to be wolves, or vampires, or whatever but not girls is just a decades old mindset at this point.
Wow you play this game for a power fantasy and wish fulfilment that’s weird dude
The rest of us over here will just continue playing our game, painting our models and enjoying the cheesy romp that is the fluff.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Like I said, it's literally just because Sisters get no attention. Now by next year this won't be an issue and I suspect these threads will die down by 75%.
And like I said, how will Sisters going out change anything for people who are found of viking and want some female space wolves? How will it change things for people who are found of Mongols and want some female White Scars? And so on. Generally, how will it make things better for people who want female space marines as opposed to “any models as long as it's women”?
I started a thread just like this last week after reading the article on bols and being appalled by its responses. I was equally appalled after my thread was closed down within hours opening because of “a dozen or more” complaints. There is a problem in this hobby. I can on,y talk about 40k as I dont play other games really.
Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
I think it matters in 40k because it is a chunk of life that is very under represented. I don’t think having female marines would see a surge of women start playing, but when I got my daughter, who was interested in her dads hobby, the 40k starter set, there were no female characters in it all. No female models.
In the last thread I was literally told it was ok because of greyfax, Celestine, sisters of battle and a drawing in the guard codex. But that’s a joke. Two characters and a heavily stereotypical female trope based army that hasn’t been touched in 6 editions. We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
Worst of all though is the anger this topic openned up. And that the anger got the conversation closed down. The anger and the scale of response shows there is an issue in the community. Sexism is its name. And the angry minority I hope it’s a minority’s but ain’t sure) shouting and crying in the internet stops us being able to discuss that, so the problem isn’t going to go away.
All the usual complaints are here, it’d break the fluff, “they’ve” got sisters, why no male sisters of battle, pseudo science and psychology about hormones and male behavioural traits. It’s the same patriarchal rubbish we have heard about any gender dispute.
I think the better way to phrase the question is, what harm would having females in the principle faction in 40k do?
I was told not to reopen my thread or leave it a while and expect the same response. People had accused me of trolling. I’m not. I have a genuine concern. I’m not going to take to the streets and protest. But I am going to keep talking about how to make our hobby more inclusive.
FYI I am a white middle class straight man. But I’m also the single father to a daughter growing up in an uneven world where she will face hardships she would have if she had been a boy. Any small step to balance that world out helps. Other fathers of daughters on here have messaged me saying the same thing. Video games, films, books all figured this out a while ago and stormcast show that Gw has too. It’s just too scared to pull the trigger in 40k. What’s best about the stormcast females is that they aren’t a big deal. They aren’t a whole separate section in boob armour. They are just there. The same as the men, no explanation needed. That’s a good example.
pm713 wrote: The only thing that bugged me in the new Star Wars was Leia flying in space.
I really don't get how that can be an issue. She has had decades to refine some rudimentary force powers, (we know she was force sensitive), and moving things in zero G requires very minimal amount of... eh... force.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: gravity in space is fine as long as it's only inside the ships but not fine when it's also out of the ship?
Yeah, that's called artificial gravity. That's a common theme in sci-fi. Its a theoretical concept that scientists tried to experiment with irl; the idea is that if you have a rotating mechanism you can create your own gravitational field. That's how the artificial gravity worked in the film 2001 A Space Odyssey; the spacecraft there had a centrifuge that generated gravity.
What is unheard of is for gravity to suddenly decide to exist out in the vacuum of space, enough for bombs to slowly drop down with no proportion mechanism, which is how bombs in star wars are supposed to work (see: Proton Torpedoes).
Asmodios wrote: No while things like "pew sound" ignore physics in all movies those are clearly added so your not watching a silent film and thinks like lightsabers are there for the rule of cool. Things, like arching laser beams and using open bomb doors and gravity in space, is a bridge too far. Suspension of reality is necessary for any sci-fi film there's a difference between that and just.... well what the most recent star wars was.
Arching laser beams are there for the rule of cool and gravity in space is fine as long as it's only inside the ships but not fine when it's also out of the ship?
You can create artificial gravity in space.... we already do it. A beam of light not only never archs it simply dissipates over time.... this is especially bad because nothing will arch in the void of space. Its especially bad because this hasn't happened in any star wars movie to date but was thrown in for.... well honestly I can't think of a reason. It wasn't cool, it didn't even look cool, it was simply distracting and just terrible. Even the part where they dropped the bombs out of the spaceship, all they really needed was a line about them being magnetic (even though this would have pulled them straight down and not on the path of a WWII flying fortress bomb) and at least one of those energy fields the hangars have used in every other movie to separate the void of space and the craft. Its like they hired someone that's never watched any sci-fi movie ever and especially not star wars and just said "yeah just do you best fanatic fans will ignore simple stuff we could have fixed in 5min and any 10-year old that's taken a science class could tell us is wrong"
pm713 wrote: The only thing that bugged me in the new Star Wars was Leia flying in space.
I really don't get how that can be an issue. She has had decades to refine some rudimentary force powers, (we know she was force sensitive), and moving things in zero G requires very minimal amount of... eh... force.
She was frozen though. Pretty sure getting blown out into space by an explosion is really bad for your health. It was a bit of an ass pull, really.
LunarSol wrote: In a game world where half the appeal is designing your own characters for wish fulfillment power fantasy, we're egregiously past the point where there's any real justification for power armored super humans being a boys only club. Half the established power armored super humans are basically a result of talented hobbists inserting their self image on the original blank canvas that is marines. Saying that its okay for marines to be wolves, or vampires, or whatever but not girls is just a decades old mindset at this point.
Wow you play this game for a power fantasy and wish fulfilment that’s weird dude
The rest of us over here will just continue playing our game, painting our models and enjoying the cheesy romp that is the fluff.
Larger than life heroes are a power fantasy regardless of how you slice it. The impossibly horrifying monsters and impossible odds; the massive scale; it all feeds into the fantasy. If it didn't, there's be no real need for wargaming beyond historicals.
Asmodios wrote: No while things like "pew sound" ignore physics in all movies those are clearly added so your not watching a silent film and thinks like lightsabers are there for the rule of cool. Things, like arching laser beams and using open bomb doors and gravity in space, is a bridge too far. Suspension of reality is necessary for any sci-fi film there's a difference between that and just.... well what the most recent star wars was.
Arching laser beams are there for the rule of cool and gravity in space is fine as long as it's only inside the ships but not fine when it's also out of the ship?
You can create artificial gravity in space.... we already do it.
Citation needed? Pretty sure we still haven't worked out a functional artificial gravity mechanism, at least one that's practical to implement.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Like I said, it's literally just because Sisters get no attention. Now by next year this won't be an issue and I suspect these threads will die down by 75%.
And like I said, how will Sisters going out change anything for people who are found of viking and want some female space wolves? How will it change things for people who are found of Mongols and want some female White Scars? And so on. Generally, how will it make things better for people who want female space marines as opposed to “any models as long as it's women”?
Then they can make Viking Sisters of Battle and have an easier time thanks to plastic coming out. For all we know they're gonna have an order more focused on being up close anyway.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Yeah, that's called artificial gravity. That's a common theme in sci-fi.
Fictional, scientifically impossible artificial gravity is fine inside a ship, even a very very small one for just one person, but fictional, scientifically impossible a artificial gravity is not fine outside of a ship, on a rocket?
CthuluIsSpy wrote: the idea is that if you have a rotating mechanism you can create your own gravitational field.
What you mean, I think, is just having a ship that rotate, and have the centripetal force simulate gravity. That is not the case in Star Wars because the ships aren't rotating. It's especially obvious with small fighters.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: What is unheard of is for gravity to suddenly decide to exist out in the vacuum of space, enough for bombs to slowly drop down with no proportion mechanism
Propulsion. Unheard of? So your problem is that the movie was innovative in sending a big middle finger to physics?
LunarSol wrote: In a game world where half the appeal is designing your own characters for wish fulfillment power fantasy, we're egregiously past the point where there's any real justification for power armored super humans being a boys only club. Half the established power armored super humans are basically a result of talented hobbists inserting their self image on the original blank canvas that is marines. Saying that its okay for marines to be wolves, or vampires, or whatever but not girls is just a decades old mindset at this point.
Wow you play this game for a power fantasy and wish fulfilment that’s weird dude
The rest of us over here will just continue playing our game, painting our models and enjoying the cheesy romp that is the fluff.
Larger than life heroes are a power fantasy regardless of how you slice it. The impossibly horrifying monsters and impossible odds; the massive scale; it all feeds into the fantasy. If it didn't, there's be no real need for wargaming beyond historicals.
And guess what? Those larger than life heroes aren't always going to be exactly like you!
pm713 wrote: The only thing that bugged me in the new Star Wars was Leia flying in space.
I really don't get how that can be an issue. She has had decades to refine some rudimentary force powers, (we know she was force sensitive), and moving things in zero G requires very minimal amount of... eh... force.
She was frozen though. Pretty sure getting blown out into space by an explosion is really bad for your health. It was a bit of an ass pull, really.
It’s was ok for guiliman though? He’s a boy mind. Somtougher (sorry that was troll like).
Star Wars isn’t the same as 40k. It’s a story. That people have invented games about. 40k is a game full of stories. It’s easier to change. Powerful female characters aren’t a thing only found in new star wars films. They are everywhere and tend to work very well. Because women are more than capable of being very powerful and being the heroes of the stories.
Just trying to get it back on topic. It’s important.
Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
Thats not diversity though, that is shoehorning. Just like changing the sex of a female character or a male character just because of diversity is not a good goal or one we should strive for. There are fundamental differences between male and female socially and physiologically. To ignore that is to ignore being human.
And the best way to achieve more diversity is to create something new. Not borrow from the old.
why no male sisters of battle
Because they are literally a LOOP hole for the Religious arm of the imperium to have a military. No men shall bare arms, so they don't use men, they use women.
We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
The thing is though. You could do something new. just saying "Oh I want them to the posterboys as well." Is childish, why not build something new, over editions instead of just shoehorning them in just because of diversity. I would be up in arms if someone changed the Slayer only female club into a homogenous title. That isn't interesting. Sometimes cultures are defined by their gender. To take that away removes their identity.
Giving them something else to stand in an order similar to the space marines, but female is a step closer in the right direction, just saying "well now the also have females" is lazy. All i've read in this thread is "Why not put females in." People read this lore to be immersed to flip on a dime and change decades of fluff because of a small minority then I don't think that is right.
We do need diversity but not this way.
It needs to be smart and written well, not just replacing a gender to fill a quota of diversity
But you are right we do need more female models. I agree, but that will take time as it alway does.
pm713 wrote: The only thing that bugged me in the new Star Wars was Leia flying in space.
I really don't get how that can be an issue. She has had decades to refine some rudimentary force powers, (we know she was force sensitive), and moving things in zero G requires very minimal amount of... eh... force.
She was frozen though. Pretty sure getting blown out into space by an explosion is really bad for your health. It was a bit of an ass pull, really.
anymore then the countless other stuff that happens. Look applying realism to star wars is idiotic, if you don't enjoy the movie thats fine, just say so and move on, but don't make an idiot of yourself by ranting about how the movie was unrealistic
Asmodios wrote: You can create artificial gravity in space.... we already do it.
Well, that explains everything. They created artificial gravity in space, and the bomb fell because of the artificial gravity.
Asmodios wrote: A beam of light not only never archs it simply dissipates over time....
Woah how do laser work please? I tried one, you pointed it in some direction and there was a red dot at the end. It wasn't like a laser sword .
Asmodios wrote: "yeah just do you best fanatic fans will ignore simple stuff we could have fixed in 5min and any 10-year old that's taken a science class could tell us is wrong"
Can't blame them, it's what happened with the original trilogy, and you loved it, so…
pm713 wrote: The only thing that bugged me in the new Star Wars was Leia flying in space.
I really don't get how that can be an issue. She has had decades to refine some rudimentary force powers, (we know she was force sensitive), and moving things in zero G requires very minimal amount of... eh... force.
I liked this scene a lot better when I watched it the second time. The first time you see it it feels like she's unconscious and comes to to suddenly comes to in the vacuum and decides she'd better get back to the ship. Watching it the second time, its more obvious she preps herself prior to the explosion and when you know she's not dead, its easier to read the expression on her face in the close up as concentration instead of sleep.
Andykp wrote: I started a thread just like this last week after reading the article on bols and being appalled by its responses. I was equally appalled after my thread was closed down within hours opening because of “a dozen or more” complaints. There is a problem in this hobby. I can on,y talk about 40k as I dont play other games really.
Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
I think it matters in 40k because it is a chunk of life that is very under represented. I don’t think having female marines would see a surge of women start playing, but when I got my daughter, who was interested in her dads hobby, the 40k starter set, there were no female characters in it all. No female models.
In the last thread I was literally told it was ok because of greyfax, Celestine, sisters of battle and a drawing in the guard codex. But that’s a joke. Two characters and a heavily stereotypical female trope based army that hasn’t been touched in 6 editions. We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
Worst of all though is the anger this topic openned up. And that the anger got the conversation closed down. The anger and the scale of response shows there is an issue in the community. Sexism is its name. And the angry minority I hope it’s a minority’s but ain’t sure) shouting and crying in the internet stops us being able to discuss that, so the problem isn’t going to go away.
All the usual complaints are here, it’d break the fluff, “they’ve” got sisters, why no male sisters of battle, pseudo science and psychology about hormones and male behavioural traits. It’s the same patriarchal rubbish we have heard about any gender dispute.
I think the better way to phrase the question is, what harm would having females in the principle faction in 40k do?
I was told not to reopen my thread or leave it a while and expect the same response. People had accused me of trolling. I’m not. I have a genuine concern. I’m not going to take to the streets and protest. But I am going to keep talking about how to make our hobby more inclusive.
FYI I am a white middle class straight man. But I’m also the single father to a daughter growing up in an uneven world where she will face hardships she would have if she had been a boy. Any small step to balance that world out helps. Other fathers of daughters on here have messaged me saying the same thing. Video games, films, books all figured this out a while ago and stormcast show that Gw has too. It’s just too scared to pull the trigger in 40k. What’s best about the stormcast females is that they aren’t a big deal. They aren’t a whole separate section in boob armour. They are just there. The same as the men, no explanation needed. That’s a good example.
No, the anger is against the usual idiots using the same nonsense you just spouted, social justice warrior be thy name.
If you want to play the game the way you want, crack on, pay your money and paint your models how you like, no one cares, try and force your gender politics nonsense on us and guess what.... your suddenly not welcome and it’s cos “sexism” boo hoo.
Also the fact that you would support the sexist, racist and disgusting lies that is the BOLS article tells me all I need to know about you in this regard.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Then they can make Viking Sisters of Battle and have an easier time thanks to plastic coming out.
We aren't going to get Viking-themed Sisters of Battle models, we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle rules, and we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle fluff.
If we get female space wolves, they will have models (the same, with a head swap for those that don't have helmet, and literally the same for those with helmet), rules (in codex: space wolves) and fluff (all the millions of lines written about space wolves).
Can't really put those on the same level, can we?
Asmodios wrote: No while things like "pew sound" ignore physics in all movies those are clearly added so your not watching a silent film and thinks like lightsabers are there for the rule of cool. Things, like arching laser beams and using open bomb doors and gravity in space, is a bridge too far. Suspension of reality is necessary for any sci-fi film there's a difference between that and just.... well what the most recent star wars was.
Arching laser beams are there for the rule of cool and gravity in space is fine as long as it's only inside the ships but not fine when it's also out of the ship?
You can create artificial gravity in space.... we already do it.
Citation needed? Pretty sure we still haven't worked out a functional artificial gravity mechanism, at least one that's practical to implement.
We haven't created a mechanism but we have plenty of different theoretical ways to do it once we actually make a space station the size it would need to be. Similar to how we can make small lasers and even some now for war application and theoretically know how you would design ones similar in function to those you read about in sci-fi. What there isn't is some way to make gravity magically apply sometime in the void of space for unknown reasons. This is also just one of many super confusing things they did. I mean the entire "chase" that the film was based around didn't make sense. They couldn't go any faster to catch the ships but somehow smaller fighters are constantly docking with the ships showing that they could easily go faster. I'm not even a big star wars fan but I truly felt bad for my friends that are. Id rather never get a 40k movie then get something like the last SW
pm713 wrote: The only thing that bugged me in the new Star Wars was Leia flying in space.
I really don't get how that can be an issue. She has had decades to refine some rudimentary force powers, (we know she was force sensitive), and moving things in zero G requires very minimal amount of... eh... force.
She was frozen though. Pretty sure getting blown out into space by an explosion is really bad for your health. It was a bit of an ass pull, really.
anymore then the countless other stuff that happens. Look applying realism to star wars is idiotic, if you don't enjoy the movie thats fine, just say so and move on, but don't make an idiot of yourself by ranting about how the movie was unrealistic
Eh, fair enough. It was pretty dumb, but its not as bad as the sheer military incompetence from anyone who really should have known better. How am I supposed to recognize the First Order as the antagonists if they are so...dumb.
pm713 wrote: The only thing that bugged me in the new Star Wars was Leia flying in space.
I really don't get how that can be an issue. She has had decades to refine some rudimentary force powers, (we know she was force sensitive), and moving things in zero G requires very minimal amount of... eh... force.
She was frozen though. Pretty sure getting blown out into space by an explosion is really bad for your health. It was a bit of an ass pull, really.
anymore then the countless other stuff that happens. Look applying realism to star wars is idiotic, if you don't enjoy the movie thats fine, just say so and move on, but don't make an idiot of yourself by ranting about how the movie was unrealistic
BrianDavion wrote: I'm gonna note the lasers in SW don't behave at ALL like lasers. (to the point I suspect the term laser is a hold over term, and they're not lasers)
Their beam of light wasn't a beam of light, that's why it didn't behave like a beam of light. It's just a hold over term.
pm713 wrote: The only thing that bugged me in the new Star Wars was Leia flying in space.
I really don't get how that can be an issue. She has had decades to refine some rudimentary force powers, (we know she was force sensitive), and moving things in zero G requires very minimal amount of... eh... force.
She was frozen though. Pretty sure getting blown out into space by an explosion is really bad for your health. It was a bit of an ass pull, really.
anymore then the countless other stuff that happens. Look applying realism to star wars is idiotic, if you don't enjoy the movie thats fine, just say so and move on, but don't make an idiot of yourself by ranting about how the movie was unrealistic
Han Solo got turned to stone, for instance.
Was he turned to stone? I thought they just covered him up in a layer of carbon or something.
If I go on people are going to think I love the new Star Wars but the reality is just that I don't like Star Wars, so I am just not blinding myself to the fact that the old ones where just as bad, lol.
Formosa wrote: Just kidding dude, it wasnt aimed at anyone in particular though, more the general people that seem to buy that kind of thing.
Since I “buy that kind of things”, it was aimed at me as part of a group rather than aimed at me in particular. Not sure that makes it Rule #1-compliant.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Then they can make Viking Sisters of Battle and have an easier time thanks to plastic coming out.
We aren't going to get Viking-themed Sisters of Battle models, we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle rules, and we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle fluff.
If we get female space wolves, they will have models (the same, with a head swap for those that don't have helmet, and literally the same for those with helmet), rules (in codex: space wolves) and fluff (all the millions of lines written about space wolves).
Can't really put those on the same level, can we?
So basically. "It's a more popular faction, shoehorn this in because GW will certainly pay attention to it". Which is kind of why we only seem to get threads desiring this done to Space Marines, and not say.. Orks.
Ok here is my $.02 on the topic of female space marines.
I don't like it, I enjoy the original lore where all Marines are basically watered down clones(or conversions) of the Emperor, and that all Marines are men because of it. We have an all female army already (who I can't wait to play when the new plastics and rules come out) as well as plenty of diverse armies that have male AND female models (I DO approve of updating IG troops though to include more female bits).
I don't hear a single person complaining that the Sororitas or Sisters of Silence have no male models, so I don't understand what the big hub bub is with Marines. They sell well because people like the looks and lore of the army.
Arguing about female space marines is frankly silly and just cherry picking an already AMAZINGLY diverse universe. We have all kinds of different ethnicities and genders amongst many of the factions. Every argument for female marines is just arguing change for the sake of change, just hiding behind the excuse of feminism.
So basically. "It's a more popular faction, shoehorn this in because GW will certainly pay attention to it". Which is kind of why we only seem to get threads desiring this done to Space Marines, and not say.. Orks.
The lack of female Orks bothers me as well and honestly the fluff justification for it irks me to a similar level. In some ways more because it feels like a more obvious reaction to the lack of female models in the existing line than something that actually needs to be there.
Zebio, if what you mean is “There are more thread about female Space Marines than about female Orks because more people want female Space Marines”, then the answer is yes!
If you are wondering why more people want female space marines than female orks, it's for two reasons:
- Marines are more popular than orks, so even if the population that wanted female model in their armies was spread equivalently, there would be more people wanting female space marines.
- Space marines are a more interesting faction to include female models because they are way closer to humans.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Then they can make Viking Sisters of Battle and have an easier time thanks to plastic coming out.
We aren't going to get Viking-themed Sisters of Battle models, we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle rules, and we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle fluff.
If we get female space wolves, they will have models (the same, with a head swap for those that don't have helmet, and literally the same for those with helmet), rules (in codex: space wolves) and fluff (all the millions of lines written about space wolves).
Can't really put those on the same level, can we?
So basically. "It's a more popular faction, shoehorn this in because GW will certainly pay attention to it". Which is kind of why we only seem to get threads desiring this done to Space Marines, and not say.. Orks.
Orks are non-binary otherkin.... they are the favorite race of the SJW.
Seriously though we have the All female SOB and SOS
All male SM and Custodes
I don't like it, I enjoy the original lore where all Marines are basically watered down clones(or conversions) of the Emperor, and that all Marines are men because of it. We have an all female army already (who I can't wait to play when the new plastics and rules come out) as well as plenty of diverse armies that have male AND female models (I DO approve of updating IG troops though to include more female bits).
I'd rather not have an all female army either. I'd rather just have a female marine captain or random squadmate in the unit.
Asmodios wrote: Seriously though we have the All female SOB and SOS
All male SM and Custodes
I'm just not seeing the inequality
Seriously though we have the All female SOB and SOS
All male Space Wolves and Blood Angels and Dark Angels and White Scars and Grey Knights and Iron Hands and Black Legion and Exorcists and Thousand Sons and World Eater and Black Dragon and… and Custodes
I'm just not seeing the equality.
If we had the All female SOB and SOS
All male Dark Angels and Custodes
Then I'll see the equality big time!
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Like I said, it's literally just because Sisters get no attention. Now by next year this won't be an issue and I suspect these threads will die down by 75%.
And like I said, how will Sisters going out change anything for people who are found of viking and want some female space wolves? How will it change things for people who are found of Mongols and want some female White Scars? And so on. Generally, how will it make things better for people who want female space marines as opposed to “any models as long as it's women”?
Hybrid, I believe I've already discussed this with you before.
There is no reason that "X Historical Theme" could not already be represented by a female 40k army already. Thinking that in order to have a certain historical theme, you must be a Space Marine is quite reductive of the potential of 40k's lore.
As I've stated before, 40K's inherent canon doesn't have to be altered at all to accomodate for this - only expanded upon. Hell, we already have all-female Mongols. Ask the Attilans (who undoubtedly have female regiments, just like they probably have a siege infantry regiment).
Whilst there IS a niche that only Space Marines can provide (that being fanatically loyal servants of the Imperium, enhanced to godlike levels of power and clad in power armour carrying boltguns), the examples you've given in this thread and beyond (Mongol women, Valkyries, Amazons etc etc) can already be done.
Andykp wrote:Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
There are lots of ways of doing it. What I feel that you're missing is that diversity does not have to be achieved via magically making Space Marines female. That won't change anything.
Even if you subscribe to the belief (as do I) that a female Space Marine would look no different from a male recruit (and at that point, the argument for "diversity" falls apart*), that doesn't fix much, because there's still the massive imbalances within the other aspects of the hobby. Very few female guardsmen, no female cultists, no female GSC, etc etc, all factions which should have a far higher proportion of female presence.
However, I haven't seen you advocating for equality in these areas (well, not before this post). No, you jump straight on the bandwagon, the poster boy faction - and THAT'S the issue here. The fact that Space Marines are disproportionately placed in the limelight.
Put other factions nearer their pedestal, give them more female features, give Sisters a facelift (2019 here we come!), but the Marines themselves don't need to change.
Of course, if in your headcanon you want to, go ahead!
In the last thread I was literally told it was ok because of greyfax, Celestine, sisters of battle and a drawing in the guard codex. But that’s a joke. Two characters and a heavily stereotypical female trope based army that hasn’t been touched in 6 editions. We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
Agreed. We need more female characters where female characters should exist. Also, Necron females are absolutely a thing, but wouldn't require any "feminising" of the models. Purely in lore (which we already have!)
If you're also implying that the only way for a character to be "strong" is to be a Space Marine, I think you might be missing the point of "strength". Unless you're implying that guardsmen aren't strong characters.
Worst of all though is the anger this topic openned up. And that the anger got the conversation closed down. The anger and the scale of response shows there is an issue in the community. Sexism is its name. And the angry minority I hope it’s a minority’s but ain’t sure) shouting and crying in the internet stops us being able to discuss that, so the problem isn’t going to go away.
The same exists on other sides too. I know you say "it's a minority", but it feels a lot like you almost have contempt for the entire opposing argument. I'm sure that isn't the case, but there being a minority doesn't mean that everyone who opposes your view is tarnished by the same brush.
All the usual complaints are here, it’d break the fluff, “they’ve” got sisters, why no male sisters of battle, pseudo science and psychology about hormones and male behavioural traits. It’s the same patriarchal rubbish we have heard about any gender dispute.
And then other arguments, like ones I've made. I agree, the psuedoscience about men being X% stronger aren't really sound points, but other points can merit.
I think the better way to phrase the question is, what harm would having females in the principle faction in 40k do?
At the same time, what harm does leaving Space Marines as is, and increasing exposure of other factions do?
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Then they can make Viking Sisters of Battle and have an easier time thanks to plastic coming out.
We aren't going to get Viking-themed Sisters of Battle models, we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle rules, and we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle fluff.
If we get female space wolves, they will have models (the same, with a head swap for those that don't have helmet, and literally the same for those with helmet), rules (in codex: space wolves) and fluff (all the millions of lines written about space wolves).
Can't really put those on the same level, can we?
Why can't you have Viking SoB? Why can't you make your own? They can exist in the lore.
Plus, you mention rules - the rules haven't been 100% accurate to lore for a long time.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Then they can make Viking Sisters of Battle and have an easier time thanks to plastic coming out.
We aren't going to get Viking-themed Sisters of Battle models, we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle rules, and we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle fluff.
If we get female space wolves, they will have models (the same, with a head swap for those that don't have helmet, and literally the same for those with helmet), rules (in codex: space wolves) and fluff (all the millions of lines written about space wolves).
Can't really put those on the same level, can we?
So basically. "It's a more popular faction, shoehorn this in because GW will certainly pay attention to it". Which is kind of why we only seem to get threads desiring this done to Space Marines, and not say.. Orks.
Orks are non-binary otherkin.... they are the favorite race of the SJW.
Seriously though we have the All female SOB and SOS
All male SM and Custodes
I'm just not seeing the inequality
It's only inequality because only one of those factions is popular.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Then they can make Viking Sisters of Battle and have an easier time thanks to plastic coming out.
We aren't going to get Viking-themed Sisters of Battle models, we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle rules, and we aren't going to get viking-themed Sisters of Battle fluff.
If we get female space wolves, they will have models (the same, with a head swap for those that don't have helmet, and literally the same for those with helmet), rules (in codex: space wolves) and fluff (all the millions of lines written about space wolves).
Can't really put those on the same level, can we?
We also aren't getting Aztec themed Space Marines with dinosaurs officially either. Instead of complaining, some people get to work on their conversions.
DudleyGrim wrote: Ok here is my $.02 on the topic of female space marines.
I don't like it, I enjoy the original lore where all Marines are basically watered down clones(or conversions) of the Emperor, and that all Marines are men because of it. We have an all female army already (who I can't wait to play when the new plastics and rules come out) as well as plenty of diverse armies that have male AND female models (I DO approve of updating IG troops though to include more female bits).
I don't hear a single person complaining that the Sororitas or Sisters of Silence have no male models, so I don't understand what the big hub bub is with Marines. They sell well because people like the looks and lore of the army.
Arguing about female space marines is frankly silly and just cherry picking an already AMAZINGLY diverse universe. We have all kinds of different ethnicities and genders amongst many of the factions. Every argument for female marines is just arguing change for the sake of change, just hiding behind the excuse of feminism.
More like half dollar feminism. This isn't feminism this Authortarianism at its finest. "I WANT IT THIS BECAUSE MY MORALS AND I SAID SO!"
Its frankly wrong and I could see it being wrong in so many wrongs due to how the world actually works and where the fluff is based on.
We don't have a female genghis khan, because genghis khan wasn't female. To turn him into a female just because nullifies the character because everyone is defined by his/her/their gender.
I am defined by my sexuality, a space marine defined by their masculinity, a guardsmen is defined by who they are. Its a deep connection and to say that male and female is the same is to downplay that role in history. I am as egalitarian as it gets, but those differences create opinions and make us whole. I am nothing without my gender, or my race. I am nothing without my culture, I am defined by my peoples past. To switch it just because changes me entirely. My life would be different if I was female.
Everyones life would be different. There is a difference between creating a well rounded character and just shoehorning.
For example from my favorite tv series : Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Buffy is defined by being female, she is the Slayer, which is only females. Because they wanted to prove that women can be just as capable went fighting a bad monster. Angel is a brooding male with all the maleisms attached with that. The two shows while extremely progressive are defined by their sexualities. Both series deal with different issues, one is about growning up, one is just about being an adult to change their gender would be to change who they were or what they did. They would not be the same person, because that assumes that being any gender has no meaning.
Because of this I do not think that argument has merit in reality, or moral justification.
That is the argument here. Not feminism, or social justice warriors, but does sexuality define someone? The short of it is socialogically, historically, and psychologically yes, yes it does.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Agreed. We need more female characters where female characters should exist. Also, Necron females are absolutely a thing, but wouldn't require any "feminising" of the models. Purely in lore (which we already have!)
If you're also implying that the only way for a character to be "strong" is to be a Space Marine, I think you might be missing the point of "strength". Unless you're implying that guardsmen aren't strong characters.
I don't think the existence of Lois Lane removes the need for comic characters with powers.
Asmodios wrote: Seriously though we have the All female SOB and SOS
All male SM and Custodes
I'm just not seeing the inequality
Seriously though we have the All female SOB and SOS
All male Space Wolves and Blood Angels and Dark Angels and White Scars and Grey Knights and Iron Hands and Black Legion and Exorcists and Thousand Sons and World Eater and Black Dragon and… and Custodes
I'm just not seeing the equality.
If we had the All female SOB and SOS
All male Dark Angels and Custodes
Then I'll see the equality big time!
The issue is that Space Marines got expanded outwards into dozens of different forms. In fact, in some of these forms (CSM), they can actually BE female already. So, realistically, Space Marines should be treated as one. Which is what I'm going to do.
Then, my personal views on Custodes is that, due to their more personalised method of selection and enhancement, they should have female representation too.
So, that leaves us with Space Marines (in various flavours, but should still fundamentally be Space Marines - like how Kill Team did it) and Grey Knights (which are different enough to justify being a separate group, unlike Deathwatch), compared to Sisters of Battle and Sisters of Silence (the Grey Knight equivalent, which should DEFINITELY receive more units and exposure).
Equal. What ISN'T equal is the exposure the factions get. Which is what I complain about.
Asmodios wrote: Seriously though we have the All female SOB and SOS
All male SM and Custodes
I'm just not seeing the inequality
Seriously though we have the All female SOB and SOS
All male Space Wolves and Blood Angels and Dark Angels and White Scars and Grey Knights and Iron Hands and Black Legion and Exorcists and Thousand Sons and World Eater and Black Dragon and… and Custodes
I'm just not seeing the equality.
If we had the All female SOB and SOS
All male Dark Angels and Custodes
Then I'll see the equality big time!
So you want an expanded sisters range with more "chapters" yeah I don't disagree thats a great idea. Also despite you naming different chapters it doesn't change the fact that there are SOS and SOB females (that are about to receive an overhaul) and SM and Custodes Male. 2 factions for both the fact that they have split into more sub-factions is because SM sell well. If SOB sells like crazy then they will continue to expand the line.
For the same reason GW doesn't currently sell you models to make an all-female Attilan army, or even any Attilan model.
(Which are Huns not Mongols but whatever).
And that is: because GW doesn't have the means or the will to create models and rules for that many different “historical” armies, so they just use space marines because it allows to share most of the models between all the historical factions.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Agreed. We need more female characters where female characters should exist. Also, Necron females are absolutely a thing, but wouldn't require any "feminising" of the models. Purely in lore (which we already have!)
If you're also implying that the only way for a character to be "strong" is to be a Space Marine, I think you might be missing the point of "strength". Unless you're implying that guardsmen aren't strong characters.
I don't think the existence of Lois Lane removes the need for comic characters with powers.
Absolutely, but when those "powers" can come from a massive variety of sources, you don't need to make Green Lantern female when you could take an existing group in the setting with that potential, and give them powers/exposure.
(My DC knowledge isn't great, so my metaphor may be flawed in places. But I trust you know what I mean, and I am aware that there are undoubtedly women in the Green Lantern Corps, and that there probably is a female Green Lantern - I'm just not a DC fan overall!)
As a woman with a very sizable Blood Angels army, I don't want them to make female marines. It would just seem like they are pandering for diversity sake and it wouldn't make sense lore wise. Marines also have more than enough models, I'd much rather they focus on other armies. I would love if they made new plastic eldar aspect warriors with a good amount of female torsos and heads in them, also guard could use some female heads at the very least. I think the level of gender diversity in the Dark Eldar range is amazing and they should strive for that in new kits for factions where it makes sense lore wise.
Formosa wrote: Just kidding dude, it wasnt aimed at anyone in particular though, more the general people that seem to buy that kind of thing.
Since I “buy that kind of things”, it was aimed at me as part of a group rather than aimed at me in particular. Not sure that makes it Rule #1-compliant.
Oh well, then yes I suppose it would cover you, I sincerely believe that people who support Fem40k and thier ilk are idiots of the highest order, quite how anyone can support accusing the 40k fan base of being rapists, racists and sexists is truelly beyond me.
For the same reason GW doesn't currently sell you models to make an all-female Attilan army, or even any Attilan model. (Which are Huns not Mongols but whatever). And that is: because GW doesn't have the means or the will to create models and rules for that many different “historical” armies, so they just use space marines because it allows to share most of the models between all the historical factions.
My apologies on the Hun/Mongol mixup.
And yes, I agree that GW is at fault for not making these more varied armies. There should absolutely be the exposure, encouragement and availability for hobbyists to explore the various potential of factions. However, we have different methods of what to do about this. Yours is "change the lore". Mine is "allow for the existing lore to be better represented".
Also, you could easily do a Mongol themed SOB army (when they get more affordable and convertible sculpts!) Nothing is stopping you from creating your homebrew Order Minoris of Mongol Sisters, or Viking Sisters. In fact, you don't even need GW to directly support it, not when conversion is an option.
Formosa, I think you're getting near that rule 1 line.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The issue is that Space Marines got expanded outwards into dozens of different forms. In fact, in some of these forms (CSM), they can actually BE female already. So, realistically, Space Marines should be treated as one.
But… no, the fact that Space Marines got expanded outward into dozens of different forms is exactly why you shouldn't treat them as one. For all practical purposes they are a group of factions that have similarities, not just one faction.
Asmodios wrote: So you want an expanded sisters range with more "chapters"
But no, I don't want that, I want an expanded Sisters range but just as one faction. We don't need to have the viking faction come in double and you pick one or the other depending on if you want female or male models. We need to have a viking faction and then you choose if you want the all-male company, the all-female company, or the mixed gender company, it's way way more efficient that way. No need to pointlessly duplicate efforts. And we'll still have the faction of space monks (dark angels) and space nuns (sisters of battle), that are very different from each others, and mono-gendered. That's the efficient and elegant way to do it.
And yes, I agree that GW is at fault for not making these more varied armies. There should absolutely be the exposure, encouragement and availability for hobbyists to explore the various potential of factions. However, we have different methods of what to do about this. Yours is "change the lore". Mine is "allow for the existing lore to be better represented".
Also, you could easily do a Mongol themed SOB army (when they get more affordable and convertible sculpts!) Nothing is stopping you from creating your homebrew Order Minoris of Mongol Sisters, or Viking Sisters. In fact, you don't even need GW to directly support it, not when conversion is an option.
No worries, it was more of me being a bit pedantic, it's a very very common mixup .
The problem is that I could do that, but GW couldn't. There wouldn't be Black Library fiction written for those Sisters order, all my models would need to be conversion, and it would still prevent mixed-gender armies. So I think in this specific situation, a small evolution of the lore (it doesn't have to be a retcon anymore, it can just be something new made by Cawl) would be fine, especially with regard to the fact there was already some HUGE lore change.
Totalwar1402 wrote: For me, the singular reason against was that it would break canon. You would need to rewrite the Horus Heresy and almost all of the lore to explain this. However, this is based on the universes rule that the Emperors creation was perfect and could not be improved upon. If anything, it’s implied that the marines weakened over time. But once Cawl made the Primaris this assumption goes away. It means that the technology can be improved upon and changed. It’s not something written in stone. If anything, the Primaris are a far greater change to the lore of 40k (turning the Imperium from a regressive society into one that improves upon the Emperors work) than any theoretical change to the old lore that “oh the glands always worked on women.” or “oh the Emperor actually made female Primarches”. Those are really superficial changes by comparison. What Cawl did and what he represents is a lot more fundamental.
The main reason you would want to add female space marines is simple. Generally speaking, there’s a noted preference for seeing romanticised depictions of powerful warrior women in fiction. Because marines are 40k: they have the most factions, the bulk of the lore is about them and the core narrative centers almost exclusively on the a civil war between space marines. So if you wanted to include them then it makes sense to do it in the most popular armies.
Now there’s two arguments against this:
1) It would change the character of marines
2) You already have Sisters of Battle.
Now, there’s basically one answer to both of these questions. Each chapter or legion has its own distinct character and that is what is a large part of the appeal of Space Marines. This means that a female marine would be distinct from a Sister of Battle. For example, Marines are secular whereas the Sisters are not. The Sisters are explicitly an all female order whereas female marine would be part of a mixed force. So a female Black Templar might be pretty similar to a Sister. Although even here the Templars have a much greater Knightly/Crusader character than the Sisters do. It wouldn’t invalidate the Sisters reason to exist if you had female marines because they are a distinct army.
I’ll take one example. Space Wolves. Think about how popular Vikings is right now. People love their Norse mythology and that is absolutely what the appeal of the Wolves is. Part of Vikings appeal is that people quite like Lagatha and the other warrior maidens on that show. So, how would adding that into the Space Wolves undermine the core Viking character of the faction when its broadly an okay thing in something like Vikings? It’s also quite distinct from Sisters of Battle who are all about religious fantaticism. Just because it’s a warrior woman doesn’t mean it’s the same. Like wise, it wouldn’t change the essential character of the Space Wolves if they did this. They’re still Space Vikings regardless of if some of them are women.
You can basically apply this rationale to any other army be it Blood Angels or Ultramarines. The character of a chapter is distinct enough that you can apply it to any female warrior and they would still be distinct from Sisters of Battle.
I collect Sisters of battle so I'm not some misogynist person saying 'no girls aloud' could there be a valid reason, probably but the point is I collected the Astartes and like them because of what they are the same with sisters, I would not want men to be introduced to the Sororitas. So I'm against it whether it makes sense in a 're-making of geneseed'. But there is no logical reason for it, Astartes are supposed to be the best warriors in the Imperium, women are physically weaker, they have less muscle mass and bone density and they have less reaction time etc. Marines are not created on a genetic level, they are altered humans so a female Astartes will never be as strong as a male Astartes. That's why they choose the strongest specimens for induction. So why would they use females, especially when astartes are such a small resource in the Imperium? I would rather have the Ministorum get the genetech and make their own super Sororitas than make astarted female.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Equal. What ISN'T equal is the exposure the factions get. Which is what I complain about.
You shouldn't. The factions get exposure based on sales. If SoB were to outsell SMs, they'd have gotten plastic kits with viking and vampire and muumuu dresses by now. But they don't, so they didn't.
Chaos Sister Marines of Slannesh should be a thing, though.
pismakron wrote: Space Marines does not come with a gender, they are miniatures made of styrene plastic. If you want them to be female, then they are female. If you want them to be shemale then that is what they are. Its not like you can inspect their styrene genitals anyway.
Don't use the word sh***le.
It's incredibly insulting, offensive, and hate filled.
Formosa wrote: I sincerely believe that people who support Fem40k and thier ilk are idiots of the highest order, quite how anyone can support accusing the 40k fan base of being rapists, racists and sexists is truelly beyond me.
To be very clear, originally the group of people you were disparaging as “idiots“ was “those that spouted the same nonsense as Andykp” (which, therefore, is likely to include the specific poster Andykp), namely :
Spoiler:
Andykp wrote: I started a thread just like this last week after reading the article on bols and being appalled by its responses. I was equally appalled after my thread was closed down within hours opening because of “a dozen or more” complaints. There is a problem in this hobby. I can on,y talk about 40k as I dont play other games really.
Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
I think it matters in 40k because it is a chunk of life that is very under represented. I don’t think having female marines would see a surge of women start playing, but when I got my daughter, who was interested in her dads hobby, the 40k starter set, there were no female characters in it all. No female models.
In the last thread I was literally told it was ok because of greyfax, Celestine, sisters of battle and a drawing in the guard codex. But that’s a joke. Two characters and a heavily stereotypical female trope based army that hasn’t been touched in 6 editions. We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
Worst of all though is the anger this topic openned up. And that the anger got the conversation closed down. The anger and the scale of response shows there is an issue in the community. Sexism is its name. And the angry minority I hope it’s a minority’s but ain’t sure) shouting and crying in the internet stops us being able to discuss that, so the problem isn’t going to go away.
All the usual complaints are here, it’d break the fluff, “they’ve” got sisters, why no male sisters of battle, pseudo science and psychology about hormones and male behavioural traits. It’s the same patriarchal rubbish we have heard about any gender dispute.
I think the better way to phrase the question is, what harm would having females in the principle faction in 40k do?
I was told not to reopen my thread or leave it a while and expect the same response. People had accused me of trolling. I’m not. I have a genuine concern. I’m not going to take to the streets and protest. But I am going to keep talking about how to make our hobby more inclusive.
FYI I am a white middle class straight man. But I’m also the single father to a daughter growing up in an uneven world where she will face hardships she would have if she had been a boy. Any small step to balance that world out helps. Other fathers of daughters on here have messaged me saying the same thing. Video games, films, books all figured this out a while ago and stormcast show that Gw has too. It’s just too scared to pull the trigger in 40k. What’s best about the stormcast females is that they aren’t a big deal. They aren’t a whole separate section in boob armour. They are just there. The same as the men, no explanation needed. That’s a good example.
There was no reference to Fem40K, and nothing about 40k fan base being rapists.
I do say things relatively similar to Andykp so I felt included, and Andykp is explicitly included. That's a clear violation of Rule #1. Sincerity doesn't prevent Rule #1 from applying, else I would still be allowed to post in Off Topic.
Formosa wrote: Just kidding dude, it wasnt aimed at anyone in particular though, more the general people that seem to buy that kind of thing.
Since I “buy that kind of things”, it was aimed at me as part of a group rather than aimed at me in particular. Not sure that makes it Rule #1-compliant.
Oh well, then yes I suppose it would cover you, I sincerely believe that people who support Fem40k and thier ilk are idiots of the highest order, quite how anyone can support accusing the 40k fan base of being rapists, racists and sexists is truelly beyond me.
That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Formosa wrote: I sincerely believe that people who support Fem40k and thier ilk are idiots of the highest order, quite how anyone can support accusing the 40k fan base of being rapists, racists and sexists is truelly beyond me.
To be very clear, originally the group of people you were disparaging as “idiots“ was “those that spouted the same nonsense as Andykp” (which, therefore, is likely to include the specific poster Andykp), namely :
Spoiler:
Andykp wrote: I started a thread just like this last week after reading the article on bols and being appalled by its responses. I was equally appalled after my thread was closed down within hours opening because of “a dozen or more” complaints. There is a problem in this hobby. I can on,y talk about 40k as I dont play other games really.
Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
I think it matters in 40k because it is a chunk of life that is very under represented. I don’t think having female marines would see a surge of women start playing, but when I got my daughter, who was interested in her dads hobby, the 40k starter set, there were no female characters in it all. No female models.
In the last thread I was literally told it was ok because of greyfax, Celestine, sisters of battle and a drawing in the guard codex. But that’s a joke. Two characters and a heavily stereotypical female trope based army that hasn’t been touched in 6 editions. We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
Worst of all though is the anger this topic openned up. And that the anger got the conversation closed down. The anger and the scale of response shows there is an issue in the community. Sexism is its name. And the angry minority I hope it’s a minority’s but ain’t sure) shouting and crying in the internet stops us being able to discuss that, so the problem isn’t going to go away.
All the usual complaints are here, it’d break the fluff, “they’ve” got sisters, why no male sisters of battle, pseudo science and psychology about hormones and male behavioural traits. It’s the same patriarchal rubbish we have heard about any gender dispute.
I think the better way to phrase the question is, what harm would having females in the principle faction in 40k do?
I was told not to reopen my thread or leave it a while and expect the same response. People had accused me of trolling. I’m not. I have a genuine concern. I’m not going to take to the streets and protest. But I am going to keep talking about how to make our hobby more inclusive.
FYI I am a white middle class straight man. But I’m also the single father to a daughter growing up in an uneven world where she will face hardships she would have if she had been a boy. Any small step to balance that world out helps. Other fathers of daughters on here have messaged me saying the same thing. Video games, films, books all figured this out a while ago and stormcast show that Gw has too. It’s just too scared to pull the trigger in 40k. What’s best about the stormcast females is that they aren’t a big deal. They aren’t a whole separate section in boob armour. They are just there. The same as the men, no explanation needed. That’s a good example.
There was no reference to Fem40K, and nothing about 40k fan base being rapists.
I do say things relatively similar to Andykp so I felt included, and Andykp is explicitly included. That's a clear violation of Rule #1. Sincerity doesn't prevent Rule #1 from applying, else I would still be allowed to post in Off Topic.
He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The issue is that Space Marines got expanded outwards into dozens of different forms. In fact, in some of these forms (CSM), they can actually BE female already. So, realistically, Space Marines should be treated as one.
But… no, the fact that Space Marines got expanded outward into dozens of different forms is exactly why you shouldn't treat them as one. For all practical purposes they are a group of factions that have similarities, not just one faction.
Asmodios wrote: So you want an expanded sisters range with more "chapters"
But no, I don't want that, I want an expanded Sisters range but just as one faction. We don't need to have the viking faction come in double and you pick one or the other depending on if you want female or male models. We need to have a viking faction and then you choose if you want the all-male company, the all-female company, or the mixed gender company, it's way way more efficient that way. No need to pointlessly duplicate efforts. And we'll still have the faction of space monks (dark angels) and space nuns (sisters of battle), that are very different from each others, and mono-gendered. That's the efficient and elegant way to do it.
And yes, I agree that GW is at fault for not making these more varied armies. There should absolutely be the exposure, encouragement and availability for hobbyists to explore the various potential of factions. However, we have different methods of what to do about this. Yours is "change the lore". Mine is "allow for the existing lore to be better represented".
Also, you could easily do a Mongol themed SOB army (when they get more affordable and convertible sculpts!) Nothing is stopping you from creating your homebrew Order Minoris of Mongol Sisters, or Viking Sisters. In fact, you don't even need GW to directly support it, not when conversion is an option.
No worries, it was more of me being a bit pedantic, it's a very very common mixup .
The problem is that I could do that, but GW couldn't. There wouldn't be Black Library fiction written for those Sisters order, all my models would need to be conversion, and it would still prevent mixed-gender armies. So I think in this specific situation, a small evolution of the lore (it doesn't have to be a retcon anymore, it can just be something new made by Cawl) would be fine, especially with regard to the fact there was already some HUGE lore change.
Ok just so i get this straight we need every faction to have an inclusion of everything just in case someone wants to play that and a model doesn't exist
>So like you said we need female SW because someone might want to play a female SW and it would be silly for them to not include everyone
So
>I need obviously female orks because I want to play them and it would be silly for them not to exist.
>They should have male SOB because maybe someone wants a male sisters army.... or better yet a transgender sister army the used to be "sisters" but now they are "brothers"
>Yup we need some female termigaunts... what if someone wanted those models but GW didn't provide them?
>I mean things as simple as pirate hat SM dont exist but it might be what someone truly wants and GW doesn't currently provide it so they need to
Your argument seems to center around the fact that someone might want x faction but slightly different so GW must accommodate. By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models. I mean i must be crazy i wanted templar themed IG so i painted my army and converted/ used third party to make it.... I should have simply demanded that GW make it for me because... reasons thats why
LunarSol wrote: In a game world where half the appeal is designing your own characters for wish fulfillment power fantasy, we're egregiously past the point where there's any real justification for power armored super humans being a boys only club. Half the established power armored super humans are basically a result of talented hobbists inserting their self image on the original blank canvas that is marines. Saying that its okay for marines to be wolves, or vampires, or whatever but not girls is just a decades old mindset at this point.
So when I first started I wanted to play SoB. But they're all metal and crazy expensive. So I went with marines and thought about buying some sisters to mix in as Female Ultramarines cause I thought it would be cool, never did. But after learning about more of the world I decided against it and now I have a respectable Ultramarines army. Starting out I just wanted to do what I want, but I'm not creative enough so I never made my own characters, chapter, nothing. So while I like the idea of female marines and wanted them when I started, I respect and admire the years of world building that has gone on long before I showed up.
My point is, is that you can do whatever your hearts content is to do. Go out buy some third party heads and have a mix or full on female chapter. But it's pretty arrogant to come on here or anywhere asking for 20-30 years of lore/tradition to be changed to how you wish to see it. GW nor myself, or anyone, is gonna hunt you down if we find out you have marine models with feminine heads.
Edit
And yes I'm super excited for plastic SoB which is bittersweet because I'm probably gonna buy a bunch
Totalwar1402 wrote: For me, the singular reason against was that it would break canon. You would need to rewrite the Horus Heresy and almost all of the lore to explain this. However, this is based on the universes rule that the Emperors creation was perfect and could not be improved upon. If anything, it’s implied that the marines weakened over time. But once Cawl made the Primaris this assumption goes away. It means that the technology can be improved upon and changed. It’s not something written in stone. If anything, the Primaris are a far greater change to the lore of 40k (turning the Imperium from a regressive society into one that improves upon the Emperors work) than any theoretical change to the old lore that “oh the glands always worked on women.” or “oh the Emperor actually made female Primarches”. Those are really superficial changes by comparison. What Cawl did and what he represents is a lot more fundamental.
The main reason you would want to add female space marines is simple. Generally speaking, there’s a noted preference for seeing romanticised depictions of powerful warrior women in fiction. Because marines are 40k: they have the most factions, the bulk of the lore is about them and the core narrative centers almost exclusively on the a civil war between space marines. So if you wanted to include them then it makes sense to do it in the most popular armies.
Now there’s two arguments against this:
1) It would change the character of marines
2) You already have Sisters of Battle.
Now, there’s basically one answer to both of these questions. Each chapter or legion has its own distinct character and that is what is a large part of the appeal of Space Marines. This means that a female marine would be distinct from a Sister of Battle. For example, Marines are secular whereas the Sisters are not. The Sisters are explicitly an all female order whereas female marine would be part of a mixed force. So a female Black Templar might be pretty similar to a Sister. Although even here the Templars have a much greater Knightly/Crusader character than the Sisters do. It wouldn’t invalidate the Sisters reason to exist if you had female marines because they are a distinct army.
I’ll take one example. Space Wolves. Think about how popular Vikings is right now. People love their Norse mythology and that is absolutely what the appeal of the Wolves is. Part of Vikings appeal is that people quite like Lagatha and the other warrior maidens on that show. So, how would adding that into the Space Wolves undermine the core Viking character of the faction when its broadly an okay thing in something like Vikings? It’s also quite distinct from Sisters of Battle who are all about religious fantaticism. Just because it’s a warrior woman doesn’t mean it’s the same. Like wise, it wouldn’t change the essential character of the Space Wolves if they did this. They’re still Space Vikings regardless of if some of them are women.
You can basically apply this rationale to any other army be it Blood Angels or Ultramarines. The character of a chapter is distinct enough that you can apply it to any female warrior and they would still be distinct from Sisters of Battle.
I collect Sisters of battle so I'm not some misogynist person saying 'no girls aloud' could there be a valid reason, probably but the point is I collected the Astartes and like them because of what they are the same with sisters, I would not want men to be introduced to the Sororitas. So I'm against it whether it makes sense in a 're-making of geneseed'. But there is no logical reason for it, Astartes are supposed to be the best warriors in the Imperium, women are physically weaker, they have less muscle mass and bone density and they have less reaction time etc. Marines are not created on a genetic level, they are altered humans so a female Astartes will never be as strong as a male Astartes. That's why they choose the strongest specimens for induction. So why would they use females, especially when astartes are such a small resource in the Imperium? I would rather have the Ministorum get the genetech and make their own super Sororitas than make astarted female.
I brought this up like 4 pages ago. Get ready to just get told to not apply logic to 40k because the lore "doesnt make sense"
Orks are non-binary otherkin.... they are the favorite race of the SJW.
Seriously though we have the All female SOB and SOS
All male SM and Custodes
I'm just not seeing the inequality
So is there a reason that SoS are all women? It seems kind of stupid to take units that main requirement is that they are blanks and then cut the pool of potential recruits in half. I'd be fine with the Order of Silence, personally.
SoB have another way to exploit that loop hole, considering most cultures that actually employed eunuchs didn't consider them men anymore. Then again the whole eunuch thing might be the domain of SM anyways lol.
Custodes are created by magic like SM so I see no problem with. Also is there anything that states they can be only men?
Also, why call them Boyz if they don't reproduce that way. Seems odd they'd have that equipment lol.
Also necrons are styled on skeletons so giving them boobs would be dumb.
The thing with all the factions you list is that each one is the equivalent of only a faction of SM like the DA, BA, SW, GK, DW, or BT. SM cover all that and more. They were long used as one of the armies to introduce new players. They often stand as literal monuments in GW stores. They are also widely acknowledged as the most popular and successful army that GW has.. Primaris were a good opportunity to add new elements to appeal to a wider selection of customers (it is good business) and preserve the old fluff too while they moved forward to match their competitors like PP or CB. Its not like Cawl wasn't already committing grievous heresy that was just hand waved in. You can even have some SM chapters that do reject female Primaris too. That female Primaris is a hill to far seems weird to me. Trying to shunt off people to a different but female army and try to say they're the same seems dishonest as well. Also SoB have had male characters in the form of preachers, SC, and inquisitors anyways. I don't see how it would destroy everything.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The issue is that Space Marines got expanded outwards into dozens of different forms. In fact, in some of these forms (CSM), they can actually BE female already. So, realistically, Space Marines should be treated as one.
But… no, the fact that Space Marines got expanded outward into dozens of different forms is exactly why you shouldn't treat them as one. For all practical purposes they are a group of factions that have similarities, not just one faction.
Personally, I disagree, but it's more semantics at this point over if Space Marines are one faction or a collection of factions.
Asmodios wrote: So you want an expanded sisters range with more "chapters"
But no, I don't want that, I want an expanded Sisters range but just as one faction. We don't need to have the viking faction come in double and you pick one or the other depending on if you want female or male models. We need to have a viking faction and then you choose if you want the all-male company, the all-female company, or the mixed gender company, it's way way more efficient that way. No need to pointlessly duplicate efforts. And we'll still have the faction of space monks (dark angels) and space nuns (sisters of battle), that are very different from each others, and mono-gendered. That's the efficient and elegant way to do it.
I feel that expanding the existing factions to have the "viking" potential (which it technically has) would be a better approach, but so long as equality is reached, that's a good thing.
And yes, I agree that GW is at fault for not making these more varied armies. There should absolutely be the exposure, encouragement and availability for hobbyists to explore the various potential of factions. However, we have different methods of what to do about this. Yours is "change the lore". Mine is "allow for the existing lore to be better represented".
Also, you could easily do a Mongol themed SOB army (when they get more affordable and convertible sculpts!) Nothing is stopping you from creating your homebrew Order Minoris of Mongol Sisters, or Viking Sisters. In fact, you don't even need GW to directly support it, not when conversion is an option.
No worries, it was more of me being a bit pedantic, it's a very very common mixup .
The problem is that I could do that, but GW couldn't. There wouldn't be Black Library fiction written for those Sisters order, all my models would need to be conversion, and it would still prevent mixed-gender armies. So I think in this specific situation, a small evolution of the lore (it doesn't have to be a retcon anymore, it can just be something new made by Cawl) would be fine, especially with regard to the fact there was already some HUGE lore change.
I definitely feel that they missed an opportunity with Cawl. Making Primaris (maybe only Primaris, make it consistently new) have the option to be female would be welcome. Again, I don't think I'd change what currently exists for SM, but if it did, I don't think I'd mind.
Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Equal. What ISN'T equal is the exposure the factions get. Which is what I complain about.
You shouldn't. The factions get exposure based on sales. If SoB were to outsell SMs, they'd have gotten plastic kits with viking and vampire and muumuu dresses by now. But they don't, so they didn't.
Chaos Sister Marines of Slannesh should be a thing, though.
If Sisters were given plastic kits with vikings, vampires and muumuu dresses, then maybe they might have outsold Space Marines.
Blndmage wrote:
pismakron wrote: Space Marines does not come with a gender, they are miniatures made of styrene plastic. If you want them to be female, then they are female. If you want them to be shemale then that is what they are. Its not like you can inspect their styrene genitals anyway.
Don't use the word sh***le.
It's incredibly insulting, offensive, and hate filled.
They are meant to be the left hand of the Emperor (Representing Females)
And the right Hand is the Custodes (Representing Males)
The paradigm of men and women working together in different but equal capacities.
The Sisters work with the Custodes, and the Custodes work with Sisters. It is that paradigm that is so obvious about them as a culture (Essentially men and women must work together to exact a goal).
Custodes are created by magic like SM so I see no problem with. Also is there anything that states they can be only men?
Yes they are his literal sons. And sisters of silence are his Daughters. That is the point of their existence. They represent Ying and Yang at the top levels of the Imperium.
I brought this up like 4 pages ago. Get ready to just get told to not apply logic to 40k because the lore "doesnt make sense"
Logic has everything to do with world building to be inconsistent world building is to ruin the setting AKA Star Wars (With violating world building laws that exist in that universe for the purpose of story telling).
You can't have a psychic blank magically use psychic powers. Nor can you have the tau all of sudden being the most powerful psykers in the galaxy cause someone said so.
Though I do have to admit it is kind of sexist of an argument to say men and women cannot have similar bone structure or physiological similarities. But their mentalities and physical qualities will be completely different.
Formosa wrote: Oh well, then yes I suppose it would cover you, I sincerely believe that people who support Fem40k and thier ilk are idiots of the highest order, quite how anyone can support accusing the 40k fan base of being rapists, racists and sexists is truelly beyond me.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Equal. What ISN'T equal is the exposure the factions get. Which is what I complain about.
You shouldn't. The factions get exposure based on sales. If SoB were to outsell SMs, they'd have gotten plastic kits with viking and vampire and muumuu dresses by now. But they don't, so they didn't.
Chaos Sister Marines of Slannesh should be a thing, though.
Well...
* SoB are a catch 22, no one wants old models or metal so no one buys
* female models DO sell and have been selling for some time now, we even have a full female gang now, Celestine sold like mad, we also have/had female models for 20yrs +, we have newer female models (give or take the past 10yrs) via DE/CWE/Quins/Chaos, etc...
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Agreed. We need more female characters where female characters should exist. Also, Necron females are absolutely a thing, but wouldn't require any "feminising" of the models. Purely in lore (which we already have!)
If you're also implying that the only way for a character to be "strong" is to be a Space Marine, I think you might be missing the point of "strength". Unless you're implying that guardsmen aren't strong characters.
I don't think the existence of Lois Lane removes the need for comic characters with powers.
Absolutely, but when those "powers" can come from a massive variety of sources, you don't need to make Green Lantern female when you could take an existing group in the setting with that potential, and give them powers/exposure.
(My DC knowledge isn't great, so my metaphor may be flawed in places. But I trust you know what I mean, and I am aware that there are undoubtedly women in the Green Lantern Corps, and that there probably is a female Green Lantern - I'm just not a DC fan overall!)
Quick note on that, Green Lanterns are powered through their rings which go to someone with high will upon their death. So there could absolutely be a female green lantern without it feeling shoehorned.
Just don't kill anyone that's popular though.
But yes, I still don't mind expanding the female model roster for the various factions, just.. not stripping the lore of a faction to justify them.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Equal. What ISN'T equal is the exposure the factions get. Which is what I complain about.
You shouldn't. The factions get exposure based on sales. If SoB were to outsell SMs, they'd have gotten plastic kits with viking and vampire and muumuu dresses by now. But they don't, so they didn't.
Chaos Sister Marines of Slannesh should be a thing, though.
Well...
* SoB are a catch 22, no one wants old models or metal so no one buys
* female models DO sell and have been selling for some time now, we even have a full female gang now, Celestine sold like mad, we also have/had female models for 20yrs +, we have newer female models (give or take the past 10yrs) via DE/CWE/Quins/Chaos, etc...
Sisters had the same full range and support at the time of their release as any other army. Same strength of support and breadth as when Necrons and Dark Eldars were released. Same as when Tau were released. They're just not a popular faction, so it's kinda foolish for GW to support them. But GW does. Still ticking...
Futa Marines of Slaaneseh and Sisters of Slaanesh - that's what 40k needs. Pink, with massive purple helmets!
They are meant to be the left hand of the Emperor (Representing Females)
And the right Hand is the Custodes (Representing Males)
The paradigm of men and women working together in different but equal capacities.
The Sisters work with the Custodes, and the Custodes work with Sisters. It is that paradigm that is so obvious about them as a culture (Essentially men and women must work together to exact a goal).
I brought this up like 4 pages ago. Get ready to just get told to not apply logic to 40k because the lore "doesnt make sense"
Logic has everything to do with world building to be inconsistent world building is to ruin the setting AKA Star Wars (With violating world building laws that exist in that universe for the purpose of story telling).
You can't have a psychic blank magically use psychic powers. Nor can you have the tau all of sudden being the most powerful psykers in the galaxy cause someone said so.
Though I do have to admit it is kind of sexist of an argument to say men and women cannot have similar bone structure or physiological similarities. But their mentalities and physical qualities will be completely different.
No its not sexist its actual science
Men have a different and larger bone structure than a woman
Men have the hormones in place to grow mass amounts of muscle much easier than women
Men are biologically more prone to violence
and the list goes on and on and on
Could you make a female SM... Yes
Would any sane galactic empire ever do it.... No
You would simply be making smaller, slower and less durable SM on average. It's established lore that the Imperium has no shortage of people so there would be zero reasons to ever draw recruits from the female population.
They are meant to be the left hand of the Emperor (Representing Females)
And the right Hand is the Custodes (Representing Males)
The paradigm of men and women working together in different but equal capacities.
The Sisters work with the Custodes, and the Custodes work with Sisters. It is that paradigm that is so obvious about them as a culture (Essentially men and women must work together to exact a goal).
Custodes are created by magic like SM so I see no problem with. Also is there anything that states they can be only men?
Yes they are his literal sons. And sisters of silence are his Daughters. That is the point of their existence. They represent Ying and Yang at the top levels of the Imperium.
I brought this up like 4 pages ago. Get ready to just get told to not apply logic to 40k because the lore "doesnt make sense"
Logic has everything to do with world building to be inconsistent world building is to ruin the setting AKA Star Wars (With violating world building laws that exist in that universe for the purpose of story telling).
You can't have a psychic blank magically use psychic powers. Nor can you have the tau all of sudden being the most powerful psykers in the galaxy cause someone said so.
Though I do have to admit it is kind of sexist of an argument to say men and women cannot have similar bone structure or physiological similarities. But their mentalities and physical qualities will be completely different.
I have to comment to correct this, there is actually a reason the SoB are all women. The eclesiarcy were told they cant have an army, specifically "Men at arms" so they found the loop hole of well they are not MEN at arms.
Totalwar1402 wrote: For me, the singular reason against was that it would break canon. You would need to rewrite the Horus Heresy and almost all of the lore to explain this. However, this is based on the universes rule that the Emperors creation was perfect and could not be improved upon. If anything, it’s implied that the marines weakened over time. But once Cawl made the Primaris this assumption goes away. It means that the technology can be improved upon and changed. It’s not something written in stone. If anything, the Primaris are a far greater change to the lore of 40k (turning the Imperium from a regressive society into one that improves upon the Emperors work) than any theoretical change to the old lore that “oh the glands always worked on women.” or “oh the Emperor actually made female Primarches”. Those are really superficial changes by comparison. What Cawl did and what he represents is a lot more fundamental.
The main reason you would want to add female space marines is simple. Generally speaking, there’s a noted preference for seeing romanticised depictions of powerful warrior women in fiction. Because marines are 40k: they have the most factions, the bulk of the lore is about them and the core narrative centers almost exclusively on the a civil war between space marines. So if you wanted to include them then it makes sense to do it in the most popular armies.
Now there’s two arguments against this:
1) It would change the character of marines
2) You already have Sisters of Battle.
Now, there’s basically one answer to both of these questions. Each chapter or legion has its own distinct character and that is what is a large part of the appeal of Space Marines. This means that a female marine would be distinct from a Sister of Battle. For example, Marines are secular whereas the Sisters are not. The Sisters are explicitly an all female order whereas female marine would be part of a mixed force. So a female Black Templar might be pretty similar to a Sister. Although even here the Templars have a much greater Knightly/Crusader character than the Sisters do. It wouldn’t invalidate the Sisters reason to exist if you had female marines because they are a distinct army.
I’ll take one example. Space Wolves. Think about how popular Vikings is right now. People love their Norse mythology and that is absolutely what the appeal of the Wolves is. Part of Vikings appeal is that people quite like Lagatha and the other warrior maidens on that show. So, how would adding that into the Space Wolves undermine the core Viking character of the faction when its broadly an okay thing in something like Vikings? It’s also quite distinct from Sisters of Battle who are all about religious fantaticism. Just because it’s a warrior woman doesn’t mean it’s the same. Like wise, it wouldn’t change the essential character of the Space Wolves if they did this. They’re still Space Vikings regardless of if some of them are women.
You can basically apply this rationale to any other army be it Blood Angels or Ultramarines. The character of a chapter is distinct enough that you can apply it to any female warrior and they would still be distinct from Sisters of Battle.
I collect Sisters of battle so I'm not some misogynist person saying 'no girls aloud' could there be a valid reason, probably but the point is I collected the Astartes and like them because of what they are the same with sisters, I would not want men to be introduced to the Sororitas. So I'm against it whether it makes sense in a 're-making of geneseed'. But there is no logical reason for it, Astartes are supposed to be the best warriors in the Imperium, women are physically weaker, they have less muscle mass and bone density and they have less reaction time etc. Marines are not created on a genetic level, they are altered humans so a female Astartes will never be as strong as a male Astartes. That's why they choose the strongest specimens for induction. So why would they use females, especially when astartes are such a small resource in the Imperium? I would rather have the Ministorum get the genetech and make their own super Sororitas than make astarted female.
I brought this up like 4 pages ago. Get ready to just get told to not apply logic to 40k because the lore "doesnt make sense"
Yeah I've had this argument before and been called sexist and a bigot and that there is nothing logically stopping there being female marines.
I have to comment to correct this, there is actually a reason the SoB are all women. The eclesiarcy were told they cant have an army, specifically "Men at arms" so they found the loop hole of well they are not MEN at arms.
I think I remember posting that exact point, but that was on the sisters of silence not the SoB
No its not sexist its actual science Men have a different and larger bone structure than a woman Men have the hormones in place to grow mass amounts of muscle much easier than women Men are biologically more prone to violence and the list goes on and on and on Could you make a female SM... Yes Would any sane galactic empire ever do it.... No You would simply be making smaller, slower and less durable SM on average. It's established lore that the Imperium has no shortage of people so there would be zero reasons to ever draw recruits from the female population.
Oh okay, O.O
I always feel like that might be sexist in someways but if science actually backs that up sure. Though it is not impossible for a woman to match a male physically it just takes a lot more focus and willpower.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Equal. What ISN'T equal is the exposure the factions get. Which is what I complain about.
You shouldn't. The factions get exposure based on sales. If SoB were to outsell SMs, they'd have gotten plastic kits with viking and vampire and muumuu dresses by now. But they don't, so they didn't.
Chaos Sister Marines of Slannesh should be a thing, though.
Well...
* SoB are a catch 22, no one wants old models or metal so no one buys
* female models DO sell and have been selling for some time now, we even have a full female gang now, Celestine sold like mad, we also have/had female models for 20yrs +, we have newer female models (give or take the past 10yrs) via DE/CWE/Quins/Chaos, etc...
Sisters had the same full range and support at the time of their release as any other army. Same strength of support and breadth as when Necrons and Dark Eldars were released. Same as when Tau were released. They're just not a popular faction, so it's kinda foolish for GW to support them. But GW does. Still ticking...
Futa Marines of Slaaneseh and Sisters of Slaanesh - that's what 40k needs. Pink, with massive purple helmets!
^
Not only this but GW will expand the range if the new ones sell like crazy and continue to sell like crazy. GW isn't running some crazy conspiracy patriarchy. If SOB had sold like SM when released and continued to sell that way we would have just as many variations of them today. Similarly, when they are re-released if they sell like crazy and continue to sell like crazy we will see more and more every year.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I am aware that there are undoubtedly women in the Green Lantern Corps, and that there probably is a female Green Lantern - I'm just not a DC fan overall!)
OMG. There are *plenty* of female Green Lanterns.
Lanterns are one of the most egregiously stupid concepts in the entire fething DC universe. But they're not sexist. They have females and hermaphrodies and asexuals and the whole range of things!
What you're probably thinking of are the all-female Pink Lanterns: ... though it's probably not out of the question that some are trans / futa...
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Equal. What ISN'T equal is the exposure the factions get. Which is what I complain about.
You shouldn't. The factions get exposure based on sales. If SoB were to outsell SMs, they'd have gotten plastic kits with viking and vampire and muumuu dresses by now. But they don't, so they didn't.
Chaos Sister Marines of Slannesh should be a thing, though.
Well...
* SoB are a catch 22, no one wants old models or metal so no one buys * female models DO sell and have been selling for some time now, we even have a full female gang now, Celestine sold like mad, we also have/had female models for 20yrs +, we have newer female models (give or take the past 10yrs) via DE/CWE/Quins/Chaos, etc...
Sisters had the same full range and support at the time of their release as any other army. Same strength of support and breadth as when Necrons and Dark Eldars were released. Same as when Tau were released. They're just not a popular faction, so it's kinda foolish for GW to support them. But GW does. Still ticking...
Futa Marines of Slaaneseh and Sisters of Slaanesh - that's what 40k needs. Pink, with massive purple helmets!
^ Not only this but GW will expand the range if the new ones sell like crazy and continue to sell like crazy. GW isn't running some crazy conspiracy patriarchy. If SOB had sold like SM when released and continued to sell that way we would have just as many variations of them today. Similarly, when they are re-released if they sell like crazy and continue to sell like crazy we will see more and more every year.
Funny, speaking of DE, they had the same problem, but GW did update them, go read some of the AMA's from old designers, they didnt always build off of sales, and sometimes they only built units due to sales, so there is no way of knowing why they did or didnt update SoB.
PS, in 5th they didnt even have a codex.... it was Clear that GW had the problem with them and not the Players, it costs next to nothing to make a 30 page codex compare to a 12 page WD....
Yes hybrid the bols article is the Fem40k article, it’s very clear from the context that is what he is referring to, even going so far as to ape a few of its comments,I can post a link if it want? in addition when he supports an attack on my community I reserve the right to push back, if you don’t like that, tough luck.
As to Delvarus comment, he is correct and if you haven’t noticed it from the qoute you yourself posted in reply to me... well, your blind mate.
You claim these models are in sizeable demand, but that demand comes from a teeny tiny part of the fan base, a very unpopular part at that, so why base your policies and marketing at these people, the same people that have been shown to not support the franchises they force change upon.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: I am aware that there are undoubtedly women in the Green Lantern Corps, and that there probably is a female Green Lantern - I'm just not a DC fan overall!)
OMG. There are *plenty* of female Green Lanterns.
Why am I the one being quoted? I didn't say that! I know about the Star Sapphires and the like, it's one of the few DC series I still read!
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
They are meant to be the left hand of the Emperor (Representing Females)
And the right Hand is the Custodes (Representing Males)
The paradigm of men and women working together in different but equal capacities.
The Sisters work with the Custodes, and the Custodes work with Sisters. It is that paradigm that is so obvious about them as a culture (Essentially men and women must work together to exact a goal).
Custodes are created by magic like SM so I see no problem with. Also is there anything that states they can be only men?
Yes they are his literal sons. And sisters of silence are his Daughters. That is the point of their existence. They represent Ying and Yang at the top levels of the Imperium.
Okay so I know the Custodes are not the literal sons of the Emperor as they are recruited from the sons of high ranking Terran nobles. I seriously doubt that the SoS are his literal daughters. His literal children were known as the Sensei and even their status is kind of dubious right now. Also what your saying with the hands of the Emperor doesn't really fit with a guy who was supposed to be all about reason and logic.
"I need more blanks to fight this Chaos invasion on earth."
"Shall I get all the male blanks?"
"No, I need to keep the symbolism."
For the same reason GW doesn't currently sell you models to make an all-female Attilan army, or even any Attilan model.
(Which are Huns not Mongols but whatever).
And that is: because GW doesn't have the means or the will to create models and rules for that many different “historical” armies, so they just use space marines because it allows to share most of the models between all the historical factions.
So if you want Viking Sisters, you have to do what people who want Aztec Marines do: actually put a little effort into it. These things CAN exist in fluff, and you already know that there will be an Order introduced that'll have some sorts bonuses for being up close.
So when affordable plastic comes out, what is your issue here?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I am aware that there are undoubtedly women in the Green Lantern Corps, and that there probably is a female Green Lantern - I'm just not a DC fan overall!)
OMG. There are *plenty* of female Green Lanterns.
Why am I the one being quoted? I didn't say that! I know about the Star Sapphires and the like, it's one of the few DC series I still read!
Formosa wrote: in addition when he supports an attack on my community I reserve the right to push back, if you don’t like that, tough luck.
That's not how the forum work, as I've been told repeatedly. If someone disrespect you and breach rule #1, you shouldn't breach rule #1 to answer in kind, you should just report the message to the moderators. If I do respond in kind to someone who breach rule #1, I get my ban. Maybe the moderators will treat you differently, but that's how it works in theory, and how it was applied to me.
Formosa wrote: As to Delvarus comment, he is correct and if you haven’t noticed it from the qoute you yourself posted in reply to me... well, your blind mate.
There is literally nothing about rapists in that quote. I'll put it again so you can check yourself:
Spoiler:
Andykp wrote: I started a thread just like this last week after reading the article on bols and being appalled by its responses. I was equally appalled after my thread was closed down within hours opening because of “a dozen or more” complaints. There is a problem in this hobby. I can on,y talk about 40k as I dont play other games really.
Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
I think it matters in 40k because it is a chunk of life that is very under represented. I don’t think having female marines would see a surge of women start playing, but when I got my daughter, who was interested in her dads hobby, the 40k starter set, there were no female characters in it all. No female models.
In the last thread I was literally told it was ok because of greyfax, Celestine, sisters of battle and a drawing in the guard codex. But that’s a joke. Two characters and a heavily stereotypical female trope based army that hasn’t been touched in 6 editions. We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
Worst of all though is the anger this topic openned up. And that the anger got the conversation closed down. The anger and the scale of response shows there is an issue in the community. Sexism is its name. And the angry minority I hope it’s a minority’s but ain’t sure) shouting and crying in the internet stops us being able to discuss that, so the problem isn’t going to go away.
All the usual complaints are here, it’d break the fluff, “they’ve” got sisters, why no male sisters of battle, pseudo science and psychology about hormones and male behavioural traits. It’s the same patriarchal rubbish we have heard about any gender dispute.
I think the better way to phrase the question is, what harm would having females in the principle faction in 40k do?
I was told not to reopen my thread or leave it a while and expect the same response. People had accused me of trolling. I’m not. I have a genuine concern. I’m not going to take to the streets and protest. But I am going to keep talking about how to make our hobby more inclusive.
FYI I am a white middle class straight man. But I’m also the single father to a daughter growing up in an uneven world where she will face hardships she would have if she had been a boy. Any small step to balance that world out helps. Other fathers of daughters on here have messaged me saying the same thing. Video games, films, books all figured this out a while ago and stormcast show that Gw has too. It’s just too scared to pull the trigger in 40k. What’s best about the stormcast females is that they aren’t a big deal. They aren’t a whole separate section in boob armour. They are just there. The same as the men, no explanation needed. That’s a good example.
Formosa wrote: You claim these models are in sizeable demand, but that demand comes from a teeny tiny part of the fan base, a very unpopular part at that, so why base your policies and marketing at these people, the same people that have been shown to not support the franchises they force change upon.
Well, that's like your opinion, man. They did the change for the Tau and it was awesome, I hope they will do the same with the Imperial Guard and the Space Marines!
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But there isn't a screaming demand for female SM. There is one vocal FB group that makes the same thread every week. I mean GW did a large survey and enough people wanted a sisters update that they did it. Because we can work under the assumption that GW is going to produce the models which have the highest demand (that's how companies work) it's clear that more of the community wants SOB then female SM. My guess is this is similar to the SJW craze in comic books where a small group screamed loudly until they overhauled everything and then they moved on without actually buying anything they screamed for. That's why sales plummeted for everything but the movies that actually kept close to the original lore. Now if feminist 40k wants to put their money where their mouth is and buy up ever SOB model in existence with the "10s of thousands of female gamers just waiting for representation" that we keep hearing about, we will see more and more female models.
More realistically fans of 40k will buy SOB and they will be very popular at first with more stable sales down the line adding more range releases but never coming close to that of more popular lines
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
Please either quote only the part of my message that you want to answer to, or just put @Hybrid at the beginning of your message, instead of putting some huge block quote like this.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Asmodios, same thing as Delvarus Centurion wrt quotes.
Also don't forget that creating an entirely new line of miniatures is much much more costly and big than just adding a few head variants in kits that you would release regardless.
They are meant to be the left hand of the Emperor (Representing Females)
And the right Hand is the Custodes (Representing Males)
The paradigm of men and women working together in different but equal capacities.
The Sisters work with the Custodes, and the Custodes work with Sisters. It is that paradigm that is so obvious about them as a culture (Essentially men and women must work together to exact a goal).
Custodes are created by magic like SM so I see no problem with. Also is there anything that states they can be only men?
Yes they are his literal sons. And sisters of silence are his Daughters. That is the point of their existence. They represent Ying and Yang at the top levels of the Imperium.
Okay so I know the Custodes are not the literal sons of the Emperor as they are recruited from the sons of high ranking Terran nobles. I seriously doubt that the SoS are his literal daughters. His literal children were known as the Sensei and even their status is kind of dubious right now. Also what your saying with the hands of the Emperor doesn't really fit with a guy who was supposed to be all about reason and logic.
"I need more blanks to fight this Chaos invasion on earth."
"Shall I get all the male blanks?"
"No, I need to keep the symbolism."
Yes because Allegories in a universe where Lucifer (I mean horus) breaks from his Arch Angels (Primarchs) and fights a war in heaven only to be cast out by his Creator (The Emperor)
Yes totally.
Male Blanks are exist though and they are used as Assassins. (Who usually only take males)
Sisters of Silence are witch hunters. That is one of their major tasks. (And they only take females)
Custodes are his sons because they are made from and by the Emperor. So they are his 'sons' but not in the classical sense. They worship him more like their king.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
Please either quote only the part of my message that you want to answer to, or just put @Hybrid at the beginning of your message, instead of putting some huge block quote like this.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Asmodios, same thing as Delvarus Centurion wrt quotes.
Also don't forget that creating an entirely new line of miniatures is much much more costly and big than just adding a few head variants in kits that you would release regardless.
I never said anyone in this thread has done that, I was replying to a comment about an article talking about people who do do that.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
Please either quote only the part of my message that you want to answer to, or just put @Hybrid at the beginning of your message, instead of putting some huge block quote like this.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Asmodios, same thing as Delvarus Centurion wrt quotes.
Also don't forget that creating an entirely new line of miniatures is much much more costly and big than just adding a few head variants in kits that you would release regardless.
Yeah you realize that GW already makes female heads right.... as well as about 1000 3rd party companies. It would be incredibly dumb for them to take up valuable display space and the logistics to support the same kits with female heads. Instead, they make money just having people kit bash or buy female heads
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
Please either quote only the part of my message that you want to answer to, or just put @Hybrid at the beginning of your message, instead of putting some huge block quote like this.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Asmodios, same thing as Delvarus Centurion wrt quotes.
Also don't forget that creating an entirely new line of miniatures is much much more costly and big than just adding a few head variants in kits that you would release regardless.
Yeah you realize that GW already makes female heads right.... as well as about 1000 3rd party companies. It would be incredibly dumb for them to take up valuable display space and the logistics to support the same kits with female heads. Instead, they make money just having people kit bash or buy female heads
Yeah and they could make female tyranids and orks does that mean they should...
Formosa wrote: in addition when he supports an attack on my community I reserve the right to push back, if you don’t like that, tough luck.
That's not how the forum work, as I've been told repeatedly. If someone disrespect you and breach rule #1, you shouldn't breach rule #1 to answer in kind, you should just report the message to the moderators. If I do respond in kind to someone who breach rule #1, I get my ban. Maybe the moderators will treat you differently, but that's how it works in theory, and how it was applied to me.
Formosa wrote: As to Delvarus comment, he is correct and if you haven’t noticed it from the qoute you yourself posted in reply to me... well, your blind mate.
There is literally nothing about rapists in that quote.
I'll put it again so you can check yourself:
Spoiler:
Andykp wrote: I started a thread just like this last week after reading the article on bols and being appalled by its responses. I was equally appalled after my thread was closed down within hours opening because of “a dozen or more” complaints. There is a problem in this hobby. I can on,y talk about 40k as I dont play other games really.
Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
I think it matters in 40k because it is a chunk of life that is very under represented. I don’t think having female marines would see a surge of women start playing, but when I got my daughter, who was interested in her dads hobby, the 40k starter set, there were no female characters in it all. No female models.
In the last thread I was literally told it was ok because of greyfax, Celestine, sisters of battle and a drawing in the guard codex. But that’s a joke. Two characters and a heavily stereotypical female trope based army that hasn’t been touched in 6 editions. We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
Worst of all though is the anger this topic openned up. And that the anger got the conversation closed down. The anger and the scale of response shows there is an issue in the community. Sexism is its name. And the angry minority I hope it’s a minority’s but ain’t sure) shouting and crying in the internet stops us being able to discuss that, so the problem isn’t going to go away.
All the usual complaints are here, it’d break the fluff, “they’ve” got sisters, why no male sisters of battle, pseudo science and psychology about hormones and male behavioural traits. It’s the same patriarchal rubbish we have heard about any gender dispute.
I think the better way to phrase the question is, what harm would having females in the principle faction in 40k do?
I was told not to reopen my thread or leave it a while and expect the same response. People had accused me of trolling. I’m not. I have a genuine concern. I’m not going to take to the streets and protest. But I am going to keep talking about how to make our hobby more inclusive.
FYI I am a white middle class straight man. But I’m also the single father to a daughter growing up in an uneven world where she will face hardships she would have if she had been a boy. Any small step to balance that world out helps. Other fathers of daughters on here have messaged me saying the same thing. Video games, films, books all figured this out a while ago and stormcast show that Gw has too. It’s just too scared to pull the trigger in 40k. What’s best about the stormcast females is that they aren’t a big deal. They aren’t a whole separate section in boob armour. They are just there. The same as the men, no explanation needed. That’s a good example.
Formosa wrote: You claim these models are in sizeable demand, but that demand comes from a teeny tiny part of the fan base, a very unpopular part at that, so why base your policies and marketing at these people, the same people that have been shown to not support the franchises they force change upon.
Well, that's like your opinion, man. They did the change for the Tau and it was awesome, I hope they will do the same with the Imperial Guard and the Space Marines!
That pretty much answer several of your questions, as to me being treated differently, well having read through your back log I wouldn’t say you have done anything I would consider worth banning for, the tone of a lot of your replies is extremely hostile in the off topic forum, but I put that down to being passionate about your cause, but that’s just my opinion eh.
No it’s pretty clear that only a tiny part of the 40k fan base follows your politics, the vast majority simply just want to play our game and paint our models without all this forced diversity nonsense cropping up to try and force us to your way of doing things (collective “your” not specifically you), but here is something we can agree on, female bloody guard, where are they? Hurry up and get them out there GW, as for tau, they have had females in the unit since the original plastic kit, PPE hides the detail and no, no female marines.
Like I said a few pages back, if they made enhanced sisters no one would bat an eyelid, don’t mess with marines though, especially if it’s just to satisfy your obsession with identity politics.
that's been training his whole life.
that’s weird dude
.
.
