Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 00:13:26


Post by: macluvin


I honestly find the concept of female space marines a more welcome change than primaris, and I’ve recently come to terms with the fact that primaris marines are simply THE space marine henceforth. Still, one would think while they were taking artistic liberties with space marines that would have never flown in previous fluff, they could have slipped in a change to the process that makes females compatible with space marine gene seed and implants and hormones. I’ve even read compelling theories that females being non compatible with gene seed and what not was not for a scientific reason but actually that the emperor was a misogynist that didn’t want women in his exclusive club of spacefaring supersoldiers, or that even he was worried about what a “woman’s touch” might bring to the culture of the marines. He certainly preferred the company of other men and rarely deigned to consult female characters, let alone female characters in leadership positions in his empire. Whilst conducting heretical experimentation on the space marine formula it would be plausible that Cawl accidentally discovered that women were in fact compatible with the program, or even found a gene or implant purposefully designed to exclude female biology and was able to reverse it... even worse, he didn’t and took that secret with him...

Just curious as to what your (hopefully filtered/restrained) responses to this sort of thinking would be. I know female space marines is one of the more toxic topics as is the lore behind the primaris, but again, please show some restraint. On the plus side the grim dark of the imperium of man can persist through misogyny if this makes for a plausible bit of fluff, knowing that female space marines are possible but that cawl and gulliman cling to the Emperor’s hypothetical legacy of misogyny...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 00:47:57


Post by: Arcanis161


Before the hate comes in:

IMO, they'd make Sisters of Battle redundant.

Sisters of Battle wear Power Armor, use Space Marine-lite weapons, and, while not as physically strong as Space Marines or Custodes, their faith "powers" allow them to achieve feats and "miracles" that even Space Marines would not be able to achieve.

Saint Mina, who founded the Order of the Bloody Rose, fought a Custodes to a stand-still. An unaugmented human. Fought. A Custodes. To a stand still.

Space Marines and Custodes are the fastest, strongest, and most powerful humans, but they require augmentation to get there. Allowing the same level of augmentation for females removes the need for the Sisters of Battle. I feel it is a more profound statement that an all female nun order is the best class of soldier that regular humans have to offer.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 01:09:51


Post by: Grimskul


I feel part of the problem is that realistically that assuming they would want women for some reason to become SM, the majority of SM trials forced on aspirants would mean that women who were chosen would be weeded out incredibly early on just given the biological advantages a man has over a woman physically. Think about US Navy Seals, they're open to women to join but so far no one has joined or made it past the initial training to make the cut. Now imagine that, but 10x worse and grueling, with additional possibility of you not being able to cope with the marine implants. The likelihood of women becoming marines, even with this change, would be so low that their representation would be incredibly rare and thus basically pointless besides as a token attempt at representation.

I'd much prefer they show more female representation in the guard than marines, because not only is it more realistic there, but the model range is already in desperate need of a reboot and it doesn't require significant retconning to make it happen.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 02:01:03


Post by: Iracundus


You have to have female Guard for the simple reason that if they survive long enough they get their own world. If they were male only, they would die out within a generation.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 02:14:17


Post by: macluvin


First of all they had to retcon female space marines out of 2nd edition... second the new primaris space marine procedure is basically a zero retcon required excuse to make them as it shouldn’t have been feasible for Cawl to commit such heresy as messing with the space marine creation process anyways, basically scribbling all over one of the emperor’s greatest accomplishments and gifts to humanity... also of note is whether or not space marine selects are physically tested before getting augmented into super soldiers; the muscle growth and second heart transplants in particular. Granted a female may not make the cut but I get the sneaky suspicion that there are some females that have put the male aspirants to shame in physical superiority, like a Catachan female (even though that particular example is probably off limits for recruiting). Also of note is the actual complexity in human genetics when it comes to biological sex, such as pseudohermaphrodism, or when the single gene on the Y chromosome that makes a male that gender, makes the leap to the X chromosome as has happened and is a documented occurrence. Biology is weird and complicated... and disregarded in the fluff.

Agreed with the guard though. We need female gaurdspeoples. A female space marine shouldn’t look that radically different from a space marine anyways, should such a thing ever exist.

An issue I have is just how much more submissive a role Sisters seem to occupy compared to Astartes; when not actively crusading there appears to be a degree of autonomy afforded space marines, whereas SoB seem to lack that... of course I might have gotten that bit wrong.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 02:34:20


Post by: Grimskul


macluvin wrote:
First of all they had to retcon female space marines out of 2nd edition... second the new primaris space marine procedure is basically a zero retcon required excuse to make them as it shouldn’t have been feasible for Cawl to commit such heresy as messing with the space marine creation process anyways, basically scribbling all over one of the emperor’s greatest accomplishments and gifts to humanity... also of note is whether or not space marine selects are physically tested before getting augmented into super soldiers; the muscle growth and second heart transplants in particular. Granted a female may not make the cut but I get the sneaky suspicion that there are some females that have put the male aspirants to shame in physical superiority, like a Catachan female (even though that particular example is probably off limits for recruiting). Also of note is the actual complexity in human genetics when it comes to biological sex, such as pseudohermaphrodism, or when the single gene on the Y chromosome that makes a male that gender, makes the leap to the X chromosome as has happened and is a documented occurrence. Biology is weird and complicated... and disregarded in the fluff.

Agreed with the guard though. We need female gaurdspeoples. A female space marine shouldn’t look that radically different from a space marine anyways, should such a thing ever exist.

An issue I have is just how much more submissive a role Sisters seem to occupy compared to Astartes; when not actively crusading there appears to be a degree of autonomy afforded space marines, whereas SoB seem to lack that... of course I might have gotten that bit wrong.


I think it's kind of disingenous to bring up 1st edition stuff as canon at all to what exists now, given that we had things like Obi Wan Sherlock Clouseau and Chief Librarian Tigurius being a half-Eldar/half-human. Furthermore, the retcon you cited should be noted that it was published in the US-based company Game Designer's Workshop's Challenge magazine, and was not directly authored or published by GW themselves. Though presumably they would have gotten permission from GW to write about their IP. It was also a time where they were trying to see what stuck rather than anything that really resembled what 40k looks like now.

Also, I'm assuming you haven't caught up with how Cawl has been able to upgrade SM at all in the fluff, but he's basically been given access to the sangprimus portum which has the raw material of all the primarchs. He basically has the personality and knowledge of one of the key geneticists that were involved in the creation of the Astartes with the Emperor among several other Mechanicus individuals. Given how long he has lived, it makes sense that he would be able to improve on the Emperor's work, especially since the Emp basically gave him his blessing in his endeavours as well. Now obviously this is something that was added recently, but it's not like he did it overnight with no prep time or experience, 10K years seems like a reasonable time in 40k standards to overhaul one of the top fighting weapons of the Imperium.

As I said before, while there are outliers to females being able to compete almost on par with men, you then also have to factor the extreme outliers to men themselves that they are also competing against. This is why most sports (well until recently with the stuff I won't go into since that moves towards the realm of politics) are delineated between men and women because you're already dealing with the cream of the crop for men in terms of genetics/biology, so even if you have the top performing women, they're still going to be far below the higher ceiling for men. So for something as extreme as SM aspirant trials where the cut off rate is pretty damn high, the few women that even make it past the initial trials might either die near the end or there might be single digits worth of fem SM in several chapters, which is...kind of pointless IMO. Then it just comes off as virtue-signalling their inclusion rather than something that actually adds depth to what already exists. Like Arcanis said before me, SoB are already a much more compelling faction and one that has a more interesting backstory and basis.

Hell, we could expand on Sisters of Silence more if you want more female representation if you're not satisfied with more rep in the Guard.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 05:09:45


Post by: mrFickle


Fabius bile muses that the reason the emperor did not enhance the female part of the population to be astartes is because they would be too dangerous. Which is why he is quite keen to create female leaders amongst his new “men”

I thought the simple reason was because the basic implants first requires to make an astartes are linked to the male chromosome


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 06:48:55


Post by: Niiai


These things always end up in the colocvial dumpster fire.

I would just like to say that I am all for more female models inn the game in general and as space marines in particular. And that is my contribution to this topic.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 06:50:36


Post by: Karak Norn Clansman


Completely unnecessary. A net negative proposal. Sisters of Battle are a better concept than bland female Space Marines. Exclusive brotherhoods and sisterhoods of warriors are a superior idea. Distinct and full of character. Adeptus Astartes, Custodes, Sororitas and Sisters of Silence are clearly the way to go. Fortunately, GW itself understands this, even if others do not.

40k plucks on archaic strings in its worldbuilding. Be true to the spirit of the setting.

Fingers crossed people cease this myopic fixation on Space Marines. There is a wider picture.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 07:18:38


Post by: macluvin


As I said before, while there are outliers to females being able to compete almost on par with men, you then also have to factor the extreme outliers to men themselves that they are also competing against. This is why most sports (well until recently with the stuff I won't go into since that moves towards the realm of politics) are delineated between men and women because you're already dealing with the cream of the crop for men in terms of genetics/biology, so even if you have the top performing women, they're still going to be far below the higher ceiling for men. So for something as extreme as SM aspirant trials where the cut off rate is pretty damn high, the few women that even make it past the initial trials might either die near the end or there might be single digits worth of fem SM in several chapters, which is...kind of pointless IMO. Then it just comes off as virtue-signalling their inclusion rather than something that actually adds depth to what already exists. Like Arcanis said before me, SoB are already a much more compelling faction and one that has a more interesting backstory and basis.

Hell, we could expand on Sisters of Silence more if you want more female representation if you're not satisfied with more rep in the Guard.


But the only difference between how a male and a female develop is purely a matter of hormones. Which the gene seed and implants manipulates anyways. Which is why a male-female trans would adopt the same muscle development as a female with hormonal treatments and vice versa. Which again, biology. And again again. Only one gene on the entire Y chromosome is responsible for males being males. Genetics as an excuse is thin as air and twice as easy to cut through with a basic understanding of biology and physiology.

I find it more believable that a xenophobic, totalitarian, and scientific method shunning society, who persecutes mutants on the basis that they look different and therefore must be tainted or evil, and bearing medieval minds simply adopted the degree of misogyny the emperor had in excluding females from space marines and simply do not consider females for leadership positions as often as men. I find it more believable that it’s not because they can’t but that they won’t. I also crave the imperium being flawed and ass backwards as much as humanly possible... robo g showing up and taking care of business and working the flaws out of the imperium would be much more interesting if he was adding or reinforcing other flaws.

This is also why the dark angels are my favorite chapter... they have very interesting skeletons in the closet.

I’m also a chaos space marine player so it makes no matter for me. Which brings me to another point... technically daemoncubula are female space marines...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 08:45:41


Post by: Tiennos


Remember that supposedly, aspirants start being "marinated" at around 10-12 years old. If you take kids before puberty, it doesn't matter that much what their gender is. It also means that their growth will be completely changed by all the hormones and implants being stuffed into them. Add the psycho hypnosis (or whatever it's called) that changes their mindset and the original gender of a marine doesn't matter at all. They will all end up as barely human killing machines anyway.

From a game design point of view, I agree that female marines would step on the sister's toes, so it's probably better to keep it that way.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 08:58:02


Post by: Mr. Burning


 Tiennos wrote:
Remember that supposedly, aspirants start being "marinated" at around 10-12 years old. If you take kids before puberty, it doesn't matter that much what their gender is. It also means that their growth will be completely changed by all the hormones and implants being stuffed into them. Add the psycho hypnosis (or whatever it's called) that changes their mindset and the original gender of a marine doesn't matter at all. They will all end up as barely human killing machines anyway.

From a game design point of view, I agree that female marines would step on the sister's toes, so it's probably better to keep it that way.


Biological makeup changed, physiology changed, psycho indoctrinated....You basically end up with something that will look like and act like an existing marine and fit into the armour provided.

I'm all for a GW retcon..'...no one is special'. Fits the grim dark theme really well


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 09:22:01


Post by: Karak Norn Clansman


Monks and nuns should be kept separate. That is more archaic than mixed orders.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 10:26:12


Post by: Gert


It is quite funny how a few characters have pointed out the silliness of Astartes and the Primarchs being all male. Malcador even suggested that the Emperor should have made the Primarchs some sisters to balance out the big manly men having -measuring contests all the time.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 10:46:44


Post by: Olthannon


I agree with KNC, Sisters of Battle are a far more awesome aesthetic and army than just having boring bland female space marines.

I'd have preferred if they had just updated the sisters a lot sooner than they did. And bring out some female guard figures.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 11:43:16


Post by: harlokin


I prefer the idea of Space Marines being beyond definable biological sex as a result of the process they go through; the ultimate defenders of humanity lose a vital element of what made them human. I always hated Space Wolves carousing like 'big damn heroes' in the mead hall, because it shat all over the tragedy of what they should be.

From a modelling perspective, female Space Marines would look like their 'male' counterparts, notwithstanding the inevitable complaints about their heads not looking 'feminine' enough and demands for more bewbs; "Hey Vasquez, have you ever been mistaken for a man?"

All of that said, I don't want female Space Marines simply to deny satisfaction to those clamouring for them in order to virtue signal.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 11:45:55


Post by: BertBert


 harlokin wrote:

All of that said, I don't want female Space Marines simply to deny satisfaction to those clamouring for them in order to virtue signal.


This is where I stand as well. Introducing major changes into an established IP for extraneous political/ideological reasons is something I cannot support.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 11:53:08


Post by: Nurglitch


Forgot where I was posting. Deleted.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 11:54:10


Post by: the_scotsman


Not gonna happen at this point. Gws market share is much more vulnerable to Aggrieved Nerdy White Man cancel culture than it is to Aggrieved Woke Let's Be Real Mostly Also White Man cancel culture.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Mr. Burning wrote:
 Tiennos wrote:
Remember that supposedly, aspirants start being "marinated" at around 10-12 years old. If you take kids before puberty, it doesn't matter that much what their gender is. It also means that their growth will be completely changed by all the hormones and implants being stuffed into them. Add the psycho hypnosis (or whatever it's called) that changes their mindset and the original gender of a marine doesn't matter at all. They will all end up as barely human killing machines anyway.

From a game design point of view, I agree that female marines would step on the sister's toes, so it's probably better to keep it that way.


Biological makeup changed, physiology changed, psycho indoctrinated....You basically end up with something that will look like and act like an existing marine and fit into the armour provided.

I'm all for a GW retcon..'...no one is special'. Fits the grim dark theme really well


Yeah, also this. Adding female heads to the guard boxes gives you 100% all the tools needed to create female space marines for yourself. I've already got female space marines - all my deathwatch are named, some of them are named "Sister" instead of "Brother".

Main problem I had was just lack of heads. I had like one spare Sister of Silence head that I cut the top knot off of that made a fine space marine head, but the Escher heads were too small (way smaller than female GSC or Sister of Silence, I think becuase they wanted to make the hair look bigger they scaled the heads down). So all but one of my battle-sisters are just wearing their helmets like responsible adults.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
My deathwatch aren't exactly the world's most lore-abiding space marines, though, because I couldn't give a rat's ass about the intricasies of marine lore. I've got Brother Apoplectus of the Angry Marines in the mix and because at least in the first iteration of the new Kill Team maybe they've changed it by now there was no way to take a Deathwatch Primaris Intercessor without paying an extra 2 points for a 100% useless, literally worthless Special Issue Ammo bolt pistol, I gave my one intercessor a good ol' boy looking Orlock head and an american flag shoulderpad and named him Cousin Jethro of the Dont Tread On Marines and modeled him dual-wielding his rifle and the pistol you can take from his cold dead hands.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 12:22:12


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I for one would welcome the models, but actively burn the fluff. I can't even begin to imagine the cringy crap that would come out of the BL about "female recruits" in the Space Marine legions. I mean, Black Library does a lot of things well, Inclusivity and sensitivity to topics and areas outside their wheelhouse is not one of them. Please just give us female heads, and call it done. Don't make cringy fluff that has "Shower hazing scenes" and brutal gory scenes depicting their torture at the hands of some sadistic BBEG. No thank you, I'll pass. But yes, I would love Custodes Females with gorgeos flowing red top knots instead of their stupid helmets.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 13:05:12


Post by: Gert


Considering GW isn't exactly in the market of making smut or torture porn I very much doubt something like that would even come close to being published. The only "cringe" GW seems to make just now is Astartes being painfully infallible but even then that isn't the case 100% of the time.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 13:14:59


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


So when I say torture porn, I'm not talking about Saw or Hostel. I'm talking more in line with what Lara Croft goes through in the new re-imagined Tomb Raider 1. She gets brutally beaten, nearly raped, and has to end up doing some pretty gruesome and horrific things to survive. That's mental torture. She's so badly beat up at the end of the game, her clothes are shredded and she's basically running around in the snow with next to nothing on. That's physical torture. Granted the writing in that is also crappy, but it's still all done from the "male gaze" perspective. I could see BL putting female Space Marines through some horrifically brutal trials, a sort of GI Jane montage of terrible things forcing her to survive and grow strong enough to "belong".


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 13:21:28


Post by: Gert


If there was literally any evidence whatsoever of BL getting an author to write a book like that in that much detail now I could see your point. But considering BL hasn't done anything close to that sort of detail, I think ever, you seem to just be spouting nonsense.
Tomb Raider 2013 was an 18 rated game, it was specifically marketed for adults. GW markets its product to people from like 8+.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 17:03:30


Post by: Mr Nobody


I could be crazy, but I always thought the core issue was less that space marines were all male and more that they are the poster boy of 40k. They're the closest thing to a protagonist the setting has. And to make a protagonist faction in a game with roleplaying characteristics with exclusive factors always felt a bit unfair.

I think if we lived in an alternate universe where SOB held the position of space marines, you would have people wishing to add men.

No idea how we move away from that. Yeah, you could add woman to primaris marines, but people already have lukewarm feeling towards the primaris release. You could also give equal attention to the various imperium factions, but that sounds equally as impossible.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 18:13:42


Post by: jareddm


 Mr Nobody wrote:
I could be crazy, but I always thought the core issue was less that space marines were all male and more that they are the poster boy of 40k. They're the closest thing to a protagonist the setting has. And to make a protagonist faction in a game with roleplaying characteristics always felt a bit unfair.

I think if we lived in an alternate universe where SOB held the position of space marines, you would have people wishing to add men.

No idea how we move away from that. Yeah, you could add woman to primaris marines, but people already have lukewarm feeling towards the primaris release. You could also give equal attention to the various imperium factions, but that sounds equally as impossible.
I thought the 9th edition trailer did exactly that. Astartes and Sisters were both shown in a positive light, with different yet equally valued skills.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 18:17:43


Post by: the_scotsman


jareddm wrote:
 Mr Nobody wrote:
I could be crazy, but I always thought the core issue was less that space marines were all male and more that they are the poster boy of 40k. They're the closest thing to a protagonist the setting has. And to make a protagonist faction in a game with roleplaying characteristics always felt a bit unfair.

I think if we lived in an alternate universe where SOB held the position of space marines, you would have people wishing to add men.

No idea how we move away from that. Yeah, you could add woman to primaris marines, but people already have lukewarm feeling towards the primaris release. You could also give equal attention to the various imperium factions, but that sounds equally as impossible.
I thought the 9th edition trailer did exactly that. Astartes and Sisters were both shown in a positive light, with different yet equally valued skills.


The space marine: Massive, hilarious levels of plot armor allowing a basic troop model with an anti-chaff melee weapon to effortlessly dispatch a 50-ish ppm heavily armored tough elite

The sister of battle: ....punctuality I guess, since the space marine didn't show up to save her until later in the vid?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 18:28:27


Post by: jareddm


Because the ability to bring forth miracles through faith is nothing. That said, this is background. Get out of here with your tabletop stats. The two are unrelated and don't match.
Never have and never will.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 18:51:46


Post by: the_scotsman


jareddm wrote:
Because the ability to bring forth miracles through faith is nothing. That said, this is background. Get out of here with your tabletop stats. The two are unrelated and don't match.
Never have and never will.


That miracle being...being rescued by the more powerful space marine.

Don't get me wrong, sisters and marines are both cool - sisters are cooler, obviously, for the same reason Batman is more likely to be peoples' favorite superhero than Superman - but that video ain't exactly a good example to point to as to how GW 'values both of their skills and abilities equally' just like how watching Justice League would be a bad way to understand why people like batman.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 19:20:05


Post by: mrFickle


I think it would be cool if CSM made female astartes. That had unique properties associated with the genetic science required to adapt the organs to the female body.

Maybe they would be too powerful for some reason and that’s why the emperor didn’t do it. Seeing as the astartes were a step down in terms of individual power compared to the thunder warriors


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 19:22:10


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


It's like putting Batman next to Superman and saying, SEE! THEY ARE EQUALS. One is a demi-god with the power to single handedly take out entire squads of lesser troops, and one is a exceptionally talented base level human that has tinkerbell powers. The only way she can survive is if you believe hard enough.

Why is it in Background every year or so you get this thread based on total false equivalence. Sisters are to Space Marines, what Space Marines are to Custodes. Sure, 1 might be able to damage or even kill one given enough help, but 9 out of 1000 times, The custodian will ROFL Stomp the Astartes into paste. Sisters are not, nor have they ever been equal to Astartes. Give Tempestus Scions Power armor and years of training, and there would be zero difference.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 19:40:06


Post by: macluvin


mrFickle wrote:
I think it would be cool if CSM made female astartes. That had unique properties associated with the genetic science required to adapt the organs to the female body.

Maybe they would be too powerful for some reason and that’s why the emperor didn’t do it. Seeing as the astartes were a step down in terms of individual power compared to the thunder warriors


Chaos does seem to lack female representation doesn’t it... It would be pretty heretical to make female chaos space marines, if not liberating to a degree. The religious polarization would be interesting as well, and seeing chaos space marines to a degree as not an inherently bad or evil faction, but more of the sorts that have been influenced by similar thoughts as one may have after reading Blake’s marriage of heaven and hell would be very interesting. It’s why the blood gorgons fascinated me. For this reason I think it would really polarize the imperial cult and chaos further with more parallels being drawn between Catholicism and modern day satanism. Since we totally know that the ecclesiarchy is definitely supposed to be the 13th century Catholic Church dialed up to 11 with the grim dark...

Also yeah. Sisters of Battle have been more often than not the whipping boy of the writers that choose to include them. And they also assume a more submissive role than the astartes, answering dutifully and constantly to the ecclesiarchy. The astartes seem to be free to conduct business where and how they wish as long as they live up to their obligations to any potential crusades, and even seem to occupy leadership roles for entire planets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

Why is it in Background every year or so you get this thread based on total false equivalence. Sisters are to Space Marines, what Space Marines are to Custodes. Sure, 1 might be able to damage or even kill one given enough help, but 9 out of 1000 times, The custodian will ROFL Stomp the Astartes into paste. Sisters are not, nor have they ever been equal to Astartes. Give Tempestus Scions Power armor and years of training, and there would be zero difference.


To be fair I wasn’t trying to draw that false equivalence. I was trying to explore whether or not the reason female space marines don’t exist is purely on a misogynist gender role expectation rather than science, and was advocating for considering the actual possibility. As well as the implications for what it means for the imperium.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/03 20:46:25


Post by: Mr Nobody


jareddm wrote:
 Mr Nobody wrote:
I could be crazy, but I always thought the core issue was less that space marines were all male and more that they are the poster boy of 40k. They're the closest thing to a protagonist the setting has. And to make a protagonist faction in a game with roleplaying characteristics always felt a bit unfair.

I think if we lived in an alternate universe where SOB held the position of space marines, you would have people wishing to add men.

No idea how we move away from that. Yeah, you could add woman to primaris marines, but people already have lukewarm feeling towards the primaris release. You could also give equal attention to the various imperium factions, but that sounds equally as impossible.
I thought the 9th edition trailer did exactly that. Astartes and Sisters were both shown in a positive light, with different yet equally valued skills.


True. And those limited edition Imperial Guard characters they released were pretty cool. It's also nice to see GW making a concerted push to sell more SOB with all those new kits. I'm still holding out hope that GW one day updates the IG kit with male and female heads.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 06:51:49


Post by: Kepora


 Grimskul wrote:
I feel part of the problem is that realistically that assuming they would want women for some reason to become SM, the majority of SM trials forced on aspirants would mean that women who were chosen would be weeded out incredibly early on just given the biological advantages a man has over a woman physically. Think about US Navy Seals, they're open to women to join but so far no one has joined or made it past the initial training to make the cut. Now imagine that, but 10x worse and grueling, with additional possibility of you not being able to cope with the marine implants. The likelihood of women becoming marines, even with this change, would be so low that their representation would be incredibly rare and thus basically pointless besides as a token attempt at representation.

I'd much prefer they show more female representation in the guard than marines, because not only is it more realistic there, but the model range is already in desperate need of a reboot and it doesn't require significant retconning to make it happen.


This, plus the point that it'd pretty much invalidate Sister of Battle. Give us more female Tau, Guard, Mechanicus, and Eldar minis instead (and update more of the older lines while they're at it!)


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 07:55:00


Post by: Not Online!!!


macluvin wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
I think it would be cool if CSM made female astartes. That had unique properties associated with the genetic science required to adapt the organs to the female body.

Maybe they would be too powerful for some reason and that’s why the emperor didn’t do it. Seeing as the astartes were a step down in terms of individual power compared to the thunder warriors


Chaos does seem to lack female representation doesn’t it... It would be pretty heretical to make female chaos space marines, if not liberating to a degree. The religious polarization would be interesting as well, and seeing chaos space marines to a degree as not an inherently bad or evil faction, but more of the sorts that have been influenced by similar thoughts as one may have after reading Blake’s marriage of heaven and hell would be very interesting. It’s why the blood gorgons fascinated me. For this reason I think it would really polarize the imperial cult and chaos further with more parallels being drawn between Catholicism and modern day satanism. Since we totally know that the ecclesiarchy is definitely supposed to be the 13th century Catholic Church dialed up to 11 with the grim dark...

What?, We got female traitor guard and female cultists, including a female champ for that. That's more female representation than guard.

Also yeah. Sisters of Battle have been more often than not the whipping boy of the writers that choose to include them. And they also assume a more submissive role than the astartes, answering dutifully and constantly to the ecclesiarchy. The astartes seem to be free to conduct business where and how they wish as long as they live up to their obligations to any potential crusades, and even seem to occupy leadership roles for entire planets.

If you think sisters get beaten up often by writers, never ever consider R&H / Cults / lost and the damend, which solely exist to facilitate some guard competecy and range on the food chain so far down that they all but guaranteed lose whenever they appear


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 09:04:42


Post by: Gert


On the whole "female Marines invalidating SoB", how do they do that?
SoB are a religious fighting force made up of orphans from the various Schola across the Imperium. They worship the Emperor and can perform miracles.
Astartes are mostly secular, viewing the Emeror as a sort of father figure rather than a God. They recruit from anywhere and the process includes huge amounts of surgery/genetic alterations to the point where technically Astartes are no longer human.
They both wear power armour, use bolt weapons and kill the enemies of humanity. That's where the similarities end. Non-male Astartes doesn't eliminate the reason for SoB existing because they are fundamentally different organisations.


Also, can people leave their poor understanding of the political spectrum at the door please.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 11:09:20


Post by: ingtaer


 Gert wrote:

Also, can people leave their poor understanding of the political spectrum at the door please.


Can people just not bring it up at all when its not relevant, also please try to remember the other three rules here like not being rude and not spamming. Thanks.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 11:12:19


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Arcanis161 wrote:IMO, they'd make Sisters of Battle redundant.
Disagree, on the sole basis that Custodes don't make Space Marines redundant by the same virtue.

They have vastly different aesthetics, playstyles, and background - I don't think Space Marines are as defined by their gender as Sisters are. Sisters being women (via the Decree Passive) is much more integral to their identity and in-universe reasoning than "uh, the space science isn't good enough yet" (and we can even infer from Malcador that it would have been *entirely* possible to have Primarchs who were women - but the Emperor laughed the idea off).

Yes, there are absolutely some stylistic hallmarks of the whole "warrior monk" thing with the Astartes, but there are far more Chapters who don't fit so neatly into that all-male box - Space Wolves certainly don't, and Ultramarines have seemed to move into a more Greco-Roman styling than the robes and hoods of the Black Templars and Dark Angels.

So, nah, I really don't think adding women into the Astartes would make Sisters redundant.

Sisters of Battle wear Power Armor, use Space Marine-lite weapons, and, while not as physically strong as Space Marines or Custodes, their faith "powers" allow them to achieve feats and "miracles" that even Space Marines would not be able to achieve.
And Custodes wear powered armour, use Space Marine+ weapons (bolt weapons) and while not as weak as Astartes, their more restrictive and close range arsenal level the playing field.

Allowing the same level of augmentation for females removes the need for the Sisters of Battle.
Disagree, on the sole basis that the same could be said for why you don't need Custodes. The point is that the augmentation is incredibly costly to becoming an Astartes, so it's hardly like every Sororitas recruit would survive. Should Scions not exist, because Space Marines do? Custodes?
I feel it is a more profound statement that an all female nun order is the best class of soldier that regular humans have to offer.
They can be both. I don't see how having women recruits into the Astartes devalues the Sororitas.

Grimskul wrote:I think it's kind of disingenous to bring up 1st edition stuff as canon at all to what exists now, given that we had things like Obi Wan Sherlock Clouseau and Chief Librarian Tigurius being a half-Eldar/half-human.
Slight fact check - it wasn't Tigurius that was the half-Eldar, it was another named character, but they were the chief instead of Tiggy.

And, funnily enough, has actually been re-made canon in I think the latest Indomitus era book. So, uh, perhaps those callbacks to 1st aren't entirely unwarranted.
It was also a time where they were trying to see what stuck rather than anything that really resembled what 40k looks like now.
Indeed - so why is the "women don't sell well" still something adhered to? Times have changed. On a purely corporate level, it may be worth reconsidering if women Astartes would be the loss they were all those decades ago.

Also, I'm assuming you haven't caught up with how Cawl has been able to upgrade SM at all in the fluff, but he's basically been given access to the sangprimus portum which has the raw material of all the primarchs. He basically has the personality and knowledge of one of the key geneticists that were involved in the creation of the Astartes with the Emperor among several other Mechanicus individuals. Given how long he has lived, it makes sense that he would be able to improve on the Emperor's work, especially since the Emp basically gave him his blessing in his endeavours as well. Now obviously this is something that was added recently, but it's not like he did it overnight with no prep time or experience, 10K years seems like a reasonable time in 40k standards to overhaul one of the top fighting weapons of the Imperium.
I don't think it's unreasonable that he could've figured out how to make women Astartes in that same time frame.

As I said before, while there are outliers to females being able to compete almost on par with men, you then also have to factor the extreme outliers to men themselves that they are also competing against.
I'd like to point out that Astartes recruits are pre-pubescent. There's barely any physical differences. Moving on.
SoB are already a much more compelling faction and one that has a more interesting backstory and basis.
And Space Marines, I find, are more interesting than the Custodes. Why do Custodes exist, if they're also an all-male heavy armoured bolt-weapon wielding elite army?

I seriously don't get why women Astartes would stand on the feet of Sororitas.

Hell, we could expand on Sisters of Silence more if you want more female representation if you're not satisfied with more rep in the Guard.
That's not how this works. Sisters of Silence, Sisters of Battle, and the Guard aren't Space Marines. And Space Marines are, like it or not, the most iconic 40k faction. They're the ones with the easily recognisable aesthetic and design. They're the ones plastered on all 40k media. They're the ones that sell. They're the ones that, if you point to, most people will actually recognise as being 40k.

While Space Marines have that dominant position in culture, it doesn't matter if every other faction is mixed or all-women, because the flagship faction puts a very "boys only" message front and centre.

harlokin wrote:I prefer the idea of Space Marines being beyond definable biological sex as a result of the process they go through; the ultimate defenders of humanity lose a vital element of what made them human.
Agreed. That's why I'd like women recruits - because it would further amplify that. Having this artificial "uh, we can't have women" creates this idea that, while on paper Astartes are sexless killing machines, it's only men who get that "chance". Having both would give opportunities to explore that eradication of humanity without a gender bias.

And absolutely agreed - from a modelling perspective, boobplate wouldn't exist. I imagine their heads would look like Stormcast ones.
I don't want female Space Marines simply to deny satisfaction to those clamouring for them in order to virtue signal.
That's definitely a thing that rational people do.

Mr Nobody wrote:I could be crazy, but I always thought the core issue was less that space marines were all male and more that they are the poster boy of 40k. They're the closest thing to a protagonist the setting has. And to make a protagonist faction in a game with roleplaying characteristics with exclusive factors always felt a bit unfair.
Yeah, that's he main concern here. It's that the most iconic faction has a big old "boys only" sign right on top of it, and that, coupled with the amount of people clamouring to uphold that if only to keep out those Gosh Darned Virtue Signallers, isn't exactly a good look.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:It's every terrible sin, made manifest, and justified, in the interest of mankind's "Better future" promised by a long dead Christ figure that believed the best course of humanity was to lean hard right into the world of hardcore Socialism.
uuuuuuuuh...
Kepora wrote:Wrong. Fascism is nationalistic socialism. Even the guy who created/first really promoted the idea, Mussolini, called it "The most perfect form of socialism".
...UHHHHHHH

I really think some of y'all need to go back to school before you start talking politics.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 11:37:14


Post by: the_scotsman


It doesn't matter. If it were more financially beneficial to include female astartes they would have with primaris marines. GW isn't trying to position themselves as a mass-market product, and it's clear from the way they handle things like Primaris that they're incredibly cautious in how they treat their whale consumers, because I would be willing to bet that the top 3-5% of customers make up about 30-35% of GW's revenue, and they buy a lot of space marines.

The mystical fig leaf that somehow organ transplants have become gendered, and surviving an organ transplant procedure is somehow easier with MANSTRENGTH THE STRONG STRENGTH ONLY MEN HAVE will stand.

They can't even make a new kit for a single space marine unit. They cant even say "this obviously the exact same space marine bike unit we just made a new kit for, is the new kit for space marine bikes." They keep awkwardly selling the old 3rd edition bike kit alongside the new biker kit, THATS how gently they're handling the delicate, easily bruised skin of their precious precious babies. There is 0 chance they'll just turn around and be like 'syke, lady marines now, deal with it NERDS.'


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 12:34:45


Post by: Tygre


In my mind the space marine transformation and development was tuned to the male development cycle. That was why they made space marines out of prepubescents. The natural development cycle was used supplemented and exaggerated to make space marines. Using females would throw the timing off.

Well that's my headcannon anyway.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 12:39:44


Post by: Mr. Burning


 the_scotsman wrote:
MANSTRENGTH THE STRONG STRENGTH ONLY MEN HAVE



Actual Imperial propaganda.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 13:42:45


Post by: General Kroll


 the_scotsman wrote:

They can't even make a new kit for a single space marine unit. They cant even say "this obviously the exact same space marine bike unit we just made a new kit for, is the new kit for space marine bikes." They keep awkwardly selling the old 3rd edition bike kit alongside the new biker kit, THATS how gently they're handling the delicate, easily bruised skin of their precious precious babies. There is 0 chance they'll just turn around and be like 'syke, lady marines now, deal with it NERDS.'


I suspect this is partly true, but I also suspect GW know they have the chance of continuing to sell an ancient kit that’s likely paid for its development a hundred times over. Why discontinue the firstborn kits when they know they can still sell both. We won’t likely see the discontinuation of things like tactical marines and OG bikes until their sales drop below what makes them profitable, or the mould wears out.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 14:05:59


Post by: the_scotsman


 General Kroll wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:

They can't even make a new kit for a single space marine unit. They cant even say "this obviously the exact same space marine bike unit we just made a new kit for, is the new kit for space marine bikes." They keep awkwardly selling the old 3rd edition bike kit alongside the new biker kit, THATS how gently they're handling the delicate, easily bruised skin of their precious precious babies. There is 0 chance they'll just turn around and be like 'syke, lady marines now, deal with it NERDS.'


I suspect this is partly true, but I also suspect GW know they have the chance of continuing to sell an ancient kit that’s likely paid for its development a hundred times over. Why discontinue the firstborn kits when they know they can still sell both. We won’t likely see the discontinuation of things like tactical marines and OG bikes until their sales drop below what makes them profitable, or the mould wears out.


If GW felt like they could deal with the fallout of discontinuing existing space marine ranges with primaris stuff they absolutely would. There is no way that releasing a unit like Outriders and having the supernerds do the mathhammer on them and go "welp, nope, looks like space marine bikers are actually better boys!" doesn't cost GW some sales.

Theres a reason Ork Warbuggies are legended. There's a reason they've tried to quietly squat the warboss on warbike for ages. GW absolutely cans the old stuff and frames a new kit as a replacement whenever they possibly can, and they generally mess around with base size, unit size, etc whenever possible to make it more awkward to continue to use the old sculpt (see Ghazghkull, new greater demons, new belakor, etc for examples of that)


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 15:50:37


Post by: Gert


NGL I would enjoy them doing that tbh, just for the fun of it.
"Oh what, you DON'T want female Astartes? Well, you know what? There are now ONLY female Astartes "


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 16:19:49


Post by: Arcanis161


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Arcanis161 wrote:IMO, they'd make Sisters of Battle redundant.
Disagree, on the sole basis that Custodes don't make Space Marines redundant by the same virtue.

They have vastly different aesthetics, playstyles, and background - I don't think Space Marines are as defined by their gender as Sisters are. Sisters being women (via the Decree Passive) is much more integral to their identity and in-universe reasoning than "uh, the space science isn't good enough yet" (and we can even infer from Malcador that it would have been *entirely* possible to have Primarchs who were women - but the Emperor laughed the idea off).

Yes, there are absolutely some stylistic hallmarks of the whole "warrior monk" thing with the Astartes, but there are far more Chapters who don't fit so neatly into that all-male box - Space Wolves certainly don't, and Ultramarines have seemed to move into a more Greco-Roman styling than the robes and hoods of the Black Templars and Dark Angels.

So, nah, I really don't think adding women into the Astartes would make Sisters redundant.

Sisters of Battle wear Power Armor, use Space Marine-lite weapons, and, while not as physically strong as Space Marines or Custodes, their faith "powers" allow them to achieve feats and "miracles" that even Space Marines would not be able to achieve.
And Custodes wear powered armour, use Space Marine+ weapons (bolt weapons) and while not as weak as Astartes, their more restrictive and close range arsenal level the playing field.

Allowing the same level of augmentation for females removes the need for the Sisters of Battle.
Disagree, on the sole basis that the same could be said for why you don't need Custodes. The point is that the augmentation is incredibly costly to becoming an Astartes, so it's hardly like every Sororitas recruit would survive. Should Scions not exist, because Space Marines do? Custodes?
I feel it is a more profound statement that an all female nun order is the best class of soldier that regular humans have to offer.
They can be both. I don't see how having women recruits into the Astartes devalues the Sororitas.


Custodes are the Emperor's personal bodyguard and are listed in the fluff as being very rare and few in number.

Space Marines offer a large degree of customizability, decades of lore, and a rather large amount of model support. They are advertised as being the "heroes of the 41st millennium."

Scions bring a Special Forces element to tbe Guard, an army largely known for heaps of lightly armed and armored bodies with heavy vehicle support. I'd say the fact they haven't released much after the Scion, Bullgryn, and Taurox kits indicates GW's faith in them becoming their own army.

Sororitas bring a Cadre of women in power armor with faith powers and heavy religious iconography. Up until recent years, they've been badly maligned in the fluff and in model support.

If female Space Marines are created, then all the Sororitas have to offer are those faith powers and religious zealotry and iconography. I hate to say this, but given recent trends, I don't see those alone appealing to a large enough audience to warrant both Sororitas and female Space Marines.

EDIT: let me put it this way: Space Marines, more than most other factions, are meant to be "your dudes", correct? Say female Space Marines are released tomorrow. You could say that your female Space Marines are similar to Black Templars, and model them with tons of religious iconography, correct? Well, now you have stronger Sisters of Battle, minus the faith powers. Again, I don't see faith powers, religious zealots, and/or religious iconography appealing to a broad enough audience on their own.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 16:48:32


Post by: Gert


Considering the huge clamour and acclaim the updated SoB range got, I'm not sure you're right on this.
Their background, rules and model range are different enough from SM that they absolutely would still be appealing to many.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 16:50:08


Post by: Olthannon


 Gert wrote:
NGL I would enjoy them doing that tbh, just for the fun of it.
"Oh what, you DON'T want female Astartes? Well, you know what? There are now ONLY female Astartes "


To be honest it's worth them doing it because it turn all those supposed "cold logical internet types" into a big amorphous blob of frothing hatred and the biggest hissy fit imaginable.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 16:59:34


Post by: the_scotsman


 Olthannon wrote:
 Gert wrote:
NGL I would enjoy them doing that tbh, just for the fun of it.
"Oh what, you DON'T want female Astartes? Well, you know what? There are now ONLY female Astartes "


To be honest it's worth them doing it because it turn all those supposed "cold logical internet types" into a big amorphous blob of frothing hatred and the biggest hissy fit imaginable.


....I'll be honest it is one of the biggest reasons I do want them to do it. There's something that uniquely amuses me about watching the people who whine and moan the loudest about cancel culture wholeheartedly engage in the most vicious and vitriolic version of it over some meaningless microaggression like some company putting a little plastic head with a ponytail sculpted on it in their box of toy soldiers.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 17:05:44


Post by: macluvin


What?, We got female traitor guard and female cultists, including a female champ for that. That's more female representation than guard.


Ah yes... the legends exclusive traitor guard (spoken as squatted) in one of the most unplayable armies in the game... and the 2 female cultist models from blackstone fortress... The lack of female representation in imperial guard is it’s own problem that doesn’t mean other model lines don’t have their own similar problems. Also there is a female commissar and catachan... Also I’m not going to say space marines NEED female models or fluff support, I just think it would be a bit more interesting and egalitarian of the writer’s and owners of the IP to shift the fluff of why space marines are all male from the standpoint that it’s biology to its misogyny (of the Emperor and to a lesser degree the primarchs, and set the culture of the space marines). I think it would be better overall to just crank out some female space marines heads, and quite frankly if they could survive the gakstorm of making space marines with twice the space and twice the marine I am certain that they can deal with the rage of putting female heads in a space marine box as optional alternate heads...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 19:37:57


Post by: Mr Nobody


macluvin wrote:
What?, We got female traitor guard and female cultists, including a female champ for that. That's more female representation than guard.


Ah yes... the legends exclusive traitor guard (spoken as squatted) in one of the most unplayable armies in the game... and the 2 female cultist models from blackstone fortress... The lack of female representation in imperial guard is it’s own problem that doesn’t mean other model lines don’t have their own similar problems. Also there is a female commissar and catachan... Also I’m not going to say space marines NEED female models or fluff support, I just think it would be a bit more interesting and egalitarian of the writer’s and owners of the IP to shift the fluff of why space marines are all male from the standpoint that it’s biology to its misogyny (of the Emperor and to a lesser degree the primarchs, and set the culture of the space marines). I think it would be better overall to just crank out some female space marines heads, and quite frankly if they could survive the gakstorm of making space marines with twice the space and twice the marine I am certain that they can deal with the rage of putting female heads in a space marine box as optional alternate heads...


Don't you worry, the fool I am, I have a R&H army in the works. Legends be damned, I have rules and I'll play with them!

Although that gives me a thought. Maybe I should give them a coven of witches for rogue psykers. Now there's a model I'd buy from GW.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 21:23:00


Post by: tauist


Why doesn't female Space Marines exist? Simple really - The Emperor Of Mankind was not a heterosexual man. He probably also loved Tom Of Finland Artwork.

On a more serious note, I think it's the "UK scifi" background of the setting. Catholic schools where boys and girls were separated, these were the institutions where the GW authors were raised. That's my guess, and also explains why gender issues, sexuality and sex in general doesn't really exist in the warhammer lore. That's my theory anyway.

BTW nothing's stopping you from plopping a female head onto a Space Marine model. Go nuts! I don't actually think anyone would have any qualms about playing against you even if you did that.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 21:36:14


Post by: Tiennos


When it comes to Chaos, it's more odd that they don't seem to have any female marines or sisters equivalent. Chaos is supposed to be more of a meritocracy than the Imperium; the gods don't (or shouldn't) care about gender and can use warp nonsense to boost anyone from normal to superpowered if they want to.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/04 22:39:51


Post by: Gert


Chaos might be a "meritocracy" overall but the Legions and Renegade chapters are still a boys club. Savona from the Fabius Bile books, despite being a formidable warrior and a member of a renowned Lord's inner circle, is constantly derided and looked down on since she is not an Astartes and never can be because she is female. A mortal woman could easily rise to the position of leadership in a Chaos Cult or fleet but would be extremely unlikely to lead a CSM Warband. 40k Chaos ain't as free as AoS Chaos.

Spoiler:
 tauist wrote:
Why doesn't female Space Marines exist? Simple really - The Emperor Of Mankind was not a heterosexual man. He probably also loved Tom Of Finland Artwork.

On a more serious note, I think it's the "UK scifi" background of the setting. Catholic schools where boys and girls were separated, these were the institutions where the GW authors were raised. That's my guess, and also explains why gender issues, sexuality and sex in general doesn't really exist in the warhammer lore. That's my theory anyway.

BTW nothing's stopping you from plopping a female head onto a Space Marine model. Go nuts! I don't actually think anyone would have any qualms about playing against you even if you did that.

England is a Protestant country and Catholic schools only make up about 10% of state/public schools there. Of course, as I do not know the creators of Warhammer personally it is entirely possible they came from Catholic backgrounds but considering the history of Catholics in England, I very much doubt it.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/05 04:29:21


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Olthannon wrote:
 Gert wrote:
NGL I would enjoy them doing that tbh, just for the fun of it.
"Oh what, you DON'T want female Astartes? Well, you know what? There are now ONLY female Astartes "


To be honest it's worth them doing it because it turn all those supposed "cold logical internet types" into a big amorphous blob of frothing hatred and the biggest hissy fit imaginable.

You mean the way you guys threw hissy fits over 5E Necron lore?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/05 04:54:07


Post by: macluvin


Totally happened across a quote randomly from Alan Merrett... Basically the only reason why we don’t have female space marines was simply because female models weren’t selling in the early days... I really doubt GW is going to do anything with space marines anyways since that would require releasing even more space ma-.... ima shut up now...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/05 09:19:45


Post by: Tiennos


 Gert wrote:
Chaos might be a "meritocracy" overall but the Legions and Renegade chapters are still a boys club. Savona from the Fabius Bile books, despite being a formidable warrior and a member of a renowned Lord's inner circle, is constantly derided and looked down on since she is not an Astartes and never can be because she is female. A mortal woman could easily rise to the position of leadership in a Chaos Cult or fleet but would be extremely unlikely to lead a CSM Warband. 40k Chaos ain't as free as AoS Chaos.

Sure, I didn't mean women could become part of an established legion. I was thinking more of a chaos equivalent to the Sororitas: women in power armor with faith on their side, not just your average cultist girl.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/05 09:31:28


Post by: Not Online!!!


Mirael sabatiel

Also that one order that purged itself.
Chances are chaos sisters exist.

Also, it's clear the dark path stands open to all, it's just more difficult for regular humans to achieve then end goal and their ascendancy is in general lower ranking than daemonprince, simply because they can't accumulate enough favour before either going spawn or daemon.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/05 09:35:02


Post by: Gert


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You mean the way you guys threw hissy fits over 5E Necron lore?

I mean I've never said anything about 5th Ed Necron lore soooooo. And just for the record, I played Necrons in 5th and had no prior experience and thought the lore was pretty cool.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/05 15:02:17


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Arcanis161 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Arcanis161 wrote:IMO, they'd make Sisters of Battle redundant.
Disagree, on the sole basis that Custodes don't make Space Marines redundant by the same virtue.

They have vastly different aesthetics, playstyles, and background - I don't think Space Marines are as defined by their gender as Sisters are. Sisters being women (via the Decree Passive) is much more integral to their identity and in-universe reasoning than "uh, the space science isn't good enough yet" (and we can even infer from Malcador that it would have been *entirely* possible to have Primarchs who were women - but the Emperor laughed the idea off).

Yes, there are absolutely some stylistic hallmarks of the whole "warrior monk" thing with the Astartes, but there are far more Chapters who don't fit so neatly into that all-male box - Space Wolves certainly don't, and Ultramarines have seemed to move into a more Greco-Roman styling than the robes and hoods of the Black Templars and Dark Angels.

So, nah, I really don't think adding women into the Astartes would make Sisters redundant.

Sisters of Battle wear Power Armor, use Space Marine-lite weapons, and, while not as physically strong as Space Marines or Custodes, their faith "powers" allow them to achieve feats and "miracles" that even Space Marines would not be able to achieve.
And Custodes wear powered armour, use Space Marine+ weapons (bolt weapons) and while not as weak as Astartes, their more restrictive and close range arsenal level the playing field.

Allowing the same level of augmentation for females removes the need for the Sisters of Battle.
Disagree, on the sole basis that the same could be said for why you don't need Custodes. The point is that the augmentation is incredibly costly to becoming an Astartes, so it's hardly like every Sororitas recruit would survive. Should Scions not exist, because Space Marines do? Custodes?
I feel it is a more profound statement that an all female nun order is the best class of soldier that regular humans have to offer.
They can be both. I don't see how having women recruits into the Astartes devalues the Sororitas.
Custodes are the Emperor's personal bodyguard and are listed in the fluff as being very rare and few in number.
And Sisters are unaugmented zealots directly answerable to the Ecclesiarchy, and are listed in the fluff as being much more numerous than Astartes. Just as different from Astartes as Astartes are to Custodes.

Space Marines offer a large degree of customizability, decades of lore, and a rather large amount of model support. They are advertised as being the "heroes of the 41st millennium."
Exactly. I'd say that not being able to have female-presenting heads rather hampers that customisability. Their gender is not the important part of their identity, so should be left neutral. And exactly as you say - offer customisability, much more lore and background material, and model support - Sisters don't. There's very clearly a niche there that Sisters don't occupy, so reducing Sisters to "the women in power armour" does both Astartes and Sororitas a disservice.

Sororitas bring a Cadre of women in power armor with faith powers and heavy religious iconography. Up until recent years, they've been badly maligned in the fluff and in model support.
Agreed. Not the same thing as Space Marines at all then - so why would having female presenting Astartes step on any of those toes?

If female Space Marines are created, then all the Sororitas have to offer are those faith powers and religious zealotry and iconography.
That's still more than what the Custodes offer and the Scions do though.

The very fact that you don't specify the gender of Space Marines or Custodes in your "selling points" of those factions tells me that you don't see their gender as essential to their identity - but you *do* for Sisters. However, if aside from the whole "women in power armour" part, you see the only difference between Sisters and Astartes as their faith, aesthetic, zealotry (as well as levels of augmentation, model support, background, and prominence in marketing - all of which you skipped over!) and you think that's too similar, then I don't see how you can't also think that about Custodes and Astartes.

I mean, aside from their power armour, how are they different? Augmented differently? Yep. Different aesthetics? Yup. But guarding the Emperor? I don't know, the Imperial Fists are pretty big on the whole Terra guarding part. Doesn't sound all that different to me.

Seriously, Sisters, even without bringing their gender into it, are much more distinct from Astartes than Custodes are from Astartes.
I hate to say this, but given recent trends, I don't see those alone appealing to a large enough audience to warrant both Sororitas and female Space Marines.
Recent trends? You mean the massive outpouring of love for Sisters, and the resurgence of women Astartes projects and conversions that came with the Primaris release? There's definitely an audience out there, and I don't think for a second that adding women Astartes would take away from the Sisters release.

Let me put it this way: Space Marines, more than most other factions, are meant to be "your dudes", correct? Say female Space Marines are released tomorrow. You could say that your female Space Marines are similar to Black Templars, and model them with tons of religious iconography, correct? Well, now you have stronger Sisters of Battle, minus the faith powers.
In which case, Your Dude Space Marines could be coloured in gold, have lots of aquila and eagle imagery, and carry power glaives and halberds. Oh, and they fanatically guard the Emperor.

Don't really need those Custodes any more, do you?

No, absolutely not - Space Marines are the most popular faction, the flagship - that is a niche that Sisters simply cannot replicate. Their method of warfare, entirely different. Their gameplay and stats - entirely different.

Honestly, I'm kinda at a loss with how badly you're underselling the Sisters, because it really just sounds like you see their gender as their only selling point.
Again, I don't see faith powers, religious zealots, and/or religious iconography appealing to a broad enough audience on their own.
But you see being gold and having pointy sticks being enough? Because, really, how much more different are the Custodes?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/05 20:13:35


Post by: tauist


Speaking of this topic, I think I just stumbled onto another female marine sculpt from back in the day. I mean, just look at that chest plate

This one's from Bryan Ansell's personal collection

The full blog can be found at
http://eldritchepistles.blogspot.com/2013/07/bryan-ansells-rogue-trader-space.html





Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/06 02:37:30


Post by: Arcanis161


This will be my last response, as I feel I know where this will lead; for our collective sanity, it would be best to stop here.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


If female Space Marines are created, then all the Sororitas have to offer are those faith powers and religious zealotry and iconography.
That's still more than what the Custodes offer and the Scions do though.


We'll have to agree to disagree here. As far as I see it, the religious zealotry and iconography of the Sisters is equivalent to the gold, special weapons, Space Marines++, and bodyguard duty of the Custodes and the "Spec Ops" of the Scions.

To move things around to address a bit coherently (I hope?)

and you think that's too similar, then I don't see how you can't also think that about Custodes and Astartes.


I kinda do though? You asked:

Let me put it this way: Space Marines, more than most other factions, are meant to be "your dudes", correct? Say female Space Marines are released tomorrow. You could say that your female Space Marines are similar to Black Templars, and model them with tons of religious iconography, correct? Well, now you have stronger Sisters of Battle, minus the faith powers.
In which case, Your Dude Space Marines could be coloured in gold, have lots of aquila and eagle imagery, and carry power glaives and halberds. Oh, and they fanatically guard the Emperor.

Don't really need those Custodes any more, do you?


In that instance, put them on Terra (or give the Imperial Fists Gold Armor, Dark-Age tech, and spears), then yeah, in my opinion, that kills the design space of the Custodes, making them irrelevant. History and fluff can always be retconned, and with GW, it often is, so while I enjoy it, I don't consider it.

I will say though that if GW does something like this, I won't be happy.

Now, onto Sisters:

The very fact that you don't specify the gender of Space Marines or Custodes in your "selling points" of those factions tells me that you don't see their gender as essential to their identity


Nice trap you got there.

"Essential"? Questionable for sure, but it is currently a key part of their identity. I would have thought this would have been a bit obvious given 40k descending from a largely male-viewpoint focused and oriented time period in popular media. I got bored enough in my college media classes so I won't bore you with further explanation of the history of 80's-90's media and GW's initial market.

- but you *do* for Sisters.


Key is in the name, Sisters of Battle, not Zealots of Battle or Clergy of Battle.

Also, I feel that, because all current Space Marines are male, and that's part of what they are currently, Sisters of Battle being all female means that them being female is an essential part of who they are. Recall from when GW first made and released them, wasn't a part of their decision to make them to have women in power armor as a contrast to the Space Marines being (augmented) men in power armor?

I like the Sisters of Battle as they are now. I like that GW is releasing more models for them. I bought the Sisters box when it was announced specifically because they were so maligned and ignored for many years.

I like that being "women in power armor" is an essential part of who the Sisters of Battle are. As I said early in this thread, I think that them being regular "women in power armor" and also being the best un-augmented human soldiers in the galaxy is a very powerful feminist statement, far more so than "Space Marine Women" would be.

However, if aside from the whole "women in power armour" part, you see the only difference between Sisters and Astartes as their faith, aesthetic, zealotry (as well as levels of augmentation, model support, background, and prominence in marketing - all of which you skipped over!) and you think that's too similar, then I don't see how you can't also think that about Custodes and Astartes.


I do though.

Seriously, Sisters, even without bringing their gender into it, are much more distinct from Astartes than Custodes are from Astartes.


As I said, we're going to have to agree to disagree here. If you leave aside gender, I feel what Sisters and Custodes each bring, while yes different from each other, are none the less equivalently different from Space Marines.

Space Marines offer a large degree of customizability, decades of lore, and a rather large amount of model support. They are advertised as being the "heroes of the 41st millennium."
Exactly. I'd say that not being able to have female-presenting heads rather hampers that customisability.


...and? What makes this such a big issue? I'd compare not having robot, skeleton, or Tau heads also hampers customizability, but I don't think you'd appreciate that comparison.

And exactly as you say - offer customisability, much more lore and background material, and model support - Sisters don't. There's very clearly a niche there that Sisters don't occupy, so reducing Sisters to "the women in power armour" does both Astartes and Sororitas a disservice.


I'll answer this one with the next response. Though I will add here that, announced recently, were a Sisters version of a Predator, Sisters version of a Centurion, a Sisters version of a Lieutenant, and a Sisters version of Vanguard Veterans. I think these add a lot more similarity between the two.

Sororitas bring a Cadre of women in power armor with faith powers and heavy religious iconography. Up until recent years, they've been badly maligned in the fluff and in model support.
Agreed. Not the same thing as Space Marines at all then - so why would having female presenting Astartes step on any of those toes?


Because, in my opinion, faith powers and heavy religious iconography are not enough of a difference then.

Let's assume female Space Marines are announced tomorrow. Let's list what both they and Sisters would bring to the table (ignoring fluff as my explanation above).

Female Space Marines would bring:
Augmented human
Female in Power Armor

Sisters of Battle currently bring:
Unaugmented human
Female in Power Armor
Faith Powers
Religious Iconography

So, religious iconography can be added to a kit of female Space Marines with enough hobby skills, so that could potentially scratch one difference right there.

Female Space Marines would be augmented, while Sisters would not be. So, that kinda makes Sisters worse? At least from a perspective of someone not familiar with lore/fluff of 40k?

What would be the significant difference that Sisters have that would appeal to new players or current players of other factions? Their Faith Powers? My answer on that below:

I hate to say this, but given recent trends, I don't see those alone appealing to a large enough audience to warrant both Sororitas and female Space Marines.
Recent trends? You mean the massive outpouring of love for Sisters, and the resurgence of women Astartes projects and conversions that came with the Primaris release? There's definitely an audience out there, and I don't think for a second that adding women Astartes would take away from the Sisters release.


You twisted my words. "Recent trends?" That should have been obviously in reference to Religion, Faith, and Religious Iconography in popular media, which, very muchly, has been on the downturn for a long while now. Take a look at recent media and show me something popular that has any of these as a main draw.

Not much eh?

So yeah, I don't see faith powers and religious iconography being enough of a draw to Sisters if Female Space Marines were to be released.

To answer what you turned my words to say, yes, there have been people making Female Space Marines for awhile now, even before the Primaris release. So yes there is an audience for that.

Yes, Sisters were massively popular upon release, and arguably still are popular. Some could be explained by new players seeing a new army release, but I suspect much of it was specifically because they had been so unfairly maligned and unsupported previously, despite still being a legitimate faction in the game. I know I bought mine because of that.

But, if a new player, unaware of the history of the production and support of the Sisters, were to also see Female Space Marines on the shelf, well, what are they going to go for? How many current Sisters players would stop buying Sisters if GW announced Female Space Marines tomorrow?

The latter? I think very few. But combined with new players coming in and picking a faction, I doubt there would be enough residual Sisters players to warrant continued production. This may be something that we simply disagree on.



Overall I want to say this: I love the Sisters of Battle as they are. I don't have any personal issue with GW making Female Space Marines. My only issue is that I feel they cannot share the same design space, and that I prefer the Sisters as I feel an all female cadre of nuns being the best unaugmented human soldiers in the galaxy makes a more powerful feminist statement than women being augmented to be as strong/tough as augmented men.

I'll be done with this thread then. Think of my arguments as you will.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/06 04:18:06


Post by: RegularGuy


macluvin wrote:

Chaos does seem to lack female representation doesn’t it...
...
I was trying to explore whether or not the reason female space marines don’t exist is purely on a misogynist gender role expectation rather than science, and was advocating for considering the actual possibility. As well as the implications for what it means for the imperium.


In all likelyhood, the emperor took the largest and most aggressive humans he could find to create his army from. Statistically men tend to dominate those factors. Given that he then went on to try to make them even larger and more aggressive, it is not unreasonable to assume that his work would have the highest chance with males.

Outside the game, the people writing these games back in the day were often males, writing games that were mostly consumed by males, which is not specifically mysogny. Neither representation nor even culture were generally considerations for its genesis, that wasn't a thing back then. It was about "This is cool, this is fun, this will sell."

Now as to today. Meh. Make some female marines if you want, if someone says they have to be men, tell them they WERE men but are trans now or something, or don't. You don't have to explain or defend yourself.

On the other hand, if someone has enjoyed their game as it is, it shouldn't be considered a moral failing on their part to like it the way they have liked it. Nor is it a failing if GW decides not to alter their game that people have enjoyed for so long and has sold well for so long in ways they don't want to. It's kind of fashionable but I don't think it's fair to start a lot of name calling and impugning people's character over those things.

One could argue 40k is to abelist, but there's nothing to stop someone from modling their guard army with wheel chairs. But it shouldn't be a moral failing if GW doesn't produce wheelchair guard models either.

I'm a bit libertarian though so I'd like people to mostly do what they want and let others do the same.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/06 06:10:34


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Arcanis161 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


If female Space Marines are created, then all the Sororitas have to offer are those faith powers and religious zealotry and iconography.
That's still more than what the Custodes offer and the Scions do though.


We'll have to agree to disagree here.
So we will. If we can't see how barebones the Custodes are on a design choice compared to the richness of the Sisters design, then it's simply not worth trying.
As far as I see it, the religious zealotry and iconography of the Sisters is equivalent to the gold, special weapons, Space Marines++, and bodyguard duty of the Custodes and the "Spec Ops" of the Scions.
But like, that's not all the Sisters are - which is my point about reductiveness.

Custodes: Gold, special DAOT tech, Space Marines ++, bodyguards.
Sisters: Religious zealots, unique iconography, faith powers, Space Marines --, specific limitation around the Holy Trinity of bolt/melta/flamer, the whole Repentia concept, etc.

Even removing the "women" part of their own specific unique identity doesn't change that, from a design perspective, they have so much more room to play with than Custodes, which apparently being painted gold is considered a key part of their identity.

and you think that's too similar, then I don't see how you can't also think that about Custodes and Astartes.


I kinda do though?
I genuinely can't understand how. In what earth is "gold, DAOT tech, and super duper elite" more iconic than "longstanding aesthetic design choices, religious fundamentalism, human statlines in power armour, and answerable to a cornerstone Imperial organisation"?

Let me put it this way: Space Marines, more than most other factions, are meant to be "your dudes", correct? Say female Space Marines are released tomorrow. You could say that your female Space Marines are similar to Black Templars, and model them with tons of religious iconography, correct? Well, now you have stronger Sisters of Battle, minus the faith powers.
In which case, Your Dude Space Marines could be coloured in gold, have lots of aquila and eagle imagery, and carry power glaives and halberds. Oh, and they fanatically guard the Emperor.

Don't really need those Custodes any more, do you?


In that instance, put them on Terra (or give the Imperial Fists Gold Armor, Dark-Age tech, and spears), then yeah, in my opinion, that kills the design space of the Custodes, making them irrelevant.
So simply putting some Space Marines on Terra is enough to invalidate the entire Custodes design space?

Look, I don't know how to tell you this, but that's already a thing. The Imperial Fists, at the very least, have a strong presence on and around Terra, and several other Chapters have garrisons present. The only thing unique to the Custodes on that regard is actually physically guarding the Palace, but that design space is getting smaller and smaller.
I will say though that if GW does something like this, I won't be happy.
They already did.

The very fact that you don't specify the gender of Space Marines or Custodes in your "selling points" of those factions tells me that you don't see their gender as essential to their identity
"Essential"? Questionable for sure, but it is currently a key part of their identity.
But essential enough that you made absolutely no mention of it as part of their core design philosophy? How so?
Plus, the fandom can't even decide if Space Marines are sexless inhuman killing machines or not - how on earth is that in support of their gender being a key part of their identity? The only lore they have that explains their "only-boys-allowed" we know is explicitly a retcon to justify how GW's actual women Astartes models sold awfully and didn't make any more. And so while that lore is currently a *part* of their identity - is it really a "key" part? I don't think so at all, and the relevance of them being an all-boys club needs to be reviewed and if that part of their identity really is "essential" any more.

I mean, in what way is it a key part, from a stylistic and design choice? If you're making 40k from the ground up, and having to justify every design choice you make, is Space Marines being all men something you can stylistically justify? Because I can't.

I would have thought this would have been a bit obvious given 40k descending from a largely male-viewpoint focused and oriented time period in popular media. I got bored enough in my college media classes so I won't bore you with further explanation of the history of 80's-90's media and GW's initial market.
I thought you were talking about "currently a key part" - but sure, if you want to bring up GW's initial market, you'd know that GW *did* make women Astartes. They were totally canon. They got canned because they were unpopular in the 80s.

I don't know if you know, but the 80s were 40 years ago. I think the market attitudes may have shifted since then.

- but you *do* for Sisters.


Key is in the name, Sisters of Battle, not Zealots of Battle or Clergy of Battle.
Yes, exactly. Gender *is* tied to the Sisters, but that doesn't make it exclusive to them. Space Marines aren't all the "Brothers of Space", or that them being "Space Marines" means they're the only force that can go into space.

Clearly, gender is more relevant to one than the other.
But, and here's the juicy thing - there are still men in the SoB codex!. Arcoflagellants, Priests, Crusaders, etc. The closest you'll get to a canon woman in the Astartes lineup is a Servitor.

Also, I feel that, because all current Space Marines are male, and that's part of what they are currently, Sisters of Battle being all female means that them being female is an essential part of who they are.
Sisters being all women doesn't preclude women existing elsewhere though. And, as you seem to think that being the same gender and in power armour is stepping on the same design toes - again, Custodes are also all men. Why don't you see that as stepping on the design toes of the Space Marines?

Surely the best solution here, to avoid such "stepping on design toes" shenanigans is for Sisters to be all women, Custodes to be all men (not sure why, but hey), and Space Marines being gender neutral. That way, they become even further differentiated on design.
Recall from when GW first made and released them, wasn't a part of their decision to make them to have women in power armor as a contrast to the Space Marines being (augmented) men in power armor?
Um, more like "remember when GW made women in power armour, but they sold badly, so they canned them and came back years later with SoB"?

I like the Sisters of Battle as they are now. I like that GW is releasing more models for them. I bought the Sisters box when it was announced specifically because they were so maligned and ignored for many years.
As do I. I don't want to change anything about SoB now, because as I've said, I feel their identity as a faction is strong enough that it won't be threatened if a Space Marine happens to be anything other than male-presenting.

I like that being "women in power armor" is an essential part of who the Sisters of Battle are.
I agree - but again, it's not exclusive to them, in the same way that I think bolt weapons are an essential part of what Sisters are, but are also essential to what Space Marines are.
As I said early in this thread, I think that them being regular "women in power armor" and also being the best un-augmented human soldiers in the galaxy is a very powerful feminist statement, far more so than "Space Marine Women" would be.
And this is the point where your logic eludes me. Just because there would be another group of power armoured soldiers who happen to be women, why on earth would that take away from what the Sisters are?

The only thing I get from you when you make that claim is that you are only viewing the Sisters through their gender, and ignoring everything else about them. It'd be like complaining if someone made a gold Chapter of Space Marines, because they stole the Custodes' special thing.

Sisters being women is an important part of their design concept, but should it be exclusive to them? No, not at all. Adding women in power armour elsewhere doesn't change that Sisters are awesome.

Seriously, Sisters, even without bringing their gender into it, are much more distinct from Astartes than Custodes are from Astartes.


As I said, we're going to have to agree to disagree here. If you leave aside gender, I feel what Sisters and Custodes each bring, while yes different from each other, are none the less equivalently different from Space Marines.
That's exactly what I said earlier.
Even removing gender from the equation, Sisters, Custodes and Space Marines are all at least equivalently distant from on another - so why on earth do you keep saying that Sisters would be the same as Astartes if Astartes could have women?
You literally just repeated my point to me.

Space Marines offer a large degree of customizability, decades of lore, and a rather large amount of model support. They are advertised as being the "heroes of the 41st millennium."
Exactly. I'd say that not being able to have female-presenting heads rather hampers that customisability.


...and? What makes this such a big issue? I'd compare not having robot, skeleton, or Tau heads also hampers customizability, but I don't think you'd appreciate that comparison.
I'm pretty sure that women are a tad more "in demand" and more likely to want to be a customisable feature than robots, skeletons, and Tau. I don't appreciate the comparison, because it's pretty ridiculous, as you well know.

And exactly as you say - offer customisability, much more lore and background material, and model support - Sisters don't. There's very clearly a niche there that Sisters don't occupy, so reducing Sisters to "the women in power armour" does both Astartes and Sororitas a disservice.


I'll answer this one with the next response. Though I will add here that, announced recently, were a Sisters version of a Predator, Sisters version of a Centurion, a Sisters version of a Lieutenant, and a Sisters version of Vanguard Veterans. I think these add a lot more similarity between the two.
And? Custodes literally use the same Land Raider and Contemptor model. Remind me, what is the armour those Allarus Custodians wear again? Oh yeah - Allarus Terminator armour.

Custodes don't have a leg to stand on here either.
Not the same thing as Space Marines at all then - so why would having female presenting Astartes step on any of those toes?


Because, in my opinion, faith powers and heavy religious iconography are not enough of a difference then.
Um, you literally said earlier that "If you leave aside gender, I feel what Sisters and Custodes each bring, while yes different from each other, are none the less equivalently different from Space Marines."

Let's assume female Space Marines are announced tomorrow. Let's list what both they and Sisters would bring to the table (ignoring fluff as my explanation above).

Female Space Marines would bring:
Augmented human
Female in Power Armor

Sisters of Battle currently bring:
Unaugmented human
Female in Power Armor
Faith Powers
Religious Iconography

So, religious iconography can be added to a kit of female Space Marines with enough hobby skills, so that could potentially scratch one difference right there.

Female Space Marines would be augmented, while Sisters would not be. So, that kinda makes Sisters worse? At least from a perspective of someone not familiar with lore/fluff of 40k?

What would be the significant difference that Sisters have that would appeal to new players or current players of other factions? Their Faith Powers? My answer on that below:
Sure, let's play that game with Custodes!
Custodes currently bring:
Super Duper Special Augmented human
Male in power armour
DaoT tech
Bodyguards
Gold??

Space Marines currently bring:
Augmented human
Male in power armour
(Dark Angels get DaoT tech)
(Imperial Fists known for garrisoning Terra)
(Quite a lot of gold coloured Chapters out there).

Hmm. Seems like the only truly unique feature is that Custodes have a different statline. Gee. So unique.

I mean, after all, all the same iconography is quite easily replicable with enough "hobby skills", but then, I suppose I can make any faction look stylistically similar with "hobby skills", so scratch that difference.

And, Custodes are super duper augmented, so I guess that just makes every other faction irrelevant, because we're apparently only capable of tying a faction's value in a design space to how big their muscles are?

I mean, what would be the significant difference that Custodes have without their monopoly on gold?
Recent trends? You mean the massive outpouring of love for Sisters, and the resurgence of women Astartes projects and conversions that came with the Primaris release? There's definitely an audience out there, and I don't think for a second that adding women Astartes would take away from the Sisters release.


You twisted my words. "Recent trends?" That should have been obviously in reference to Religion, Faith, and Religious Iconography in popular media, which, very muchly, has been on the downturn for a long while now. Take a look at recent media and show me something popular that has any of these as a main draw.

Not much eh?
Uh, Game of Thrones had a pretty major focus on the interplay between state and religion, and the utilisation of religion and faith within the politics of that setting.
Religion, faith, and religious iconography are almost certainly depicted in modern media - not in a favourable light, but they are presented.

So yeah, I don't see faith powers and religious iconography being enough of a draw to Sisters if Female Space Marines were to be released.
I have to disagree. Unless you think that people are only buying Sisters because they're women, one can only assume that people are getting them because they look super damn cool.

Yes, Sisters were massively popular upon release, and arguably still are popular. Some could be explained by new players seeing a new army release, but I suspect much of it was specifically because they had been so unfairly maligned and unsupported previously, despite still being a legitimate faction in the game. I know I bought mine because of that.
Or, you know, it's because they look really damn cool, instead of this "aw gee, I feel so bad for the Sisters not being a major faction until now, I'll buy some out of pity".

But, if a new player, unaware of the history of the production and support of the Sisters, were to also see Female Space Marines on the shelf, well, what are they going to go for? How many current Sisters players would stop buying Sisters if GW announced Female Space Marines tomorrow?
I don't know, if a new player, unaware of the history of the production and support of the Custodes were to see male Custodes next to male Space Marines, what are they going to go for?

Same argument, bud. And all I see to be hearing from you is how you only seem to view the Sisters through their lens as The Women's Army.

This may be something that we simply disagree on.
Evidently.

Overall I want to say this: I love the Sisters of Battle as they are.
Agreed.
My only issue is that I feel they cannot share the same design space
But adding female-presenting genetically enhanced supersoldiers wouldn't do that, any more so than them both carrying bolters does. This is the fundamental disagreement - you seem to believe that the Sisters identity is so fragile that "woman in power armour" is all they have going for them.
I prefer the Sisters as I feel an all female cadre of nuns being the best unaugmented human soldiers in the galaxy makes a more powerful feminist statement than women being augmented to be as strong/tough as augmented men.
It's not about a feminist statement of "being as strong as men". It's about "hey, why can't I have women (not weird aliens or skeletons or robots) in your flagship faction which is all about being a blank slate and custom creation?"

If the only argument for why that's the case is "because there's only room for one group of women in armour", firstly, I think that vastly undersells the design of the Sisters, and secondly, why doesn't that extend the same way to Custodes?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/06 07:21:30


Post by: harlokin


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Look, I don't know how to tell you this, but that's already a thing. The Imperial Fists, at the very least, have a strong presence on and around Terra, and several other Chapters have garrisons present. The only thing unique to the Custodes on that regard is actually physically guarding the Palace, but that design space is getting smaller and smaller.


The Imperial Fists are hilarious; "We are based on holy Terra, our armour is yellow like gold, and we defend The Emperor".....so bargain basement Custodes then?

From a modelling perspective I absolutely don't want to see boob armour and 'feminine' heads, and in the absensce of those what's the fething difference between male and female Space Marine minis. It's really a fluff issue, and shouldn't be a big deal.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/06 09:51:00


Post by: Rik Lightstar


Given the descriptions of the Marines throughout most of the lore, especially recently, I think the extent to which they're Post-Human is being overlooked.

They're recognisably humanoid, but their degree of musculature is unnatural, their facial features are described frequently as displaying "gigantism", their voices are supposedly noticeably deeper and more bass than even the few humans that approach them in size.

To me the main thing is that after all of the changes, alterations and enhancements a Marine goes through a female Marine would be almost completely indistinguishable from a male one.

Their growth would have been chemically and hormonally forced as would muscle development, any sexual development from adolescence would be completely halted. They might end up an inch or two shorted and a few pounds lighter. But the pre-pubescent human that gets turned into a marine is really just a convenient meat and bone foundation which humans create for free rather than trying to grow them in a lab.

Rik


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/06 12:24:44


Post by: RegularGuy


That's a good point. Overhwelming anyone's natural growth with tons of testosterone and goodness knows what else to drive size and aggression would probably masculinize the female to a degree far beyond current trans medicine transforms female features to masculine.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/07 03:25:16


Post by: tauist


 RegularGuy wrote:
That's a good point. Overhwelming anyone's natural growth with tons of testosterone and goodness knows what else to drive size and aggression would probably masculinize the female to a degree far beyond current trans medicine transforms female features to masculine.


I know, right?




[Thumb - 7AC8ECEB-E542-4DB2-8653-261E39E1E740.jpeg]


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/07 13:01:31


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


In mother Russia, I don't even know anymore.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/07 14:05:36


Post by: harlokin


 tauist wrote:
 RegularGuy wrote:
That's a good point. Overhwelming anyone's natural growth with tons of testosterone and goodness knows what else to drive size and aggression would probably masculinize the female to a degree far beyond current trans medicine transforms female features to masculine.


I know, right?





Yeah well, how about without the tons of makeup, and the obvious facial cosmetic surgery.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/07 17:50:51


Post by: Hecaton


 tauist wrote:
Why doesn't female Space Marines exist? Simple really - The Emperor Of Mankind was not a heterosexual man. He probably also loved Tom Of Finland Artwork.


Definitely part of my headcanon, but more importantly, he was probably extremely gynophobic.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/07 18:45:46


Post by: tauist


Hecaton wrote:
 tauist wrote:
Why doesn't female Space Marines exist? Simple really - The Emperor Of Mankind was not a heterosexual man. He probably also loved Tom Of Finland Artwork.


Definitely part of my headcanon, but more importantly, he was probably extremely gynophobic.


For sure, the only lasses he allowed to be clad in his gold had to make wows of silence.. He also wanted them to creep the heck out of everyone else


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/07 18:48:42


Post by: macluvin


By the dark Gods we know now the dark secret of the two missing legions...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 09:30:21


Post by: TwilightSparkles


The Imperial Fists, ultimately Dorn, were charged with defending the Emperor’s Palace , which by extension meant terra. That’s not necessarily the same as the Custodes role to protect the Emperor.

For 10000 years they protected the Emperor over everything else to the point daemons walked on Terra fir the first time since the Siege.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 09:48:52


Post by: DalekCheese


I personally would much prefer female custodes than female marines. It makes much more sense IMO- it’s a different process, and a more refined one, with none of the concessions to (relative) mass-production that were made with the Astartes.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 11:35:10


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 DalekCheese wrote:
I personally would much prefer female custodes than female marines. It makes much more sense IMO- it’s a different process, and a more refined one, with none of the concessions to (relative) mass-production that were made with the Astartes.


I believe those are called Sisters of Silence. They were designed to fight with and be part of the Custodes. Which is intense, as anyone whos able to train to be part of a Custodes melee unit must be of equal or close skill level.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 11:55:20


Post by: the_scotsman


Well, with the addition of 5-6 female heads to one guard kit, we've got an addition to the storied pantheon of Factions Who Are Supposed To Be 50-50 Male-Female to keep track of.

Dark Eldar: 2/8 characters, half the torsos/heads in 5 kits (Scourges, Hellions, Wyches, Kabs, Reavers). Gold star for dark eldar!

Craftworld Eldar: Half the torsos/heads in 2 kits (Guardians, Windrider Bikes) and one all-girls unit with 1 character.

Tau: 1 character, like 3 heads in one kit. The first of the "Whoops, We Forgot And Made Them Accidentally All Dudes" factions.

Genestealer Cults: 1 character, like 3 heads in one kit (bikers), and one optional vehicle crewmember on the ridgerunner.

Imperial Guard: 5 heads in one kit

Adeptus Mechanicus: can't tell, too roboty. My personal head canon is the reason the skitarii units have 2 different types of crotch covering instead of 1 (seemingly more logical) is because slightly different lead shielding is required to protect the goobie bits just enough to allow them to still be extracted to make more skitarii, and that is the extent that the Adeptus Mechanicus cares about such frivolous human concerns.

Inquisition/imperial weirdos: 1 named character, 1 assassin. Jokaeros may all be female in which case gw has been peddling PORNOGRAPHIC SMUT since releasing their model - (WHFB Dwarf Voice) "that's a'cancelin'!"

Adeptus Custodes: "We Could've We Just Forgot."

Chaos Space Marines: "We Could've We Just Forgot." (monopose BSF chaos cultos have some ladies IIRC)

Necromunda: Van Saar and Delaques had 1/5 women from the get-go, Goliaths and Orlocks got Whoops We Forgot women in the expansion kits/FW. Escher got Whoops We Forgot men from FW.


Let's see, how are we stacking up to AOS?

Well, it looks like....GW just hasn't made it a whole thing with AOS and every faction is basically 50-50 by default unless their aesthetic is "all shirtless" like kairic acolytes and fireslayers and orks.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 RegularGuy wrote:
macluvin wrote:

Chaos does seem to lack female representation doesn’t it...
...
I was trying to explore whether or not the reason female space marines don’t exist is purely on a misogynist gender role expectation rather than science, and was advocating for considering the actual possibility. As well as the implications for what it means for the imperium.


In all likelyhood, the emperor took the largest and most aggressive humans he could find to create his army from. Statistically men tend to dominate those factors. Given that he then went on to try to make them even larger and more aggressive, it is not unreasonable to assume that his work would have the highest chance with males.

Outside the game, the people writing these games back in the day were often males, writing games that were mostly consumed by males, which is not specifically mysogny. Neither representation nor even culture were generally considerations for its genesis, that wasn't a thing back then. It was about "This is cool, this is fun, this will sell."

Now as to today. Meh. Make some female marines if you want, if someone says they have to be men, tell them they WERE men but are trans now or something, or don't. You don't have to explain or defend yourself.

On the other hand, if someone has enjoyed their game as it is, it shouldn't be considered a moral failing on their part to like it the way they have liked it. Nor is it a failing if GW decides not to alter their game that people have enjoyed for so long and has sold well for so long in ways they don't want to. It's kind of fashionable but I don't think it's fair to start a lot of name calling and impugning people's character over those things.


The thing people always fail to realize is that the companies that they like to complain about that are doing this aren't doing it to be 'fashionable' they're doing it because the overheads for a company making an entertainment property have ballooned to the point where you HAVE to make sure that the property has some way to appeal to every demographic if you want to make your money back.

If you want to aim a product at only a small fragment of the potential target audience, it needs to be cheap enough to make that it can sell only to that fragment and still make money. Two things have happened in recent years: products like mainstream films, mainstream TV and mainstream video games have gotten much, much, MUCH more expensive to create than they were two to three decades ago, and the particular segment of the population that almost everything used to be advertised to (basically....well...me) now has a whole lot less spending power, because mommy and daddy went from being in the baby boomer generation to being in the gen x/millennial generation, and what you're really targeting with kids' products is mommy and daddy's money.



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 12:08:35


Post by: harlokin


 the_scotsman wrote:

Dark Eldar: 2/8 characters, half the torsos/heads in 5 kits (Scourges, Hellions, Wyches, Kabs, Reavers). Gold star for dark eldar!


You have uncovered the real reason why Drukhari are doing so well in the current edition


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 14:47:05


Post by: Gert


Don't T'au use generic armour for everyone like AM do? So the only noticeable difference for a T'au model would be a bare head with its different head dent shape.
The Inquisition used to have a fairly good balance of models until they all got axed. But TBF you could use pretty much any Human scale model as an Inquisitor.
GSC I don't really know TBH. The less mutated ones sure could use a bit of a change but the more Genestealery you get the less human you look so it'd be hard to tell.
I think the original background for the Goliaths and Escher was they were exclusively one or the other because mutation. Males born into house Escher were usually frail and deformed because radiation but they seem to have gone for a more "creed rather than genes" deal now which I like.
As for the Admech, binary is for code, not gender, all are one in the machine.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 15:38:48


Post by: the_scotsman


 Gert wrote:
Don't T'au use generic armour for everyone like AM do? So the only noticeable difference for a T'au model would be a bare head with its different head dent shape.

Correct, so their 50-50 representation is based solely on the (just checked) 2 female tau heads you get in the Fire Warriors box, and Shadowsun, the rest you just gotta go with 'they're wearing helmets' - which works a lot better than it does with Eldar as they don't have the sculpted-on chests and tight fitting bodysuits, and better than with Guard and GSC as they're mostly wearing full face helmets.

The Inquisition used to have a fairly good balance of models until they all got axed. But TBF you could use pretty much any Human scale model as an Inquisitor.

True, you just have to find a female human scale model without power armor on, in which case your options are....
....the special edition named commissar lady, or one of the female escher gangers. That'd be about it if you want GW. Oh, or one of the Rogue Trader sculpts.


GSC I don't really know TBH. The less mutated ones sure could use a bit of a change but the more Genestealery you get the less human you look so it'd be hard to tell.

Yeah, they're in the category of "Whoops, We Forgot". Wave 1 the Gen3/Gen4 sculpts were all male for no explored reason, there were female GSC present in the fluff of the codex. Though TBF I did forget there is also the new Magus sculpt which is a lady, so 2 out of about a dozen character sculpts.

I think the original background for the Goliaths and Escher was they were exclusively one or the other because mutation. Males born into house Escher were usually frail and deformed because radiation but they seem to have gone for a more "creed rather than genes" deal now which I like.

Yeah with Escher it makes sense there's only one male sculpt as theyre supposed to be rarer, and with goliath you can wave your hand and go 'once they get past Forgeborn they're so 'roided up you cant tell and they all turn into big gorilla-y Video Game Goons From Arkham Asylum

As for the Admech, binary is for code, not gender, all are one in the machine.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 16:26:02


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Don't GSC prefer they/them/theirs?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 16:33:20


Post by: Gert


What do you mean? A GSC just needs hosts for new generations of Stealers. It doesn't care what sex the person is because the cult mind control powers and genetic gribblies will solve any problems relating to not having kids i.e. behavioural changes towards spouses or an inclination to have loads of one-night-stands.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 17:33:40


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I'm talking hive intelligence. Why are you trying so hard to be literal on your posts.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 17:37:17


Post by: Gert


You do know there is no way for me to know what inflection you're putting on a post right? I have no idea if you're serious or joking. Also, GSC aren't technically a hive mind. They all feel the psychic presence of the Patriarch, Magus and other Stealers but they all still have a large amount of free will.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/10 23:10:03


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:Don't GSC prefer they/them/theirs?
The cultists likely use the same pronouns they always had, because the cultists still have their own identities, even if now slaved to the cult. If they do switch pronouns, it's likely going to be to "we/us", instead of any singular pronoun.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/11 14:54:23


Post by: panzerfront14


Honestly I fairly certain that most tyranids are "female" in the same fashion that a worker ant is female. Though if GSC are using human biology as a model than it could be a reason why they don't use females as often, and thats because the vast majority of them are bringing the next generation of the Cult into being at any given time. To both add to the parent Hive Fleet's meal and too add to the psychic signal that draws them in. It also helps that the male part of reproduction is relatively quick compared to the gestational period, and therefore the male cultists are far more disposable.

Honestly 40k's fluff should center around how horrible it all is, and thats why I like the various stories where they show great effort only for it to prove to be not enough or the big damn heroes never show up. Like that one GSC story in the Word Bearer's anthology where the guy rescues this child from the Tyranids only for the narrator to inform us the kid was not blue with cold but with Genestealer infection. Things of that nature. Bring women and children into the scope of these stories but their should be an emphasis on how dehumanizing the setting is.


NOTE: I don't want female space marines because I don't particularly want to see any more space marine releases for a while, so that GW can bring the rest of the factions into this century. The endless deluge of Space Marines releases is honestly the most frustrating aspect of 40k to me personally, not what gender they are.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/11 15:28:01


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I think our human brains cannot understand what or how they view sex/gender, and their brains don't care about our distinctions. It's entirely irrelevant to their purpose unless it provides an advantage to their goal. I will say in all the books I've read where GSC "implanted" a guard or IDF human, they were a mix of men, and women, so I think the intent was they don't care. It's all fodder and food to them.

This raises an interesting idea, is there canon Female orks? Do they have females, being sentient plants/fungus?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/11 15:53:26


Post by: Lord Zarkov


There’s no femal orks in current canon 40k.

Though technically there’s no males orks either... they’re just referred to as male by convention.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/12 08:20:00


Post by: macluvin


panzerfront14 wrote:

NOTE: I don't want female space marines because I don't particularly want to see any more space marine releases for a while, so that GW can bring the rest of the factions into this century. The endless deluge of Space Marines releases is honestly the most frustrating aspect of 40k to me personally, not what gender they are.


I actually am in agreement there... female space marines can wait until after every Xenos gets overhauled and for half of a brand new faction gets released like the skitaari...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/12 10:02:38


Post by: harlokin


panzerfront14 wrote:

NOTE: I don't want female space marines because I don't particularly want to see any more space marine releases for a while, so that GW can bring the rest of the factions into this century. The endless deluge of Space Marines releases is honestly the most frustrating aspect of 40k to me personally, not what gender they are.


I don't get why this is a model issue, rather than just fluff.

Does anybody in favour of female Space Marines really want a sprue with boob armour, cartoon eyleshed helmets, and pouty-lipped heads?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/12 10:10:31


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


harlokin wrote:Does anybody in favour of female Space Marines really want a sprue with boob armour, cartoon eyleshed helmets, and pouty-lipped heads?
Not sure why you think any of those things are necessary for women Astartes. Bit weird, frankly.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/12 10:12:52


Post by: harlokin


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
harlokin wrote:Does anybody in favour of female Space Marines really want a sprue with boob armour, cartoon eyleshed helmets, and pouty-lipped heads?
Not sure why you think any of those things are necessary for women Astartes. Bit weird, frankly.


I don't really, and the last two are intentionally silly, but how does 'female' Space Marine in helmet look any different to 'male' Space Marine in helmet?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/12 11:36:23


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


This is the main contention for me. If woke GW wants to make gender inclusion into Astartes I'm all for it, unless it's a fantasy sexualised male gaze sort of thing, ala OG Repentia models.

If it's just a female head swap option, great, I'll buy it yesterday and twice on Sunday. But if it's boob armor and sexy poses, ala Tracer in 40k, then I'm out.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/12 11:48:53


Post by: panzerfront14


 harlokin wrote:
panzerfront14 wrote:

NOTE: I don't want female space marines because I don't particularly want to see any more space marine releases for a while, so that GW can bring the rest of the factions into this century. The endless deluge of Space Marines releases is honestly the most frustrating aspect of 40k to me personally, not what gender they are.


I don't get why this is a model issue, rather than just fluff.

Does anybody in favour of female Space Marines really want a sprue with boob armour, cartoon eyleshed helmets, and pouty-lipped heads?


The reason why I see it as a model issue is because the fluff tends to find representation in models, particularly for Space Marines as is. I honestly expect a head swap if female space marines are to become a thing but honestly I don't really care if they make female marines or if they keep it an entirely male monk esque warrior society even if parts stray from that.

At the end of the day I don't want to see any more space marine releases for some time, and I know well enough that should another change occur to Marine fluff they'll get models to match.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/12 11:51:35


Post by: the_scotsman


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
This is the main contention for me. If woke GW wants to make gender inclusion into Astartes I'm all for it, unless it's a fantasy sexualised male gaze sort of thing, ala OG Repentia models.

If it's just a female head swap option, great, I'll buy it yesterday and twice on Sunday. But if it's boob armor and sexy poses, ala Tracer in 40k, then I'm out.


....If only we could look to some kind of analagous space marine-esque range in another game made by GW that they've done a phenomenal job going "you know what, no, this is silly, our main hero faction does not have to be all male for no reason, they're gender integrated now, here you go, have 50% more sculpt variety."

but alas, GW has never made Stormcast Eternals, so we will never know.


I don't know, I don't get why everyone just defaults to 'eeeeeee, muh virtue signal!!!!' it just makes modeling and painting a unit more fun if they're not all basically the exact same dude in different poses. I'm able to get a lot more variety out of "Mono Pose" kits like Namarti Thralls than out of "Multi-pose" kits like imperial guardsmen, because there's only so many ways to angle a lasgun barrel or tilt a big goofy bobblehead with a face roughly carved out of a potato, but having 50% male namarti and 50% female namarti increases the number of meaningfully visually distinct models I can create by a factor of 2.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/12 11:51:50


Post by: Gert


Considering GW didn't do it for Stormcast or any of the female miniatures they've made outside of Slaanesh and Daughters of Khaine, why would anyone think they would do it for Marines?
You're saying "I would NEVER buy this thing the company clearly has no intention of doing!".


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/12 12:11:46


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I personally find the faces of female models easier to get "right". Their hair usually makes up for a lot of the head, and their face is often more angular and pointed, so the shading is simpler to create.

Maybe I'm just a bad painter and have no idea what I'm talking about, but my female dnd models are always easier to paint. I would want to start a Sister's force, but I don't have that sorta cash.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/13 14:49:47


Post by: Jack Flask


 the_scotsman wrote:
I don't know, I don't get why everyone just defaults to 'eeeeeee, muh virtue signal!!


No one is defaulting to anything, that's literally what it is. There is no actual reason for female space marines to be added to the game. Period.

The lore and flavor of space marines since the beginnings of "modern" 40k (not Rogue Trader) is focused around the concept of a monk order mixed with a warrior brotherhood. They are the only faction in the game (I'm including Custodes in this) which are entirely male. Flavor-wise the setting would lose that and be ret-conning one of the cornerstones of the lore yet gain nothing if female space marines were introduced.

And no, this isn't a "representation issue". GW has increasingly provided additional representation to the point that there is an entire plastic army of all women and every other army can field some % of female troops. GW has even started to place additional emphasis on Sisters as a front facing aspect of the setting, with them getting more novels and increasing presence in advertising. And that's not even mentioning that number of female characters both on the table and in the novels who have been introduced.

All of that is great, and I'm sure we'll continue to get a balanced depiction going forward. Sure it's a shame that there aren't more female GSC options or female Orlocks on the original sprue, but hopefully that'll be fixed in time.

None of that however is justification for the insane lengths of spite some people take to spitting bile about how one faction (and yes I am quite aware how numerous SM are) is male only...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/13 14:53:57


Post by: the_scotsman


 Jack Flask wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
I don't know, I don't get why everyone just defaults to 'eeeeeee, muh virtue signal!!


No one is defaulting to anything, that's literally what it is. There is no actual reason for female space marines to be added to the game. Period.


I love so much that you cut out the very next line of the quote, which is literally a reason besides virtue signaling to add them: because they allow you a wider variety of modeling options as someone who wants to build a visually interesting army.

It's the same reason that the transition away from "every marine head is basically just the same exact guy making slightly different facial expressions" was a good thing, and the addition of poses beyond "standing with legs spread unnaturally far apart" was a good thing.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/13 15:43:25


Post by: Jack Flask


 the_scotsman wrote:
 Jack Flask wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
I don't know, I don't get why everyone just defaults to 'eeeeeee, muh virtue signal!!


No one is defaulting to anything, that's literally what it is. There is no actual reason for female space marines to be added to the game. Period.


I love so much that you cut out the very next line of the quote, which is literally a reason besides virtue signaling to add them: because they allow you a wider variety of modeling options as someone who wants to build a visually interesting army.


That reason holds absolutely no water. You know what would also increase the modelling options of someone who wants to make a visually interesting army?

Having Ork space marines! No not orks in looted power armor, actual Ork space marines with geneseed fighting for the Emperor and everything!

Oh and Eldar space marines! That's even more variation! How about Tau space marines? That's even more-erer variations!

Let's also completely ignore that with hundreds of chapters inspired by cultures all across contemporary Earth, plus a myriad of imagined cultures, Space Marines somehow don't have enough variation...

 the_scotsman wrote:
It's the same reason that the transition away from "every marine head is basically just the same exact guy making slightly different facial expressions" was a good thing, and the addition of poses beyond "standing with legs spread unnaturally far apart" was a good thing.


That's a completely apples to oranges comparison...

If you were asking for space marine kits to have a wider range of ethnic representation in unhelmeted heads, then you might have a point. I would wholeheartedly support that, as would the lore.

Adding female space marines is not just a cosmetic change.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/13 16:21:52


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Raises an interesting point: Where are all the people clamouring for Female Orks, Female GSC models, and female Chaos cultists? Why is it always centered around Space Marines and ret-conning their lore? I guess it's because they are the posterkids of the hobby? But still, I would find it hilarious if they made this giant female ork model with tusks and a "I'll kick your ass" look. Also, is it accurate that there are ZERO GSC models at all?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/13 16:29:39


Post by: the_scotsman


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Raises an interesting point: Where are all the people clamouring for Female Orks, Female GSC models, and female Chaos cultists? Why is it always centered around Space Marines and ret-conning their lore? I guess it's because they are the posterkids of the hobby? But still, I would find it hilarious if they made this giant female ork model with tusks and a "I'll kick your ass" look. Also, is it accurate that there are ZERO GSC models at all?


They...get....listened to and GW puts out kits with female tau, female gsc and female chaos cultists? I don't get it, why do you think people haven't been asking for these things? I'm assuming the whole reason this thread got created is because GW finally made more interesting and varied heads for guardsmen and are updating the ancient guard kit with the special weapon options its been missing since forever and heads that aren't just copies of the same dude making different faces.

People obviously did ask for female genestealer cults, that's why when GW put out a second wave of GSC instead of being all-male as the first wave, Jackal Bikers are 50-50, the crew in the Achilles Ridgerunner is a female cultist, and they made an alternate sculpt for a magos that is a woman.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Jack Flask wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
 Jack Flask wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
I don't know, I don't get why everyone just defaults to 'eeeeeee, muh virtue signal!!


No one is defaulting to anything, that's literally what it is. There is no actual reason for female space marines to be added to the game. Period.


I love so much that you cut out the very next line of the quote, which is literally a reason besides virtue signaling to add them: because they allow you a wider variety of modeling options as someone who wants to build a visually interesting army.


That reason holds absolutely no water. You know what would also increase the modelling options of someone who wants to make a visually interesting army?

Having Ork space marines! No not orks in looted power armor, actual Ork space marines with geneseed fighting for the Emperor and everything!

Oh and Eldar space marines! That's even more variation! How about Tau space marines? That's even more-erer variations!

Let's also completely ignore that with hundreds of chapters inspired by cultures all across contemporary Earth, plus a myriad of imagined cultures, Space Marines somehow don't have enough variation...

 the_scotsman wrote:
It's the same reason that the transition away from "every marine head is basically just the same exact guy making slightly different facial expressions" was a good thing, and the addition of poses beyond "standing with legs spread unnaturally far apart" was a good thing.


That's a completely apples to oranges comparison...

If you were asking for space marine kits to have a wider range of ethnic representation in unhelmeted heads, then you might have a point. I would wholeheartedly support that, as would the lore.

Adding female space marines is not just a cosmetic change.


I think it should be self-evident that while space marines being entirely male may be a critical element of their lore to you, there are others who view that aspect of their lore as somewhat secondary to the other elements of their lore (them being giant, genetically modified posthuman warrior super-soldiers).

Also, I do just have to add to your funny little display of incredulous outrage...if GW decided to introduce Tau, Eldar, or some other existing species space marines, I'd consider them the third most unbelievable variation of space marines to exist, behind sparkly vampire space marines wearing golden nipple armor and yiffing furry werewolf space marines wearing literal made-for-fething-werewolves power armor.

tau are a technologically advancing race with actual scientists and research. If they were having trouble fighting space marines, why wouldn't they take a suit of power armor and reverse-engineer it?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/13 17:46:27


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I'm not trying to be thick here, I promise. But I never knew there were "Canon" chaos Cultists with female sculpts. Or female Tau, aside from literally one single character, Shadowsun (?). I never knew there were female tau sculpts/models. As I said before, I am all for it unless it's a horrifically male gaze sort of thing. I don't care about Astartes fluff. Burn it all down to the ground for all I care. Women in 40k have shown they can be just as horrific and grimdark as men, let them have their models.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/13 17:58:04


Post by: the_scotsman


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm not trying to be thick here, I promise. But I never knew there were "Canon" chaos Cultists with female sculpts. Or female Tau, aside from literally one single character, Shadowsun (?). I never knew there were female tau sculpts/models. As I said before, I am all for it unless it's a horrifically male gaze sort of thing. I don't care about Astartes fluff. Burn it all down to the ground for all I care. Women in 40k have shown they can be just as horrific and grimdark as men, let them have their models.


Yeah, all the renegades and cultists that came out with Blackstone Fortress had male and female models, and the latest kit for Tau fire warriors and Pathfinders includes heads for female tau.

In general, most kits GW puts out post-8th edition or so that are for a faction that isn't explicitly monogendered or genderless includes both male and female sculpts, with the exception of the sort of 'burly man shirtless warriors' type units. Particularly now that for the most part, legs and torso in a kit come as a set, you can have different models in the same unit be slightly different sizes while still being compatible with all the weapon options. In other cases they just include a variety of different heads, like the Incubi kit includes female heads and the howling banshee kit includes male heads.

it adds a lot of variety especially in instances where the models either don't have hair or wear helmets that don't cover their full heads, like with some of the necromunda gangs, namarti, etc.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/13 18:05:58


Post by: Jack Flask


 the_scotsman wrote:
I think it should be self-evident that while space marines being entirely male may be a critical element of their lore to you, there are others who view that aspect of their lore as somewhat secondary to the other elements of their lore (them being giant, genetically modified posthuman warrior super-soldiers).


No, it's not a critical element of the lore to me, it's a critical element of the lore period. It is part of the identity of the faction.

If you view that as secondary, then you either don't understand or don't appreciate the faction for what it is.

It's no different than someone asking for male Sisters of Battle, which I'd also vehemently oppose. It'd take away from the faction's identity while bringing nothing positive in return.

 the_scotsman wrote:
Also, I do just have to add to your funny little display of incredulous outrage...if GW decided to introduce Tau, Eldar, or some other existing species space marines, I'd consider them the third most unbelievable variation of space marines to exist, behind sparkly vampire space marines wearing golden nipple armor and yiffing furry werewolf space marines wearing literal made-for-fething-werewolves power armor.


Nice strawman. Because despite all of the gakky memes the Blood Angels and Space Wolves not as ridiculous as some members of the community want to pretend. Also even the goofily named additions they've received carry the DNA of the lore from as far back as 3/4e.

 the_scotsman wrote:
tau are a technologically advancing race with actual scientists and research. If they were having trouble fighting space marines, why wouldn't they take a suit of power armor and reverse-engineer it?


That's not what we're talking about though. We're talking about Imperial space marines. But ok, I'll indulge you.

Why don't the Tau make space marines?
[in setting] Because unlike the Imperium they don't have the uncountable millions of worlds to breed 0.01% of 0.01% genetically peaked individuals that they can use as biological clay to mold into a space marine.

They also have different biological development than humans, being physically weaker than humans. They also, as you said, understand their technology, which allows them to make more versatile equivalents to space marines such as battlesuits and stealth suits.

This has led the Tau in following a different philosophy of war where they use advanced vehicles and suits to strike with either overwhelming ranged firepower or swift scalpel-like hit and run attacks. Where physical brawn is required they outsource those roles to allied species or mercenaries (usually Kroot).

Making space marines requires genetic engineering ability beyond what the Tau seem capable of (most of their science seems geared towards technological advancement over biological). Additionally, space marines are resource intensive to make and don't achieve anything that stealth/battlesuits already can't do.

[Out of game] Because giving Tau space marines would take away some of what makes them distinct from the Imperium this making them less interesting.

Which is again, the sum of my point. You are selfishly asking for something that doesn't make the Space Marine faction in any way more interesting and only serves to dilute it's identity.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/13 18:26:38


Post by: Vaktathi


Hey all, lets bring the tone down in this conversation a bit, I know the topic is contentious but if we want the thread to stay open it'll help, thanks!


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/14 04:20:00


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
harlokin wrote:Does anybody in favour of female Space Marines really want a sprue with boob armour, cartoon eyleshed helmets, and pouty-lipped heads?
Not sure why you think any of those things are necessary for women Astartes. Bit weird, frankly.

Not really. On Facebook I saw a thread where there were MANY complaints that the female Commisar released a while ago didn't look enough like a woman. I'm only half joking when I say people want visible tits on the armor. Otherwise, where is this extra modeling opportunity that Scotsman is talking about?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/14 08:04:08


Post by: blood reaper


There's something immensely infantile about the concept of 'redundancy' (imo it would be very easy to argue a swathe of Xenos armies are redundant, and not say, the sheer number of redundant vehicles). There's like 30 Space Marine Armies and then there's Grey Knights and Custodes. They are also,

> All male
> All in power armour

But Custodes don't make Space Marines redundant. How would female Space Marines make Sisters of Battle redundant? They share power armour, but it would be like saying Custodes make Space Marines redundant. Christ, it's like saying *power armoured Inquisitors* make Space Marines redundant.

Incidentally another weak point is the fixation on 'archaic brotherhoods'. The Imperium, as far as I can tell, isn't actually sexist. But regardless, one could keep it that certain chapters (or simply just companies) are archaic and do not accept women.

I will also say there is an immense level of intellectual dishonesty in attempting to portray GW or people as '''woke''' for saying "It doesn't make any in-lore sense for Space Marines to all be guys, why can't there be female Space Marines?" It's pure poisoning the well.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/14 11:29:39


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 blood reaper wrote:
There's something immensely infantile about the concept of 'redundancy' (imo it would be very easy to argue a swathe of Xenos armies are redundant, and not say, the sheer number of redundant vehicles). There's like 30 Space Marine Armies and then there's Grey Knights and Custodes. They are also,

I will also say there is an immense level of intellectual dishonesty in attempting to portray GW or people as '''woke''' for saying "It doesn't make any in-lore sense for Space Marines to all be guys, why can't there be female Space Marines?" It's pure poisoning the well.


(Snipped by me)

I will absolutely 100% agree that GW is not "Woke" and their whole "you will not be missed" campaign was a marketing choice in response to the BLM protests and world mood at the time. They only care about dollars, which then raises the issue of, if the customer is willing to pay extra to have an all female army, why don't we have the sprus? As one GW rep told me at an event, Because GW doesn't want to piss off it's largely male, largly center right audience. Its still trying to play both sides. GW says buy more sisters boxes, and swap the heads, we won't care, you've just purchased twice the product!


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/14 12:04:37


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


harlokin wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
harlokin wrote:Does anybody in favour of female Space Marines really want a sprue with boob armour, cartoon eyleshed helmets, and pouty-lipped heads?
Not sure why you think any of those things are necessary for women Astartes. Bit weird, frankly.


I don't really, and the last two are intentionally silly, but how does 'female' Space Marine in helmet look any different to 'male' Space Marine in helmet?
It doesn't. But not all Space Marines wear helmets.

the_scotsman wrote:....If only we could look to some kind of analagous space marine-esque range in another game made by GW that they've done a phenomenal job going "you know what, no, this is silly, our main hero faction does not have to be all male for no reason, they're gender integrated now, here you go, have 50% more sculpt variety."

but alas, GW has never made Stormcast Eternals, so we will never know.
Exactly. Stormcast pull off mixed gender super soldiers well, and I'd love to see more on those lines.



Jack Flask wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
I don't know, I don't get why everyone just defaults to 'eeeeeee, muh virtue signal!!


No one is defaulting to anything, that's literally what it is.
Really ain't, but if you're going to stay in ignorance, I can't change that.
There is no actual reason for female space marines to be added to the game. Period.
Customisation. Representation. Simple "I want"?
That's three valid reasons there.
They are the only faction in the game (I'm including Custodes in this) which are entirely male.
How do those goalposts feel?
And no, this isn't a "representation issue". GW has increasingly provided additional representation to the point that there is an entire plastic army of all women and every other army can field some % of female troops.
Call me when Sisters have the same market representation that Astartes (and Custodes, as you brought them in!) do.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:Raises an interesting point: Where are all the people clamouring for Female Orks, Female GSC models, and female Chaos cultists?
Orks are agender, and there are female GSC and Cultists.
Why is it always centered around Space Marines and ret-conning their lore?
When you think 40k, most people see a Space Marine. That's why.

Jack Flask wrote:No, it's not a critical element of the lore to me, it's a critical element of the lore period. It is part of the identity of the faction.

If you view that as secondary, then you either don't understand or don't appreciate the faction for what it is.
I forgot you were the arbiter on that. Silly me.

It's no different than someone asking for male Sisters of Battle, which I'd also vehemently oppose. It'd take away from the faction's identity while bringing nothing positive in return.
In what way is Space Marines being all male because of a genetic defect that we've clearly shown could be overcome in universe the same as a piece showcasing Imperial power politics and the tenuous relationship between the church and the rest of the Imperium?

Also even the goofily named additions they've received carry the DNA of the lore from as far back as 3/4e.
Women Astartes have DNA from the lore back in Rogue Trader.

blood reaper wrote:There's something immensely infantile about the concept of 'redundancy' (imo it would be very easy to argue a swathe of Xenos armies are redundant, and not say, the sheer number of redundant vehicles). There's like 30 Space Marine Armies and then there's Grey Knights and Custodes. They are also,

> All male
> All in power armour

But Custodes don't make Space Marines redundant. How would female Space Marines make Sisters of Battle redundant? They share power armour, but it would be like saying Custodes make Space Marines redundant. Christ, it's like saying *power armoured Inquisitors* make Space Marines redundant.

Incidentally another weak point is the fixation on 'archaic brotherhoods'. The Imperium, as far as I can tell, isn't actually sexist. But regardless, one could keep it that certain chapters (or simply just companies) are archaic and do not accept women.

I will also say there is an immense level of intellectual dishonesty in attempting to portray GW or people as '''woke''' for saying "It doesn't make any in-lore sense for Space Marines to all be guys, why can't there be female Space Marines?" It's pure poisoning the well.
Aye, gotta agree with all that.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/14 12:39:22


Post by: the_scotsman


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
harlokin wrote:Does anybody in favour of female Space Marines really want a sprue with boob armour, cartoon eyleshed helmets, and pouty-lipped heads?
Not sure why you think any of those things are necessary for women Astartes. Bit weird, frankly.

Not really. On Facebook I saw a thread where there were MANY complaints that the female Commisar released a while ago didn't look enough like a woman. I'm only half joking when I say people want visible tits on the armor. Otherwise, where is this extra modeling opportunity that Scotsman is talking about?


Half of the models in the Namarti Thralls box look like this, and half look like this. You've got rather than the usual one singular body type/size/profile you've got two. it increases the number of meaningfully distinct models you can make out of the kit by a factor of 100% as compared to a version of the box where they're either all men or all women. I've made relatively few kits enough times to have to really be stretching for variety - namarti thralls, GSC acolytes, GSC neophytes, Wyches, Eldar Guardians, and Rubric Marines basically, and despite the thralls being technically close to "Mono-Pose" and the fact that their faces are all extremely similar bald heads, I was able to build 40 of them and make them all look meaningfully unique and distinct.

There's other factors to that obviously - there are many more ways to model units holding a variety of melee weapons than there are ways to model units that are all holding guns.

Even if the body shape and size doesn't change, having heads that are from either sex helps with creating distinct models just as much as any other distinguishing feature. And you only need to look at the hairstyles present in the Space Wolves kit to realize that GW has a tendency to run out of ideas super super fast when confined to just varying the facial and head hair configurations of one gender.

"OK lets see, short hair. Long hair. Beard. Mustache and beard. Just a mustache. Um, um...giant mohawk. Hair sticking straight up in the air like goku. Hair sticking straight up in the air like goku on one half, the other half is shaved bald. Did we already say giant mohawk? Oh feth how many different heads do I have to make for this space wolf kit. Throw Mr. T in there, I don't know. Balding on top but with a braid in the back like elsa from frozen and big sideburns."


Automatically Appended Next Post:
also, a point to note:

GW's new guardsman sprue has increased the available number of normal, unmutated human female heads that are not recognizably wearing 'The Sisters of Battle Haircut" from about....sixteen, scattered about the brand new sisters of battle range plus the Necromunda Escher box, to about 20, across the entire warhammer 40,000 model range.

If GW were to put female space marine heads in the box, if you wanted to make all-male space marines, you could, just by using any of the quite probably over 100 human male heads available in almost any kit for a human unit in the game.


[Thumb - 01.jpg]
[Thumb - thrall22-May03-Content22yh.jpg]


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/14 15:37:12


Post by: blood reaper


I have to ask to those claiming it was a critical element of the lore, what would really change if female Space Marines became a thing?

I cannot say it has ever really been a focus for the lore. Phraseology and word choice, sure, but are there really extensive paragraphs on how the Space Marines are a male brotherhood and that women would ruin that? To be clear, use of the phrase 'Battle Brother' *really isn't that important* to the setting (nor would it end - Space Marines would simply share an additional phrase, Battle Sister). It would not be removed by the presence of Battle Sisters (and hell, you could say that 'Battle Brother' is simply the term Space Marines use - regardless of the gender of the Astartes - it's not like that hasn't' happened in the lore already!)

So what would *really change*? Malcadors comments on female Primarchs wouldn't be canon or the one or two lines in the Space Marine codex would change? Phraseology might have to be adjusted? It's not like older art would need to be adjusted or anything like that.

I will also say that those people praising the sacredness of the lore seem to forget how much of the lore is a byproduct of marketing or business decisions and often made last minute or without any real concern for consistency. The Custodes example is probably the best; one author wanted to have them, but since they hadn't made any models, they decided there were none. As far as I can tell the deliberate choice for male only Space Marines was made because, at the time, 40k was primarily marketed towards a male audience in a time where models and games and media primarily had male heroes. It is not some sacred decision made for the continuity or preserving some ideal at the heart of the setting. It's an addendum made to explain why certain models hadn't been manufactured.

If your response, "Well, if it isn't a big deal, then isn't necessary" congratulations, you've collapsed your own argument by conceding it isn't a major issue and implementing it would cause no problems.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/15 13:58:49


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I would argue that we already have technical female primarchs in the Saint whats her name. If they took a bunch of her "aspirants" from the sisterhood, and Cawl did his Hey Presto Reseto magik, then we suddenly have Sisters with Black Carapace with a primarch, built in lore, and away we go. How is "But MUH LORE" the best argument to the negative that people can come up with here?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 16:05:46


Post by: queen_annes_revenge


For those who belittle arguments based on the setting, my question is: if you're not going to respect the established lore/canon of a setting, then why get into it in the first place? What gives you the right to demand changes to an established setting based on your real world ideology, (which most of this seems to be about)

If you actually enjoy the setting, why demand these changes?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 16:17:44


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
For those who belittle arguments based on the setting, my question is: if you're not going to respect the established lore/canon of a setting, then why get into it in the first place?
Changing one part of that canon isn't changing the whole thing.

In that same vein, does this mean *any* criticism of any part of 40k lore means you should quit 40k? Does it imply that 40k's lore has never changed form "established" principles?
What gives you the right to demand changes to an established setting based on your real world ideology, (which most of this seems to be about)
The same right that anyone has to criticise parts of the setting - I don't think anyone can argue I *don't* have that right. At the end of the day, the only one who needs to be convinced by the argument is GW.

If you actually enjoy the setting, why demand these changes?
Because I enjoy the rest of the setting that doesn't promote a mindless boys-only mentality.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 18:00:02


Post by: blood reaper


 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
For those who belittle arguments based on the setting, my question is: if you're not going to respect the established lore/canon of a setting, then why get into it in the first place? What gives you the right to demand changes to an established setting based on your real world ideology, (which most of this seems to be about)

If you actually enjoy the setting, why demand these changes?


Because it's a miniscule change that won't impact or damage the setting and is effectively an aesthetic adjustment.

You are simply doing exactly what you accuse other people of, most likely; demanding something be maintained to suit your own real world ideology.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 18:30:50


Post by: Gert


 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
For those who belittle arguments based on the setting, my question is: if you're not going to respect the established lore/canon of a setting, then why get into it in the first place? What gives you the right to demand changes to an established setting based on your real world ideology, (which most of this seems to be about)

If you actually enjoy the setting, why demand these changes?


The setting that has been constantly updated/revised/changed? The one where there were originally female SM and inquisitor Obiwan? That setting?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 19:19:09


Post by: VonGerrow


 Gert wrote:
 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
For those who belittle arguments based on the setting, my question is: if you're not going to respect the established lore/canon of a setting, then why get into it in the first place? What gives you the right to demand changes to an established setting based on your real world ideology, (which most of this seems to be about)

If you actually enjoy the setting, why demand these changes?


The setting that has been constantly updated/revised/changed? The one where there were originally female SM and inquisitor Obiwan? That setting?


Woah woah woah;

Inquistor Obiwan? Tell me more.


Also, if we get female space marines (back?) I want male Sisters of Battle. Guilliman has overruled the decree passive, or something.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 20:01:18


Post by: queen_annes_revenge


 Gert wrote:
 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
For those who belittle arguments based on the setting, my question is: if you're not going to respect the established lore/canon of a setting, then why get into it in the first place? What gives you the right to demand changes to an established setting based on your real world ideology, (which most of this seems to be about)

If you actually enjoy the setting, why demand these changes?


The setting that has been constantly updated/revised/changed? The one where there were originally female SM and inquisitor Obiwan? That setting?



Yes I see that trotted out a lot. And indeed there did used to be female space soldiers at the beginning. However, apart from that being little more than a relatively asinine appeal to history, the canon has been established over the past 40 years of media, and they were ultimately not included.

Female marines is not 'a miniscule change' it's a massive change that rewrites that entire setting, if it were to be retconned. And if it was somehow put into the fiction now it would be nothing more than a shoehorning for the sake of 'inclusion' which is nonsense at the face, seeing as there are already multiple female factions, and an increasing number of female miniatures. If it were about inclusion and representation, this would be enough. But it's not, it's about fundamentally changing an established setting, for what, I can't say for certain, but if I had to guess, I'd say it being an attempt to establish precedent and gain a foothold in the setting for that particular ideology ...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 20:26:50


Post by: blood reaper


I mean how does it change it? It changes three paragraphs at most.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And I am eager to know 'which' vile ideology is seeking to gain "a foothold" in the setting or whatever delusional paranoid crap is going on.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 20:52:07


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


queen_annes_revenge wrote:Yes I see that trotted out a lot. And indeed there did used to be female space soldiers at the beginning.
Aw jeez, but what about respecting the "established lore/canon of a setting"?

Almost like the "established lore" is constantly evolving for whatever suits GW.
Female marines is not 'a miniscule change' it's a massive change that rewrites that entire setting
How does adding women Astartes affect my Tau? My AdMech? Hell, even my guardsmen or Sisters of Battle? It only affects one thing - Space Marines, and it's not exactly "critical" to their identity.

Look at the descriptions of what Space Marines are - their gender is only trotted out as a rebuttal to "can I have women Astartes", never in isolation, and hell, there's no even a true consensus within the fandom over if Space Marines should even be classed "male". Personally, I don't actually class them as male, but you can't deny they are male-coded, for no good reason.

But you actually hit on an excellent reason WHY Space Marines should be made gender-neutral - "a massive change that rewrites the whole setting". You're establishing that Space Marines ARE the setting. You're agreeing that, no matter what strides are made in representation for the Sisters, for the Guardsmen, for the Tau, for the GSC, for Chaos Cultists - they're not the flagship 40k faction. Space Marines are. And if the flagship faction isn't emblematic of those strides of representation, then it's all a bit pointless, really.
Thank you for outlining my point so adequately!
And if it was somehow put into the fiction now it would be nothing more than a shoehorning for the sake of 'inclusion' which is nonsense at the face
Why is it? What's so wrong about that?
seeing as there are already multiple female factions
See point above - those "female factions" (which I'm assuming you mean "gender neutral", because there's only one true "female faction") don't hold a candle to the influence Space Marines have.
and an increasing number of female miniatures.
It's a great start. But call me back when they have the influence Astartes do.
If it were about inclusion and representation, this would be enough. But it's not, it's about fundamentally changing an established setting, for what, I can't say for certain, but if I had to guess, I'd say it being an attempt to establish precedent and gain a foothold in the setting for that particular ideology ...
And what ideology would that be? The evil boogiemen coming to steal away your manhoods?

It ain't that deep. Space Marines are iconic. We want to see women in the most iconic faction, the one that's supposed to be a hallmark for creativity and customisation, the one that is arguably the most adaptable and "blank slate-y" for a hobbyist. We want to see that endorsement of women in the most iconic position of the company, because that sends a clearer message of "hey, we're welcoming you to join in!" than "hey, you can't be like THOSE guys, but we made these ones just for you!! but remember, you can't be part of THOSE guys! k thnx bye"


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 21:13:01


Post by: VonGerrow


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

It ain't that deep. Space Marines are iconic. We want to see women in the most iconic faction, the one that's supposed to be a hallmark for creativity and customisation, the one that is arguably the most adaptable and "blank slate-y" for a hobbyist. We want to see that endorsement of women in the most iconic position of the company, because that sends a clearer message of "hey, we're welcoming you to join in!" than "hey, you can't be like THOSE guys, but we made these ones just for you!! but remember, you can't be part of THOSE guys! k thnx bye"


I think this is the crux of the matter. People advocate for female marines see it as an "endorsement of women." People advocating against it see it as an "endorsement of the idea that men and women are equally suited for frontline infantry combat roles in the real world."


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 21:18:20


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


VonGerrow wrote:
People advocate for female marines see it as an "endorsement of women." People advocating against it see it as an "endorsement of the idea that men and women are equally suited for frontline infantry combat roles in the real world."
I think when we're talking about sci-fi genetically engineered post-humans that are far beyond any idea of what a "regular" human could ever accomplish, biology and the real world are rather moot points, yes?

If there's people out there who are opposed to the endorsement of the idea that men and women are equally suited for frontline combat roles in the real world, I wonder why they aren't complaining about women Guardsmen, who aren't genetically enhanced with magic space juice.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 21:27:57


Post by: Tyran


My big issue with the whole thing is that the lore doesn't make much sense. I mean, the lore reason there aren't female Space Marines is because girls aren't compatible with the Geneseed... And that doesn't make any sense.

Are you telling me that the god-like genius that was the Emperor couldn't solve the issue of one little chromosome? It is a laughable silly idea.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 21:33:11


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


It's doubly hilarious because it wasn't even the Emperor who made the geneseed, so the whole "if the Emperor couldn't do it, no-one can!" argument falls apart there too.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 21:58:41


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


So often these issues always devolve into angry white male privilege.

"Female Space marines would RUIN the hobby for me" - I daresay if that's true, you never truly belonged to or enjoyed the hobby in the first place.

"If they get Female Space Marines, I Get MALE Sisters!" - While I love that you are promoting a gender fluid stance here, I don't actually think you would want this. You are simply trotting out the tired trope of "their equality would lessen mine" commonly used by Proud Boys and other Incel myogynists.

"But MUH Lore" - again, and for the billionth time, it's clear you care nothing for the lore, you just don't want female representation in your hobby. If Primaris can happen, and Cog-boy lore is accurate, Cawl doesn't give a toss about what dangly bits you have pre-creation. He just wants viable soldiers. And as Gman has stated in several books, he thinks the Sisters of Battle are some of the best fighters in the entire Imperium, and wishes he had more.

Long story short - if bewbs scare you, there is the door, you will not be missed.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 22:09:32


Post by: insaniak


 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Female marines is not 'a miniscule change' it's a massive change that rewrites that entire setting, if it were to be retconned.

Would it? Explain how.

Unlike adding, say, male soldiers to Ecclessiarchy forces, which actually would require a change or repeal of an in-universe law, adding female space marines would be as easy as just... adding female space marines. Even as a retcon, which we've had plenty of before (Yeah, this particular tank variant has been around for 20,000 years, we've just never mentioned it before...) it changes nothing of significance. If, in the next edition of the codex, GW starts referring to 'Katie Sicarius' instead of Cato, nothing about the character's story actually changes. Nothing about how that character affects the setting changes.

As far as I'm aware, there's never actually been anything concrete written into the background stating categorically that Marines can only be men. And even if there were, the changes to the geneseed that resulted in Primaris marines open the door for... pretty much anything, really.

Adding female marines would be a major change for representation. But in a universe where someone's gender rarely ever matters, adding women to the most visible faction in that universe is a very, very minor change to the setting.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 23:00:24


Post by: VonGerrow


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So often these issues always devolve into angry white male privilege.

"Female Space marines would RUIN the hobby for me" - I daresay if that's true, you never truly belonged to or enjoyed the hobby in the first place.

Or you just need to learn how to shout "HERESY!"

"If they get Female Space Marines, I Get MALE Sisters!" - While I love that you are promoting a gender fluid stance here, I don't actually think you would want this. You are simply trotting out the tired trope of "their equality would lessen mine" commonly used by Proud Boys and other Incel myogynists.


I actually want male Ecclesiastical troops in power armour. I don't want to do space marines, but I would love some Ecclesiastical troops; but I've never wanted to play Sisters because A. Girl Cooties. B. Their armour seems overly sexualized to me; I don't want to be "that guy".

"But MUH Lore" - again, and for the billionth time, it's clear you care nothing for the lore, you just don't want female representation in your hobby. If Primaris can happen, and Cog-boy lore is accurate, Cawl doesn't give a toss about what dangly bits you have pre-creation. He just wants viable soldiers. And as Gman has stated in several books, he thinks the Sisters of Battle are some of the best fighters in the entire Imperium, and wishes he had more.


While Primaris is definitely, clearly; HERESY!


Long story short - if bewbs scare you, there is the door, you will not be missed.


Wait, where is the door? I'm still locked down. I'm not legally allowed to go anywhere as far as I know.



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 23:13:42


Post by: insaniak


VonGerrow wrote:

I actually want male Ecclesiastical troops in power armour. I don't want to do space marines, but I would love some Ecclesiastical troops; but I've never wanted to play Sisters because A. Girl Cooties. B. Their armour seems overly sexualized to me; I don't want to be "that guy".

Do it, then.

In-universe, the Ecclesiarchy isn't allowed to have male troops. There's nothing at all stopping you from having a force created by some jumped-up heirarch who chooses to ignore the Decree. Sure, they would be branded as Heretics when the rest of the Imperium finds out, but that's nothing new.

The background is intended to be a sandbox, not a precise quantification of what you can and can't do.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 23:21:18


Post by: blood reaper


I can't think of a more dated, boring, 2009-esque/I get all my knowledge from 1d4chan meme than spamming HERESY over and over again.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/16 23:30:23


Post by: VonGerrow


 blood reaper wrote:
I can't think of a more dated, boring, 2009-esque/I get all my knowledge from 1d4chan meme than spamming HERESY over and over again.


This comment? Definitely heresy.

But seriously, I think it's a great in universe solution to a development you don't like; just declare it heretical, don't put it in your forces, and if you run into another player using it, perfect, their heresy is your motivation for a battle!




Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 06:22:34


Post by: Jarms48


 Mr. Burning wrote:

Biological makeup changed, physiology changed, psycho indoctrinated....You basically end up with something that will look like and act like an existing marine and fit into the armour provided.

I'm all for a GW retcon..'...no one is special'. Fits the grim dark theme really well


This, the only real difference between a male and female Space Marine would be their name and origin. The end product will always be the same.

I saw other people saying they wanted more male representation in the Adepta Sororitas, now that doesn't make in universe sense to me. The Adeptus Ministorum could have more male representation in the terms of adding Frateris Militia, which could still have male and female models as well. Basically what amounts to cultists but in an Adepta Soroitas detachment.

I really want more female representation for Guard. We got some new heads in the upcoming upgrade sprue, which is a start, but more would certainly be nice.

I'd say Ad-Mech too, but that's somewhat similar to the Space Marines. The only difference is a name really. Though some more lower rank members might still have feminine features, before they take on even more mechanic parts.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 06:56:34


Post by: macluvin


 insaniak wrote:
 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Female marines is not 'a miniscule change' it's a massive change that rewrites that entire setting, if it were to be retconned.

Would it? Explain how.

Unlike adding, say, male soldiers to Ecclessiarchy forces, which actually would require a change or repeal of an in-universe law, adding female space marines would be as easy as just... adding female space marines. Even as a retcon, which we've had plenty of before (Yeah, this particular tank variant has been around for 20,000 years, we've just never mentioned it before...) it changes nothing of significance. If, in the next edition of the codex, GW starts referring to 'Katie Sicarius' instead of Cato, nothing about the character's story actually changes. Nothing about how that character affects the setting changes.

As far as I'm aware, there's never actually been anything concrete written into the background stating categorically that Marines can only be men. And even if there were, the changes to the geneseed that resulted in Primaris marines open the door for... pretty much anything, really.

Adding female marines would be a major change for representation. But in a universe where someone's gender rarely ever matters, adding women to the most visible faction in that universe is a very, very minor change to the setting.


In my head the canon is that the emperor was a misogynist and sabotaged the gene seed formula to exclude women. I don’t recall many women in leadership positions pre-heresy in the lore, but then again it was focused on the legions... maybe he didn’t even sabotage the gene seed; maybe he tainted the results. Chaos space marine equivalents of apothecaries likely would have been the first to deign to experiment with the gene seed on adolescent females and found they took just fine to it, the imperium catches on after dissecting a heretic astartes too many and Cawl gets the big idea to try it himself... it wouldn’t even be a major retcon because it accounts for previous lore just fine.

Also of note is that the person criticizing a single chromosome as being some road block to the emperor and his brains from making the gene seed work, it is actually exclusively one gene on the entire chromosome that is responsible for determining physical sex; and it isn’t unheard of for that single gene to transfer occasionally leaving people chromosomally a gender, genetically the other gender, and the physical sex being also either or as pseudohermaphrodism and many other biological sex oddities exist as well... biology is weird and complicated. Anyways my point is that it’s not the chromosome; it’s the tiniest part of the chromosome, a single gene that would have theoretically been responsible for stumping the emperor.

Have an exalt, Sgt Smudge, the Scotsman, and Insaniak for making the argument I wish I was capable of constructing. Pull your punches though...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 08:18:52


Post by: blood reaper


imo a lot of the people here arguing "it's a huge change" are basically unable to finish their arguments because they know they'll fall into open sexism. They'll be forced to reveal their entire position is based in a sort of 'girls are icky/liberal-SJW-Marxist conspiracy is trying to take over my corporate product' stance (as the one person talking about the efforts of an 'ideology' to infiltrate the game has clearly demonstrated).

I will say that overall the replies in this thread are pretty good, and show that there's been a massive change in attitudes over this dumb 'sacred cow' (ten years ago, suggestions of female Space Marines would've been meet with near total contempt).


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 11:08:15


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Jarms48 wrote:This, the only real difference between a male and female Space Marine would be their name and origin. The end product will always be the same.
Agreed, insofar as there are some differences between how even current Space Marines look!

Yes, they'll all generally look similar, but there probably would be some slight differences - enough to warrant whole new body sculpts? No. New head sculpts? Yeah, that sounds fair.

macluvin wrote:I don’t recall many women in leadership positions pre-heresy in the lore
Actually, there were a small few, and tended to have some good solid influence! You had Jenetia Krole of the Silent Sisters, Lotara Sarrin of the World Eaters, Guilliman's mum (sure, more of a local leader than an Imperial leader, but still commanded a great amount of respect within the Ultramarines Legion), and Amar Astarte herself.

Of course, they're a drop in the bucket compared to the lion's share of portrayals Astartes get in the Heresy, but they *do* exist. But there's definitely a gulf there.

blood reaper wrote:I will say that overall the replies in this thread are pretty good, and show that there's been a massive change in attitudes over this dumb 'sacred cow' (ten years ago, suggestions of female Space Marines would've been meet with near total contempt).
I'm fine to admit that I *used* to be on the "but muh lore" side, until I realised that someone else having the option of women Astartes literally didn't affect me in the slightest. Then with Primaris, and the dropped ball there to introduce women into what was clearly the flagship (and therefore most visible) faction, my view on women Astartes shifted entirely to positive.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 11:21:04


Post by: Gert


More stories about Guillimans mum pls GW.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 11:21:43


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Aren't we also forgetting about the High Lords of Terra? Several of the most prominent ones (Administratum, Navy, and Eccliesiarchy, I think) are all women, also Jeck herself wields no small amount of power.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 blood reaper wrote:
imo a lot of the people here arguing "it's a huge change" are basically unable to finish their arguments because they know they'll fall into open sexism. They'll be forced to reveal their entire position is based in a sort of 'girls are icky/liberal-SJW-Marxist conspiracy is trying to take over my corporate product' stance (as the one person talking about the efforts of an 'ideology' to infiltrate the game has clearly demonstrated).

I will say that overall the replies in this thread are pretty good, and show that there's been a massive change in attitudes over this dumb 'sacred cow' (ten years ago, suggestions of female Space Marines would've been meet with near total contempt).


You get an exalt for saying succinctly what I have been unable to in many paragraphs. Thank you!


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 11:41:45


Post by: blood reaper


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
blood reaper wrote:I will say that overall the replies in this thread are pretty good, and show that there's been a massive change in attitudes over this dumb 'sacred cow' (ten years ago, suggestions of female Space Marines would've been meet with near total contempt).
I'm fine to admit that I *used* to be on the "but muh lore" side, until I realised that someone else having the option of women Astartes literally didn't affect me in the slightest. Then with Primaris, and the dropped ball there to introduce women into what was clearly the flagship (and therefore most visible) faction, my view on women Astartes shifted entirely to positive.


The biggest problem with the 'Lore Argument against Female Space Marines' is that it's basically just repeating, "Well, because the lore says so" over and over again. It's very clear the lore justification isn't a strong one, and it's not based in any concept of like, 'brotherhood' or whatever, it's based in some very dubious 40k science which effectively makes zero sense.

The 'lore reasoning' is literally just "Oh well, the Emperor was somehow the greatest scientist ever, but also really bad" or something. It isn't some schizophrenic rightoid fantasy of "The Emperor decided only MEN could protect the Imperium and WOMEN had to stay in the fething kitchen!" It's clear just a posteriori justification for not making female miniatures, and one that has been elevated in scope by the fanbase. There's barely any in universe lore which discusses it either. It's no different from the 'lore' that explains why there aren't female Custodes - it's because they forgot to make them.

If you look earlier in the thread there's people trying to act like the all-female or all-male warrior orders of 40k are a deliberate 'archaic' concept - but in this case they are extrapolating a theme which wasn't actually there. It's an interpretation. As far as I know (and none of the anti-female Space Marine types have actually presented any evidence to the contrary) there is nothing really sexist about the Imperium. The universe isn't focussed on traditional gender roles either. Again, I ask for evidence, and these people have nothing - because they are projecting views.

That or they are engaging in dishonest polemics about 'virtue signalling' (when by their own logic, they themselves are engaging in a kind of reverse, right-wing virtue signalling).

A female Space Marine with a helmet wouldn't even look that different from another helmeted Space Marine, perhaps being slightly more lean or slender (but then again, male Space Marines should also vary in their proportions a lot more).


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 12:24:35


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


So different question:

Would you rather it be it's own NEW chapter, or folded into existing chapters? I would love to see BA/IF Female Space marines, not in a male gaze way, but I honestly think it would make for a pretty interesting perspective. How would it change/affect the chapter's structure, methods? How would it enhance the leadership or strategic mindset? IF would be able to suddenly fully populate their Flagship, and BA would be able to suddenly have a much greater influence in their segmentum.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 12:31:09


Post by: blood reaper


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So different question:

Would you rather it be it's own NEW chapter, or folded into existing chapters? I would love to see BA/IF Female Space marines, not in a male gaze way, but I honestly think it would make for a pretty interesting perspective. How would it change/affect the chapter's structure, methods? How would it enhance the leadership or strategic mindset? IF would be able to suddenly fully populate their Flagship, and BA would be able to suddenly have a much greater influence in their segmentum.


I think the best approach would be to make the emergence of female Space Marines a relatively new thing pushed forward by Cawl but have it also that the method spread to the creation of firstborn/whatever pre-Primaris are as well, meaning Female Space Marines can be found in both pre-and-post Primaris forms canonially. I think this is the *cleanest* way to do it.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:02:26


Post by: Not Online!!!


 blood reaper wrote:
imo a lot of the people here arguing "it's a huge change" are basically unable to finish their arguments because they know they'll fall into open sexism. They'll be forced to reveal their entire position is based in a sort of 'girls are icky/liberal-SJW-Marxist conspiracy is trying to take over my corporate product' stance (as the one person talking about the efforts of an 'ideology' to infiltrate the game has clearly demonstrated).

I will say that overall the replies in this thread are pretty good, and show that there's been a massive change in attitudes over this dumb 'sacred cow' (ten years ago, suggestions of female Space Marines would've been meet with near total contempt).


Considering that SM are literally supposed to be you know in some cases, templar like monk orders... and in their behaviour and ranking system are actually quite similar, yes i 'd regard it as a failure for internal consistency and regard the demand for it as unnecessary.

Then again, maybee i am just jaded, but parading out the " you'll not be missed line" as if it was an epiphany and grand change in GW corporate structure is something that i think deserves total contempt. Because simply put, it's a corporation that only cares about the shareholders, it behaves that way, it increases prices for that matter, it applies typicall whale hunting strategies like a videogame even, yet the hobby is supposed to be inclusive? it ain't there are more inclusive hobbies out there, especially in regards to TG simply due to afordability than GW, and no ammount of internet brownie collection statements will increase that.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:06:46


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I think we can all agree that 40k is not MLP in terms of inclusivity or open mindedness to new ways of thinking. That being said, attacking a stance by the shareholders as "deserving of contempt" is slightly odd. Why attack a company for attempting to make itself more inclusive? Especially after it's woken up (If I'm allowed to say that) and realized it's been far too cozy with the extreme right wing political spectrum for the last 20 years.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:08:27


Post by: harlokin


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So different question:
How would it change/affect the chapter's structure, methods? How would it enhance the leadership or strategic mindset? .


After bio modificaton, chem treatment, hypno indoctrination and all that jazz they should shouldn't be any fething different.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:12:15


Post by: blood reaper


Not Online!!! wrote:

Considering that SM are literally supposed to be you know in some cases, templar like monk orders... and in their behaviour and ranking system are actually quite similar, yes i 'd regard it as a failure for internal consistency and regard the demand for it as unnecessary.


I mean Space Marines are supposed to be, in some cases, templar like monk orders, which in a previous post I directly addressed by saying that in those cases, there would be reason those chapters shouldn't have female members.

But it seems silly to say this should then effect every other chapter. There's plenty of Space Marine chapters who aren't warrior monks, and there have been warrior monk orders who did not fixate on the presence of purely male members. Why does a warrior monk order in the 41st millenium have to be all male besides aesthetics? Does 40k lore go on about the necessity of the all male monk order? No, it does not.

You can state it is unnecessary but it also seems entirely unnecessary to not have it present. By adding in female Space Marines there's a wealth of modelling options opened up, at the expense of a single line of lore (and if you add it in at a future point in the setting, said line of lore is not impacted).


Not Online!!! wrote:

Then again, maybee i am just jaded, but parading out the " you'll not be missed line" as if it was an epiphany and grand change in GW corporate structure is something that i think deserves total contempt. Because simply put, it's a corporation that only cares about the shareholders, it behaves that way, it increases prices for that matter, it applies typicall whale hunting strategies like a videogame even, yet the hobby is supposed to be inclusive? it ain't there are more inclusive hobbies out there, especially in regards to TG simply due to afordability than GW, and no ammount of internet brownie collection statements will increase that.


I mean all companies are literally interested purely in profit. I do not understand why people think "YOU WILL NOT BE MISSED" is such a big deal (though 99% of the people who seem to fixate on this marketing gimmick do always seem to fall into the categories of those who have a general contempt for certain elements of the populace.



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:14:59


Post by: the_scotsman


VonGerrow wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So often these issues always devolve into angry white male privilege.

"Female Space marines would RUIN the hobby for me" - I daresay if that's true, you never truly belonged to or enjoyed the hobby in the first place.

Or you just need to learn how to shout "HERESY!"

"If they get Female Space Marines, I Get MALE Sisters!" - While I love that you are promoting a gender fluid stance here, I don't actually think you would want this. You are simply trotting out the tired trope of "their equality would lessen mine" commonly used by Proud Boys and other Incel myogynists.


I actually want male Ecclesiastical troops in power armour. I don't want to do space marines, but I would love some Ecclesiastical troops; but I've never wanted to play Sisters because A. Girl Cooties. B. Their armour seems overly sexualized to me; I don't want to be "that guy".

"But MUH Lore" - again, and for the billionth time, it's clear you care nothing for the lore, you just don't want female representation in your hobby. If Primaris can happen, and Cog-boy lore is accurate, Cawl doesn't give a toss about what dangly bits you have pre-creation. He just wants viable soldiers. And as Gman has stated in several books, he thinks the Sisters of Battle are some of the best fighters in the entire Imperium, and wishes he had more.


While Primaris is definitely, clearly; HERESY!


Long story short - if bewbs scare you, there is the door, you will not be missed.


Wait, where is the door? I'm still locked down. I'm not legally allowed to go anywhere as far as I know.



I know this is just asinine whataboutism and you arent serious but aphyons feudal guard as scions would be great for this.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:16:07


Post by: harlokin


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So different question:
How would it change/affect the chapter's structure, methods? How would it enhance the leadership or strategic mindset? .


After bio modificaton, chem treatment, hypno indoctrination and all that jazz they shouldn't be any fething different.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
IF would be able to suddenly fully populate their Flagship, and BA would be able to suddenly have a much greater influence in their segmentum.


Wut? Astartes numbers are limited by restrictions imposed by the Lords of Terra, not by a lack of meat sack recipients.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:17:38


Post by: blood reaper


It's kind of amazing that people are fixated on the idea Space Marines are all male because of 'lore consistency' (a dubious concept given how much 40ks lore changes and how inconsistent it is) and warrior monk stuff but then if it were suggested female Space Marines styled after say, Boudicca were brought it, it would be unacceptable.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:21:04


Post by: Not Online!!!


 blood reaper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:

Considering that SM are literally supposed to be you know in some cases, templar like monk orders... and in their behaviour and ranking system are actually quite similar, yes i 'd regard it as a failure for internal consistency and regard the demand for it as unnecessary.


I mean Space Marines are supposed to be, in some cases, templar like monk orders, which in a previous post I directly addressed by saying that in those cases, there would be reason those chapters shouldn't have female members.

But it seems silly to say this should then effect every other chapter. There's plenty of Space Marine chapters who aren't warrior monks, and there have been warrior monk orders who did not fixate on the presence of purely male members. Why does a warrior monk order in the 41st millenium have to be all male besides aesthetics? Does 40k lore go on about the necessity of the all male monk order? No, it does not.

You can state it is unnecessary but it also seems entirely unnecessary to not have it present. By adding in female Space Marines there's a wealth of modelling options opened up, at the expense of a single line of lore (and if you add it in at a future point in the setting, said line of lore is not impacted).

It is still questionable, as in all the orders share for the most part their structures with each other. And it is still established lore, despite GW "recently" gaking all over it for the sake of reselling marine armies. I prefer internal consistency in stories.
What would be actually better and more consistent would be , if gw actually bothered to increase the options for modelling for factions that are not specifically tied to gender lorewise, like guard f.e. which the new added sprue is probably one of the better exemples of GW actually doing something "kinda"* right. Updating SoB was also a decent step in the right direction.



*(the whole nonsense about the rest of the kit still beeing legally able to go on a drink with me says enough though in regards to actual diverse and technically more important factions getting completely sidelined for corporate interest and should in general make us consider GW's handleing or lack thereoff of their IP...)


Not Online!!! wrote:

Then again, maybee i am just jaded, but parading out the " you'll not be missed line" as if it was an epiphany and grand change in GW corporate structure is something that i think deserves total contempt. Because simply put, it's a corporation that only cares about the shareholders, it behaves that way, it increases prices for that matter, it applies typicall whale hunting strategies like a videogame even, yet the hobby is supposed to be inclusive? it ain't there are more inclusive hobbies out there, especially in regards to TG simply due to afordability than GW, and no ammount of internet brownie collection statements will increase that.


I mean all companies are literally interested purely in profit. I do not understand why people think "YOU WILL NOT BE MISSED" is such a big deal (though 99% of the people who seem to fixate on this marketing gimmick do always seem to fall into the categories of those who have a general contempt for certain elements of the populace.



No, my issue is whith the psychological exploitation that goes on that GW attempts to adapt the same skinnerbox tricks the mobile gameing industry is in some cases even attempts to build up their own mobile games P2W gimmik games.
The other thing is basically PR department makes non commited statement that is not even tangentially an issue for the background. It's hypocritical and people believing that it changes something is a parade exemple of gullability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 blood reaper wrote:
It's kind of amazing that people are fixated on the idea Space Marines are all male because of 'lore consistency' (a dubious concept given how much 40ks lore changes and how inconsistent it is) and warrior monk stuff but then if it were suggested female Space Marines styled after say, Boudicca were brought it, it would be unacceptable.


TBF, GW is inconsistent for selling more marine stuff. It's like reselling an army for the what was that 3? 4th time?
It's buissness, that doesn't change that consistency increases the strength of a narrative, and i think it shows that GW fails to maintain it's narrative decently enough recently with the newer lore being.... questionable. (then again GW was never a paragon of particulary good consitency.)


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:28:04


Post by: Gert


What do you mean by "reselling an army"? How is GW "reselling" SM when they've never been off the market? New additions to a range aren't "reselling".


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:29:51


Post by: blood reaper


It is still questionable, as in all the orders share for the most part their structures with each other. And it is still established lore, despite GW "recently" gaking all over it for the sake of reselling marine armies. I prefer internal consistency in stories.

What would be actually better and more consistent would be , if gw actually bothered to increase the options for modelling for factions that are not specifically tied to gender lorewise, like guard f.e. which the new added sprue is probably one of the better exemples of GW actually doing something "kinda"* right. Updating SoB was also a decent step in the right direction.

*(the whole nonsense about the rest of the kit still beeing legally able to go on a drink with me says enough though in regards to actual diverse and technically more important factions getting completely sidelined for corporate interest and should in general make us consider GW's handleing or lack thereoff of their IP...)


Space Marine Chapters haven't shared consistent structures for years; plenty of chapters in universe (and fan chapters) have unique forms, units and hierarchy. Nothing, by the way, in Space Marine structure or organisation at any point dismisses the possibility of women. It's almost like this point is entirely irrelevant to whether women can be Space Marines. Again, you fail to provide evidence for this claim it's inherent to Space Marines - except with a sort of vulgar historical comparison. Space Marines draw inspiration from historical warrior monk orders but are not literally those orders. Why not bring up issues with those other elements? Why purely the fact they are women? (I am going to make the assumption of sexism, personally).

This isn't a new development either. I believe Space Wolves have had a unique Chapter structure since 3rd edition? The game has also always encouraged people to organise their Space Marine chapters as they see fit. This isn't to mention the HH which depicts Space Marine chapters are radically different from one another.

I also feel your entire point kind of veers into a massive false dichotomy. You can have female Space Marines and female models in other factions. It's not one or the other. They should do both.

The lore has never argued women cannot be part of Chapters because they are women - it has argued they can't be part of them because they aren't compatible on a genetic level - which is very silly.

No, my issue is whith the psychological exploitation that goes on that GW attempts to adapt the same skinnerbox tricks the mobile gameing industry is in some cases even attempts to build up their own mobile games P2W gimmik games.
The other thing is basically PR department makes non commited statement that is not even tangentially an issue for the background. It's hypocritical and people believing that it changes something is a parade exemple of gullability.


I mean I am going to agree this is all bad but again, all corporations are bad, all businesses are bad - it's almost entirely irrelevant to this current discussion except as an effort by some people to try and turn this into a quagmire of why if you want Space Marines who are women you are an evil corporate wokeoid shill.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:56:38


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


First it was the lore, which was addressed.


Now the goalposts have shifted again, and it's GW is a hypocritical woke Cashgrabing exploitative company and giving into this type of thinking is agreeing with the worst of capitalist exploitation.

This is a total strawman, not to mention shifting of the goalposts.

Jon Stewart called it the "BS of infinite regress", We can't afford to do ANYTHING, until we know EVERYTHING. We can't afford letting Astartes be women, until we know it won't be supporting greedy capitalist fat cats that are trying to destroy "OUR" hobby with their woke LGBTQ+ agenda!


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 13:58:23


Post by: blood reaper


The biggest problem with the lore argument is that it's entirely arbitrary. The warrior monk element of Space Marines has never focussed on the fact they are all male.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 14:25:56


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I think Arbitrary is the wrong term. I think subjective is more apt. It's entirely based off the "head canon" of a bunch of boys playing toy soldiers.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 14:26:07


Post by: Gert


I've never seen SM as "warrior monks" anyway. The vast majority don't worship the Emperor as a God and are as secular as you can get in the modern Imperium. They aren't especially living ascetic lifestyles, especially chapters like the Space Wolves. They aren't even celibate by choice, it's a side effect of being an Astartes AFAIK. They call each other brother because they are brothers, they all share the same fathers within each gene-line. What makes them monks? Is it the Fortress-Monastery? If I buy an old monastery and live in it does that make me a monk?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 14:32:18


Post by: Not Online!!!


yeah arbitrary if you ignore the time span from 3-8th. Insiting on that bit of consistency is neither qeustionable nor headcannon. The vast majority of the lifespan of the game. Indeed it's one of the few things in regards to marines or IoM that has remained consistent into 8th and 9th


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 14:35:06


Post by: blood reaper


Not Online!!! wrote:
yeah arbitrary if you ignore the time span from 3-8th. Insiting on that bit of consistency is neither qeustionable nor headcannon.


It is arbitrary because it has no impact on their actual characterisation and is most likely a result of failure to simply produce the miniatures.

You have failed to provide any meaningful reasoning as to why it is necessary that Space Marines remain all male except for "well, it's always been the case". It's effectively a circular argument and appeal to tradition. It's fallacious reasoning.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 14:43:45


Post by: Not Online!!!


 blood reaper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
yeah arbitrary if you ignore the time span from 3-8th. Insiting on that bit of consistency is neither qeustionable nor headcannon.


It is arbitrary because it has no impact on their actual characterisation and is most likely a result of failure to simply produce the miniatures.

You have failed to provide any meaningful reasoning as to why it is necessary that Space Marines remain all male except for "well, it's always been the case". It's effectively a circular argument and appeal to tradition. It's fallacious reasoning.


No, it's not a circular argument, it is simply put consitency of the narrative, which i provided a time span on that stretches into 9th edition even despite the recent changes.

It's you that argue for a demand for change, and so far you have failed to provide bar the one exemple with cawl an working somewhat consitent alternative. Ergo the remaining on the position that the change is unnecessary is neither arbitrary nor sexist. And for the record i am perfectly willing to accept a deus ex cawl modification to geneseed, however the ulterior motives of GW do make me question if it is indeed progress for the narrative sake, which was an argument as to why 40k must change with the galaxy now being spllit apart and primaris as a vocal point, and not just because it goes for a quick PR stunt.
Nevermind that there are still doubts about Primaris lore to this day, rightfully so, because it's not high quality or even medicore quality narrative sotry telling.
Which is why i brought up GW's hypocrisy.

And btw, when you regard an argument from a traditional basis (which this is not let's be honest, this is an argumentation about the leftover bits of GW's internal narrative consistency but side show.) as fallacious, there's the contrary which is just as "fallacious" .or also known as argumentum ad novitatem.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 14:43:51


Post by: Cybtroll


I wonder why Game haven't use the Primaris horrible fluff to AT LEAST introduce Female Space Marines.

That would have probably been a better reason to introduce them than the money-hrab we get.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 14:48:00


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Cybtroll wrote:
I wonder why Game haven't use the Primaris horrible fluff to AT LEAST introduce Female Space Marines.

That would have probably been a better reason to introduce them than the money-hrab we get.


Probably some concerns that they'd change the DNA of the SM design too much, which at that point is also a ridicoulus point if one considers that the IoM is supposed to be technologically stagnant... but like i said, the argument above can be just as easily be justified as the argument here..



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 14:57:56


Post by: blood reaper


Not Online!!! wrote:
 blood reaper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
yeah arbitrary if you ignore the time span from 3-8th. Insiting on that bit of consistency is neither qeustionable nor headcannon.


It is arbitrary because it has no impact on their actual characterisation and is most likely a result of failure to simply produce the miniatures.

You have failed to provide any meaningful reasoning as to why it is necessary that Space Marines remain all male except for "well, it's always been the case". It's effectively a circular argument and appeal to tradition. It's fallacious reasoning.


No, it's not a circular argument, it is simply put consitency of the narrative, which i provided a time span on that stretches into 9th edition even despite the recent changes.

It's you that argue for a demand for change, and so far you have failed to provide bar the one exemple with cawl an working somewhat consitent alternative. Ergo the remaining on the position that the change is unnecessary is neither arbitrary nor sexist. And for the record i am perfectly willing to accept a deus ex cawl modification to geneseed, however the ulterior motives of GW do make me question if it is indeed progress for the narrative sake, which was an argument as to why 40k must change with the galaxy now being spllit apart and primaris as a vocal point, and not just because it goes for a quick PR stunt.
Nevermind that there are still doubts about Primaris lore to this day, rightfully so, because it's not high quality or even medicore quality narrative sotry telling.
Which is why i brought up GW's hypocrisy.

And btw, when you regard an argument from a traditional basis (which this is not let's be honest, this is an argumentation about the leftover bits of GW's internal narrative consistency but side show.) as fallacious, there's the contrary which is just as "fallacious" .or also known as argumentum ad novitatem.


I mean no, it is a circular argument. You are stating it is as such and should be as such because it as such. Everyone is aware that GW has had Space Marines always be male since 3rd edition, but people are asking why, and feel the reasoning to be arbitrary or silly (because it is).

You aren't explaining why it should remain that way besides "Well, it always has been" - but that seems to implicate any kind of changes can't occur. It's a relatively minor change, and it doesn't impact the overall continuity of the setting - it impacts it even less than Primaris. Your entire argument is "Well, it has always been that way, so it should be that way" (the near definition of a circular argument). I can understand liking consistency, but this is such a minor point of consistency it seems silly to fixate on the maintenance of it.

The argument in favour of it isn't arbitrary because there is a reason because "Well, it should be". An arbitrary point is one without reasoning or argument behind it. People have provided numerous examples of why it should be, including,

> wider diversity in figure range
> wide range for modelling
> it's more inclusive and open
> the actual in-lore justification seems silly
> I like female characters and want more of them - and ones that aren't limited to specific "factions for girls"

These aren't arbitrary arguments.

I struggle to see how Female Space Marines are bad story telling.

And it is an appeal to tradition. Your entire argument hinges on "Well it's always been like that, so it should always be like that". You talk about consistency, but the only consistency this impacts is the consistency of Space Marines always being male (when if the change was made as one that only happens from point X, no consistency is changed, all pre-existing lore remains the same). It doesn't impact anything else in the setting. So it is concern over the consistency of probably a couple hundred words at most. It seems like a silly consistency to fixate upon.

And assertion my argument is an appeal to novelty is pointless unless you can demonstrate it is an appeal to novelty.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoiler:



The above image is a post from Alan Merrett, a former head of Games Workshop’s intellectual property, explaining the in-depth lore reasoning behind a lack of female Space Marines (pro tip; it's entirely based in business stuff).


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 15:27:18


Post by: Not Online!!!


 blood reaper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 blood reaper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
yeah arbitrary if you ignore the time span from 3-8th. Insiting on that bit of consistency is neither qeustionable nor headcannon.


It is arbitrary because it has no impact on their actual characterisation and is most likely a result of failure to simply produce the miniatures.

You have failed to provide any meaningful reasoning as to why it is necessary that Space Marines remain all male except for "well, it's always been the case". It's effectively a circular argument and appeal to tradition. It's fallacious reasoning.


No, it's not a circular argument, it is simply put consitency of the narrative, which i provided a time span on that stretches into 9th edition even despite the recent changes.

It's you that argue for a demand for change, and so far you have failed to provide bar the one exemple with cawl an working somewhat consitent alternative. Ergo the remaining on the position that the change is unnecessary is neither arbitrary nor sexist. And for the record i am perfectly willing to accept a deus ex cawl modification to geneseed, however the ulterior motives of GW do make me question if it is indeed progress for the narrative sake, which was an argument as to why 40k must change with the galaxy now being spllit apart and primaris as a vocal point, and not just because it goes for a quick PR stunt.
Nevermind that there are still doubts about Primaris lore to this day, rightfully so, because it's not high quality or even medicore quality narrative sotry telling.
Which is why i brought up GW's hypocrisy.

And btw, when you regard an argument from a traditional basis (which this is not let's be honest, this is an argumentation about the leftover bits of GW's internal narrative consistency but side show.) as fallacious, there's the contrary which is just as "fallacious" .or also known as argumentum ad novitatem.


I mean no, it is a circular argument. You are stating it is as such and should be as such because it as such. Everyone is aware that GW has had Space Marines always be male since 3rd edition, but people are asking why, and feel the reasoning to be arbitrary or silly (because it is).


"Lore from the offical source has remained constant on this issue for the vast span of the games live, despite changes sourounding it, it has become part of the core identity of the faction." --> "nu uh circular argument"

You aren't explaining why it should remain that way besides "Well, it always has been" - but that seems to implicate any kind of changes can't occur. It's a relatively minor change, and it doesn't impact the overall continuity of the setting - it impacts it even less than Primaris. Your entire argument is "Well, it has always been that way, so it should be that way" (the near definition of a circular argument). I can understand liking consistency, but this is such a minor point of consistency it seems silly to fixate on the maintenance of it.

I don't have to, simply put it's the advocate for change that should argue as to why it should change, and bring reasonable points forward as to why, until now you haven't done that much beyond simply proclaiming that lore consistency is irrelevant , which is arguable, and for some would go against the core perception of the constant narrative sourounding space marine organisation. Which is debatable, i have admitted to such that the primaris exemple could've easily done so, what however is also the case that the narrative progression in which change should occur in a story ( and it is arguable in howfar GW has done a good job for such a narrative). There's also the issue that 40k for the most part was more of a setting (which is even more dependant upon the organisational form and has to be more stringent in regards lore accuracy and consistency) which bites itself with the progress made in the newer narrative, which i suspect has less to do with ambitions in telling a good story and more to do as a vehicle to resell the same army to the same people in essence again.


The argument in favour of it isn't arbitrary because there is a reason because "Well, it should be". An arbitrary point is one without reasoning or argument behind it. People have provided numerous examples of why it should be, including,

> wider diversity in figure range
In the best case scenario that is indeed the case, but then again GW model sales wise is rarely best case, considering how long it took for them to add some variety to Guardsmen and how few helmets and torso options are in the AoS set it's arguably that the effort ends in tokenism or just nothing of relevance. It's also very optimistic that GW would therefore produce something more diverse, and the recent focus on monopose doesn't really help this argument either. In an optimal world f.e. in regards to guard or AoS sigmarines you'd get your 20 torsoes and 40 heads for cheaper than right now, and gw would still earn alot, however GW isn't really custommer friendly and will skimp as you so nicely provided , on logistics for a bigger sales margine.

> wide range for modelling
That assumes NR 1 will happen, which there can be brought up two counter arguments N1: it's unlikely that GW would increase the quality of the kits enough. N2 is it really needed.

> it's more inclusive and open
Tied to the quality it's questionable if it wouldn't end up with tokenistic representation.

> the actual in-lore justification seems silly
Considering as to what 40k started out as that is not really an argument for the inclusion. And narrative consistency is important for the suspension of disbelieve. (of course you could argue with cawl that went so hard out the window that the defenestration of prague is positively mild but like i said i don't like primaris lore and neither am i fan of the new and "improved " story progression because the quality of that is already lackluster... )

> I like female characters and want more of them - and ones that aren't limited to specific "factions for girls"
That is an arbitrary and subjective demand though. Quite frankly if GW wouldn't have dropped the ball on guard as hard that would also be less a problem?

These aren't arbitrary arguments.
the last one though is entirely subjective and arbitrary, which isn't inherently wrong since GW want's to sell to custommers and that includes wishes of you me and everyone else technically, but it's arbitrary, let's not kid ourselves.

I struggle to see how Female Space Marines are bad story telling.
when you at that point remove the only singular remaining narrative design choices consistency of a faction tieing it together in a background sense , yes it can be argued it is. Does make my argument however atackable via the questionable primaris lore and general inconsitency, but it certainly makes the general switch from setting to progressing story a place for debate as to what was better. Which tbh should happen in regards to 40k.


And it is an appeal to tradition. Your entire argument hinges on "Well it's always been like that, so it should always be like that". You talk about consistency, but the only consistency this impacts is the consistency of Space Marines always being male (when if the change was made as one that only happens from point X, no consistency is changed, all pre-existing lore remains the same). It doesn't impact anything else in the setting. So it is concern over the consistency of probably a couple hundred words at most. It seems like a silly consistency to fixate upon.

And assertion my argument is an appeal to novelty is pointless unless you can demonstrate it is an appeal to novelty.


An argument based upon the last remaining bit of consistent narrative tieing together the core design in a background fashion which has remained consistent regardless of the recent switch from setting to progressing narrative is not traditionalistic or circular.

An argument to Deus Ex and facilitate a change to accomondate an universe that existed long before your participation of the hobby is an argument torwards the change of that for the sake of acomodating novelty.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 15:49:32


Post by: blood reaper


"Lore from the offical source has remained constant on this issue for the vast span of the games live, despite changes sourounding it, it has become part of the core identity of the faction." --> "nu uh circular argument"


This is very much a strawman of my position, which I should have come to expect since practically everyone in this debate has engaged in incredibly poor faith. Incidentally, I have repeatedly asked why being male is a core element of being a Space Marine, and you have consistently failed to provide reasoning besides "Well, it's always been like that" (we've already gone over your warrior monk argument and found that wanting).

I don't have to, simply put it's the advocate for change that should argue as to why it should change, and bring reasonable points forward as to why, until now you haven't done that much beyond simply proclaiming that lore consistency is irrelevant.


You are right - which is why I provided I believe 5 reasons as to why the change should be made. At the same time, you have made claims yourself, and are required to back those with arguments.

On the point of consistency. I have not claimed consistency is irrelevant. I have claimed and argued the following,

> 40k's existing consistency is dubious and lacking already
> this is a minor consistency within the lore which effectively exists to prop itself up - its relevance to the setting is minor and so changing it impacts very little in the overarching consistency of the setting

This does not equate to your claim that "lore consistency is irrelevant".

which is arguable, and for some would go against the core perception of the constant narrative sourounding space marine organisation


Said some should really start providing arguments that go beyond "Well, Space Marines have always been that way". I again ask why should Space Marines be exclusively male? What about Space Marines requires them to be male?


In the best case scenario that is indeed the case, but then again GW model sales wise is rarely best case, considering how long it took for them to add some variety to Guardsmen and how few helmets and torso options are in the AoS set it's arguably that the effort ends in tokenism or just nothing of relevance.


This point is somewhat bizarre and rambly (I have cut out some other pieces that did not seem to address my argument or were still talking about Primaris which are another issue entirely. Primaris live rent free in so many people's heads, they might as well declare them Fortress Monasteries).

I do not really see what 'tokenism' is going on. You're going to have to explain how these additions are 'tokenism'.

That assumes NR 1 will happen, which there can be brought up two counter arguments N1: it's unlikely that GW would increase the quality of the kits enough. N2 is it really needed.


I mean, no, it doesn't. One can simply convert their own (as many do!) or make use of the bits provided. I feel this is effectively a whole other argument relating to options it kits, and has effectively nothing to do with Female Space Marines.

Tied to the quality it's questionable if it wouldn't end up with tokenistic representation.


Why is it tied to quality? Why would it be tokenism? I have always found the phrase tokenism to be a massive dogwhistle. You are going to have to expand on this premise for it to be meaningful and not just ap poisoning of the well, because it really does just seem like a way for you to deride any inclusive options.

Considering as to what 40k started out as that is not really an argument for the inclusion. And narrative consistency is important for the suspension of disbelieve. (of course you could argue with cawl that went so hard out the window that the defenestration of prague is positively mild but like i said i don't like primaris lore and neither am i fan of the new and "improved " story progression because the quality of that is already lackluster... )


You will have to explain your argument further beyond stating "this is not an argument".

Narrative consistency is important, and as such, I have argued there are ways to include female Space Marines while maintaining the existing lore - make them a new thing from this point onwards. The narrative is fully maintained.

That is an arbitrary and subjective demand though.


I do not see how that is either arbitrary and subjective. Explain.

the last one though is entirely subjective and arbitrary, which isn't inherently wrong since GW want's to sell to custommers and that includes wishes of you me and everyone else technically, but it's arbitrary, let's not kid ourselves.


How is it arbitrary? How is "I think this concept would be cool, and I would rather my choices of who I can play as not be limited to certain factions" arbitrary? Explain!

when you at that point remove the only singular remaining narrative design choices consistency of a faction tieing it together in a background sense , yes it can be argued it is. Does make my argument however atackable via the questionable primaris lore and general inconsitency, but it certainly makes the general switch from setting to progressing story a place for debate as to what was better. Which tbh should happen in regards to 40k.


I mean this is almost entirely wrong. There's plenty of things that have remained consistent about Space Marines - and the male thing isn't really that important. I mean what, are women in the Astartes going to change the basics of the faction?

Space Marines are
> humanities elite protectors
> genetically modified, indoctrinated
> clad in unique suits of power armour
> armed with bolters, chainswords and such

I don't see how saying "Oh and here's Sally, she's Captain of the Ultrablades - and likes walks on the beach" changes the core identity and consistency of the faction especially if it is a change that comes from this point on, rather than from being retroactively introduced. The male thing doesn't seem like a core aspect of the Space Marines to me - and even if female marines were introduced, the male dominated nature of the Marines wouldn't change.


An argument based upon the last remaining bit of consistent narrative tieing together the core design in a background fashion which has remained consistend regardless of the recent switch from setting to progressing narrative is not traditionalistic or circular.


How is that the last bit of consistent narrative? This seems like an incredibly strong claim - that the last consistent narrative of 40k is that Space Marines ... are all men? There's plenty of other things that have remained the same since 3rd. For example,

* Space Marines remain humanities most prominent and elite defenders
* Space Marine equipment, gear and structure largely remains the same
* Space Marines remain organised as chapters

etc.

You are making a huge claim which little to back it up by claiming Space Marines last remaining consistent narrative is that they're all men - a relatively minor detail amongst everything else.

An argument to Deus Ex and facilitate a change to accomondate an universe that existed long before your participation of the hobby is an argument torwards the change of that for the sake of acomodating novelty.


You are doing to have to explain Deus ex' argument. You are also going to have to explain how my is 'accommodating novelty'

Engaging with your argument is incredibly hard in part because it is not just bad, but so few of your claims are baked or explained.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 15:53:55


Post by: Not Online!!!


Considering you regard the problem of tokenism as a dogwhistle i won't bother.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 15:58:24


Post by: blood reaper


Not Online!!! wrote:
Considering you regard the problem of tokenism as a dogwhistle i won't bother.


Let's have a live action replay of what I said,

Why is it tied to quality? Why would it be tokenism? I have always found the phrase tokenism to be a massive dogwhistle. You are going to have to expand on this premise for it to be meaningful and not just ap poisoning of the well, because it really does just seem like a way for you to deride any inclusive options.


I have asked you to explain what you mean by Tokenism. You clearly can't do that without revealing true colours (in general you can't even make other arguments, you simply assert things). Maybe one day you will be able to explain why it is a core feature of Space Marines that they remain male, without the argument of 'Well, it's been like that for a while."


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 16:05:58


Post by: Not Online!!!


 blood reaper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Considering you regard the problem of tokenism as a dogwhistle i won't bother.


Let's have a live action replay of what I said,

Why is it tied to quality? Why would it be tokenism? I have always found the phrase tokenism to be a massive dogwhistle. You are going to have to expand on this premise for it to be meaningful and not just ap poisoning of the well, because it really does just seem like a way for you to deride any inclusive options.


I have asked you to explain what you mean by Tokenism. You clearly can't do that without revealing true colours (in general you can't even make other arguments, you simply assert things). Maybe one day you will be able to explain why it is a core feature of Space Marines that they remain male, without the argument of 'Well, it's been like that for a while."

Look it's pretty clear that you are not intending to even regard the argument for a good narrative being a consistent one as counting, it's also pretty clear that you are not interested in a good faith argument either by proclaiming constantly that anyone not sharing your opinion argues in bad faith. And yes you questioning the basic premise of space marine creation is pretty major ergo you regard consistency as closeish to irrelevant.

But since you insist i will give you the answer which was readable above:
GW sucks at providing model kits that are actually decently modifyable or for that matter have enough bits in them to be. Therefore ANY change in the range for models will not ammount to something good for the player but rather be dictated by the company. GW then has done nothing and instead implemented a general standard because the options will be nevitably lacking since gw couldn't be arsed to make a decent model kit including more options for customisation. Ergo, for some people it will have too few women in there inevitably, hence there will be people crying tokenism, for some it will have too much. Nobody has anything from that situation.

IF GW would actually do decent kits, like f.e. WGA, where you find atleast 3 head options on historically non army builder kits up to 7 then this would be not an issue, however since GW won't do so the only thing happening is now that you are forced to buy multiples if you want an all female / all male force


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 16:12:26


Post by: blood reaper


Look it's pretty clear that you are not intending to even regard the argument for a good narrative being a consistent one as counting, it's also pretty clear that you are not interested in a good faith argument either by proclaiming constantly that anyone not sharing your opinion argues in bad faith. And yes you questioning the basic premise of space marine creation is pretty major ergo you regard consistency as closeish to irrelevant.


Yeah I'm questioning a basic premise because it doesn't make any sense and changing it would have a limited impact on the overall game and the lore. This is not like saying "Actually, Space Marines shouldn't have a Black Carapace", because imo that does set them apart from every other power armoured faction. Again, I ask why it is so important to the narrative of the Space Marines (and all you can say is "well, it's always been that way!"). I am claiming you arguing in bad faith because you are misrepresenting points or not explaining your own fully.

GW sucks at providing model kits that are actually decently modifyable. Therefore ANY change in the range for models will not ammount to something good for the player but rather be dictated by the company. GW then has done nothing and instead implemented a general standard because the options will be nevitably lacking since gw couldn't be arsed to make a decent model kit including more options for customisation. Ergo, for some people it will have too few women in there inevitably, hence there will be people crying tokenism, for some it will have too much. Nobody has anything from that situation.


Cool, I agree GW aren't good at offering kits that can be converted. I don't see how adding in female heads are going to cause any issues however. None of this seems to result in 'tokenism' however - and those people would have to provide arguments as to why it is tokenism to be meaningful. Your issue over 'tokenism' is the potential for people to cry about tokenism - which seems like absurd reasoning against it.

Your entire argument seems to be 'it'll upset people, so it shouldn't happen'. Any change will upset people.

IF GW would actually do decent kits, like f.e. WGA, where you find atleast 3 head options on historically non army builder kits up to 7 then this would be not an issue, however since GW won't do so the only thing happening is now that you are forced to buy multiples if you want an all female / all male force


Cool, I agree! GW should make better kits. And those kits should contain enough torsos and heads to make any squad fully male, fully female, or a mix between the two. I don't feel the ability of GW to make good kits should determine if female Space Marines exist though.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 16:19:53


Post by: Not Online!!!


 blood reaper wrote:
Look it's pretty clear that you are not intending to even regard the argument for a good narrative being a consistent one as counting, it's also pretty clear that you are not interested in a good faith argument either by proclaiming constantly that anyone not sharing your opinion argues in bad faith. And yes you questioning the basic premise of space marine creation is pretty major ergo you regard consistency as closeish to irrelevant.


Yeah I'm questioning a basic premise because it doesn't make any sense and changing it would have a limited impact on the overall game and the lore. This is not like saying "Actually, Space Marines shouldn't have a Black Carapace", because imo that does set them apart from every other power armoured faction. Again, I ask why it is so important to the narrative of the Space Marines (and all you can say is "well, it's always been that way!"). I am claiming you arguing in bad faith because you are misrepresenting points or not explaining your own fully.


Simply put, no i did, the lore reason for the narrative consistency is stated, you not liking it is the issue as to why for you the suspension of disbelive doesn't work anymore. It^s the same reason when someone argues that there should be male SoB equivalents, it would go against a certain rather important decree the Echlesiarchy bypasses via employing only females. Which arguably represents that rather splintered and internally corrupt and bickering imperium quite well in a narrative consistent way. The same reason why the complete separation of one gender represents the complete and utter disonance of Marine chapters torwards humanity as a whole.



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 16:25:04


Post by: blood reaper


Not Online!!! wrote:
 blood reaper wrote:
Look it's pretty clear that you are not intending to even regard the argument for a good narrative being a consistent one as counting, it's also pretty clear that you are not interested in a good faith argument either by proclaiming constantly that anyone not sharing your opinion argues in bad faith. And yes you questioning the basic premise of space marine creation is pretty major ergo you regard consistency as closeish to irrelevant.


Yeah I'm questioning a basic premise because it doesn't make any sense and changing it would have a limited impact on the overall game and the lore. This is not like saying "Actually, Space Marines shouldn't have a Black Carapace", because imo that does set them apart from every other power armoured faction. Again, I ask why it is so important to the narrative of the Space Marines (and all you can say is "well, it's always been that way!"). I am claiming you arguing in bad faith because you are misrepresenting points or not explaining your own fully.


Simply put, no i did, the lore reason for the narrative consistency is stated, you not liking it is the issue as to why for you the suspension of disbelive doesn't work anymore. It^s the same reason when someone argues that there should be male SoB equivalents, it would go against a certain rather important decree the Echlesiarchy bypasses via employing only females. Which arguably represents that rather splintered and internally corrupt and bickering imperium quite well in a narrative consistent way. The same reason why the complete separation of one gender represents the complete and utter disonance of Marine chapters torwards humanity as a whole.



Cool, we finally have another (but very weak) argument; "consistency and suspension of disbelief", but I really struggle to see how 'suspension of disbelief' is going to be lost if someone were to say "After decades of effort, it is now possible to expand Space Marine recruit to women".

I don't see issue with SOB male equivalents ... and indeed, they exist in the lore! Frateris Militia! Another clever way to get around an existing decree.

I don't see how the presence of only men reflects dissonance of Space Marines to humanity. Plenty of Space Marines also live very much within and around humanity (see Ultramar). Not all Space Marines are apart sociopaths. Some are clearly very social.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 16:25:12


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Honest question: Where was it originally established that only Males could bond with the black Carapace, or the Geneseed? Was that established in any book, or was it back in like 1st edition?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
also, the SoB have no problems with making the Arco Flaggelents being male, or the Priests and ecclesiarchs. Why would it suddenly be wrong to put men in the suits of war?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 16:30:35


Post by: Tyran


If you believe the Emperor was a misogynist, then it makes sense, there are no female Space Marines because the Emperor didn't want female Space Marines. But I don't think that has ever been implied, specially as the Great Crusade did have high ranking women in other imperial institutions outside the Space Marines Legions.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 16:30:49


Post by: Not Online!!!


 blood reaper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 blood reaper wrote:
Look it's pretty clear that you are not intending to even regard the argument for a good narrative being a consistent one as counting, it's also pretty clear that you are not interested in a good faith argument either by proclaiming constantly that anyone not sharing your opinion argues in bad faith. And yes you questioning the basic premise of space marine creation is pretty major ergo you regard consistency as closeish to irrelevant.


Yeah I'm questioning a basic premise because it doesn't make any sense and changing it would have a limited impact on the overall game and the lore. This is not like saying "Actually, Space Marines shouldn't have a Black Carapace", because imo that does set them apart from every other power armoured faction. Again, I ask why it is so important to the narrative of the Space Marines (and all you can say is "well, it's always been that way!"). I am claiming you arguing in bad faith because you are misrepresenting points or not explaining your own fully.


Simply put, no i did, the lore reason for the narrative consistency is stated, you not liking it is the issue as to why for you the suspension of disbelive doesn't work anymore. It^s the same reason when someone argues that there should be male SoB equivalents, it would go against a certain rather important decree the Echlesiarchy bypasses via employing only females. Which arguably represents that rather splintered and internally corrupt and bickering imperium quite well in a narrative consistent way. The same reason why the complete separation of one gender represents the complete and utter disonance of Marine chapters torwards humanity as a whole.



Cool, we finally have another (but very weak) argument; "consistency and suspension of disbelief", but I really struggle to see how 'suspension of disbelief' is going to be lost if someone were to say "After decades of effort, it is now possible to expand Space Marine recruit to women".

I don't see issue with SOB male equivalents ... and indeed, they exist in the lore! Frateris Militia! Another clever way to get around an existing decree.

I don't see how the presence of only men reflects dissonance of Space Marines to humanity. Plenty of Space Marines also live very much within and around humanity (see Ultramar). Not all Space Marines are apart sociopaths. Some are clearly very social.


Your perception of that argument is that it is weak, it's not. Consistency is A-Z for writing in general, but especially for the more fantastical genres.

And it's in essence the same problem that primaris face. Simply put the overarching theme of a corrupt empire dying and stagnating technology just fails to pull when there is stuff like brandspanking new Hover tanks (something the IoM didn't really have even during the heresy). And considering how overall primaris still get regarded as bad narratively adding that to it, whilest not really worsening the narrative consistency just expands the problem of inconsistency. And it then jives even more with the setting.
Basically any setting can stomach a certain degree of inconsistency. 40k can stomach even more since it's nature atleast in the beginning was intended as satirical (and in some instances that still shines through), there's only however so much "bad" narrative change and progress the setting can stomach before the suspension of disbelieve shatters. For some it allready did, for others it didnt.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 17:05:02


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I think we can all agree that 40k is not MLP in terms of inclusivity or open mindedness to new ways of thinking. That being said, attacking a stance by the shareholders as "deserving of contempt" is slightly odd. Why attack a company for attempting to make itself more inclusive?

It already is inclusive. You have Sisters of Battle if you want a female in Power Armor.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 17:11:15


Post by: Not Online!!!


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I think we can all agree that 40k is not MLP in terms of inclusivity or open mindedness to new ways of thinking. That being said, attacking a stance by the shareholders as "deserving of contempt" is slightly odd. Why attack a company for attempting to make itself more inclusive?

It already is inclusive. You have Sisters of Battle if you want a female in Power Armor.


Well background technically it's really inclusive, just modelwise.... yeah between the prices filtiering out a lot of people and armies like guard beeing run on fumes and limited in their models. it isn't really either.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 17:12:04


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Not Online!!! wrote:Considering that SM are literally supposed to be you know in some cases, templar like monk orders
The Ultramarines aren't. The Space Wolves aren't. The Blood Angels aren't really. The Emperor's Spears aren't. The Iron Hands aren't. The White Scars aren't.

You're totally right that in "some" cases they do have those features, in the same way that in some Chapters, animal companions are considered the norm, or that they worship the Omnissiah, or hate using Dreadnoughts. So guess what - perhaps those specific Chapters don't have women Astartes.

harlokin wrote:After bio modificaton, chem treatment, hypno indoctrination and all that jazz they should shouldn't be any fething different.
Agreed. So let them be women. After all, they wouldn't be any different.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I think we can all agree that 40k is not MLP in terms of inclusivity or open mindedness to new ways of thinking. That being said, attacking a stance by the shareholders as "deserving of contempt" is slightly odd. Why attack a company for attempting to make itself more inclusive?

It already is inclusive. You have Sisters of Battle if you want a female in Power Armor.
Call me when Sisters have the same market presence Space Marines do.

Otherwise, can we get rid of Space Marines, because we already have Custodes as "men in power armour"?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 17:33:00


Post by: blood reaper



Your perception of that argument is that it is weak, it's not. Consistency is A-Z for writing in general, but especially for the more fantastical genres.

And it's in essence the same problem that primaris face. Simply put the overarching theme of a corrupt empire dying and stagnating technology just fails to pull when there is stuff like brandspanking new Hover tanks (something the IoM didn't really have even during the heresy). And considering how overall primaris still get regarded as bad narratively adding that to it, whilest not really worsening the narrative consistency just expands the problem of inconsistency. And it then jives even more with the setting.
Basically any setting can stomach a certain degree of inconsistency. 40k can stomach even more since it's nature atleast in the beginning was intended as satirical (and in some instances that still shines through), there's only however so much "bad" narrative change and progress the setting can stomach before the suspension of disbelieve shatters. For some it allready did, for others it didnt.


My perception the argument is weak is because its premises do not lead to its conclusion. Your argument that "It has always been that way, so it should remain as such" isn't a strong argument for it should remain that way. That is the definition of a weak argument.


The problem with the Primaris comparison is the following,

* Primaris, whether you love them or hate them, radically change the setting
* Primaris in many ways did not originally match the original aesthetics of the Space Marines
* Primaris felt originally like they were replacing old marines (this is no longer clearly the case though)

But the setting advancing is not out of character. the Imperium stagnating does not mean it doesn't innovate (this is a terrible lorelet conception). Here's a good thread on the subject,
https://www.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/82icbq/how_much_does_the_admech_actually_know_about_what/dvac5lb/?st=jzizn4x2&sh=34158b83

I do not disagree that 40k has changed, and often for the worse, but I do not really see how female Space Marines violate the original setting. Their lack of inclusion (as demonstrated by the people who MADE THE ORIGINAL GAME!) was a matter of logistics. Nothing about the archaic nature of the Imperium dictates women aren't allowed to fight. I do not see how this massively disrupts the 'consistency of the setting' (which by the way, it has never been consistent!). Especially if the change was introduced from this point onwards. How would that affect the consistency of the setting, exactly?

The idea that female Space Marines would 'shatter your sense of disbelief' is hysterical. It is a minuscule change. It's importance to the lore is a footnote. If your sensitivity to change is that great I do not really know what to say.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I think we can all agree that 40k is not MLP in terms of inclusivity or open mindedness to new ways of thinking. That being said, attacking a stance by the shareholders as "deserving of contempt" is slightly odd. Why attack a company for attempting to make itself more inclusive?

It already is inclusive. You have Sisters of Battle if you want a female in Power Armor.


I don't want women in power armour. I want fully fledged female Space Marines. A Space Marine is more than just power armour.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:02:38


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Sgt_Smudge 798058 11126067 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I think we can all agree that 40k is not MLP in terms of inclusivity or open mindedness to new ways of thinking. That being said, attacking a stance by the shareholders as "deserving of contempt" is slightly odd. Why attack a company for attempting to make itself more inclusive?

It already is inclusive. You have Sisters of Battle if you want a female in Power Armor.
Call me when Sisters have the same market presence Space Marines do.

Otherwise, can we get rid of Space Marines, because we already have Custodes as "men in power armour"?

They do have marketing presence. You literally forget they were the primary hero in the video promotions for 9th, going as far as to defeat Necrons with relative ease?

Also many people have problems with Custodes, myself included, because of the design space issue created along with lore. Actually, if anything, I'm for female Custodes and have pushed that idea before.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 blood reaper wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I think we can all agree that 40k is not MLP in terms of inclusivity or open mindedness to new ways of thinking. That being said, attacking a stance by the shareholders as "deserving of contempt" is slightly odd. Why attack a company for attempting to make itself more inclusive?

It already is inclusive. You have Sisters of Battle if you want a female in Power Armor.


I don't want women in power armour. I want fully fledged female Space Marines. A Space Marine is more than just power armour.

You're right, and Sisters are more than just Power Armor. So now you get the best of both worlds, problem solved. You have that boob Armor to stare at already.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:09:15


Post by: Gert


So your logic behind SoB having the same marketing presence as SM is they were in the 9th edition Trailer? They weren't in Indomitus, they aren't in any of the ETB starter sets, they've not got their Codex yet, they get decisively less novels than SM, SM are on the posters that get put in shop windows, nearly every single warhammer 40k video game has centred on SM. Do I need to go on or is the point made?

Oh and keep going with the "you only want female space Marines so you can perv on them", that'll win you arguments


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:13:10


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Gert wrote:
So your logic behind SoB having the same marketing presence as SM is they were in the 9th edition Trailer? They weren't in Indomitus, they aren't in any of the ETB starter sets, they've not got their Codex yet, they get decisively less novels than SM, SM are on the posters that get put in shop windows, nearly every single warhammer 40k video game has centred on SM. Do I need to go on or is the point made?

Most armies haven't gotten their codices yet, what a dumb argument.

They also don't need to be in Indomitus because they're getting another Vs starter set. Your arguments basically hinge on saying Superman should be a woman because Wonderwoman herself doesn't have marketing presence (which is obviously wrong since the 2017 film made a LOT of money, like 800mill last I checked).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 blood reaper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
yeah arbitrary if you ignore the time span from 3-8th. Insiting on that bit of consistency is neither qeustionable nor headcannon.


It is arbitrary because it has no impact on their actual characterisation and is most likely a result of failure to simply produce the miniatures.

You have failed to provide any meaningful reasoning as to why it is necessary that Space Marines remain all male except for "well, it's always been the case". It's effectively a circular argument and appeal to tradition. It's fallacious reasoning.

That's been the same exact argument for bringing male Sororitas into the fold but none of you have been really arguing against that point and instead ignore it.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:21:45


Post by: DalekCheese


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
 DalekCheese wrote:
I personally would much prefer female custodes than female marines. It makes much more sense IMO- it’s a different process, and a more refined one, with none of the concessions to (relative) mass-production that were made with the Astartes.


I believe those are called Sisters of Silence. They were designed to fight with and be part of the Custodes. Which is intense, as anyone whos able to train to be part of a Custodes melee unit must be of equal or close skill level.


They’re part of the Talons of the Emperor, and do fight alongside Custodes, but they’re not actually custodes- physically they’re just very, very fit baseline humans. The worst part is this:


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:23:10


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Gert wrote:

Oh and keep going with the "you only want female space Marines so you can perv on them", that'll win you arguments

I'm not wrong here, sorry. As is, a Marine is mutated so that very few times will the standard armor not fit (which is why it's a point to make in lore that characters like Abbadon and Tyberos have very modified armor). Marines are mutated so they wont exactly have boobs. Outside Blood Angels and Space Wolves, none of the Marines are exactly pretty boys and have long flowing hair. They're mostly scarred and often have shaved heads as standard.

So the female heads will have what to define them exactly outside the bobcuts you want to steal from the Sororitas?

Hell, many people were complaining that the female commisar released just not long ago didn't look female enough.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:25:49


Post by: Gert


We're not comparing most armies though are we? We're comparing SM and SoB. As for your beloved trailer, the Marines literally show up to save the SoB. So much for them effortlessly beating the Necrons.
As for your garbage SM VS WW analogy, if SoB and SM had relieved equal attention in the last 30 odd years then whatever argument you were trying to make would maybe make sense. But they haven't had they? It took until 2019 for Sisters to get a plastic release outside of a rhino chassis. And that was after the introduction of Primaris and then less than a year later more Primaris. The Piety and Pain boxset is not where near the same value indomitus was. Even without that, SM still got the ETB starter sets. That you think SoB and SM have the same market presence is actually a joke.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:28:46


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Gert wrote:
We're not comparing most armies though are we? We're comparing SM and SoB. As for your beloved trailer, the Marines literally show up to save the SoB. So much for them effortlessly beating the Necrons.
As for your garbage SM VS WW analogy, if SoB and SM had relieved equal attention in the last 30 odd years then whatever argument you were trying to make would maybe make sense. But they haven't had they? It took until 2019 for Sisters to get a plastic release outside of a rhino chassis. And that was after the introduction of Primaris and then less than a year later more Primaris. The Piety and Pain boxset is not where near the same value indomitus was. Even without that, SM still got the ETB starter sets. That you think SoB and SM have the same market presence is actually a joke.

Sisters didn't get plastic kits because GW literally prided themselves on ZERO market research and didn't realize people would buy plastic over obnoxious metal kits. This isn't rocket science.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:32:23


Post by: the_scotsman


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Honest question: Where was it originally established that only Males could bond with the black Carapace, or the Geneseed? Was that established in any book, or was it back in like 1st edition?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
also, the SoB have no problems with making the Arco Flaggelents being male, or the Priests and ecclesiarchs. Why would it suddenly be wrong to put men in the suits of war?


That...is...a good point.

Are arco-flagellants and ministorum priests with weapons and penitent engines with flamers and giant sawblades somehow NOT considered soldiers directly working for the ecclesiarchy?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:45:59


Post by: blood reaper


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Gert wrote:
So your logic behind SoB having the same marketing presence as SM is they were in the 9th edition Trailer? They weren't in Indomitus, they aren't in any of the ETB starter sets, they've not got their Codex yet, they get decisively less novels than SM, SM are on the posters that get put in shop windows, nearly every single warhammer 40k video game has centred on SM. Do I need to go on or is the point made?

Most armies haven't gotten their codices yet, what a dumb argument.

They also don't need to be in Indomitus because they're getting another Vs starter set. Your arguments basically hinge on saying Superman should be a woman because Wonderwoman herself doesn't have marketing presence (which is obviously wrong since the 2017 film made a LOT of money, like 800mill last I checked).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 blood reaper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
yeah arbitrary if you ignore the time span from 3-8th. Insiting on that bit of consistency is neither qeustionable nor headcannon.


It is arbitrary because it has no impact on their actual characterisation and is most likely a result of failure to simply produce the miniatures.

You have failed to provide any meaningful reasoning as to why it is necessary that Space Marines remain all male except for "well, it's always been the case". It's effectively a circular argument and appeal to tradition. It's fallacious reasoning.

That's been the same exact argument for bringing male Sororitas into the fold but none of you have been really arguing against that point and instead ignore it.


We're not ignoring it. We're all saying we'd be fine with it because we don't see an issue. I'll also say Slayer that no, I want female Space Marines. They are distinct from Sisters of Battle. I do not want Boob Plate. I want Space Marines who are girls. You are dishonest and engaging in bad faith.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 19:55:36


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


And what does a female Space Marine look like if it doesn't have boob armor?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 20:01:34


Post by: Octopoid


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
And what does a female Space Marine look like if it doesn't have boob armor?


Does it matter? Give Space Marines "female" heads, like the Guard just got, and call it a day. In the end, modelers will make their own minis for female Space Marines.

The minis matter less than the inclusion: make female Space Marines canon, give them a few head swaps, and you're done.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:04:12


Post by: Grimskul


 Octopoid wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
And what does a female Space Marine look like if it doesn't have boob armor?


Does it matter? Give Space Marines "female" heads, like the Guard just got, and call it a day. In the end, modelers will make their own minis for female Space Marines.

The minis matter less than the inclusion: make female Space Marines canon, give them a few head swaps, and you're done.


See, that's what I'm talking about. Modelling wise, there's nothing stopping you from using headswaps and having your own headcanon, you're entitled to that. Why however, would you want to impose changes that would change the established canon of the lore that you and many others have clearly liked for over 20 years? The focus on inclusion doesn't make sense to me when its clearly just a focus on making what's most popular fit into the "everything must be equally represented" narrative of people who want these changes. You don't see people be as desperate to push female models for things like Orks (people say they're asexual and use that to avoid changes, but if you want to go revise the lore anyways with SM, what's stopping you from retconning Orks to being male/female? We even have "historical" and even model precedent with the Orc cheerleader from BB), Ogors, Necrons (you can say the models are unisex, but there aren't any explicit female characters that have been named or given models).

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I personally really dislike the lore explanation for Primaris (a simple armour/weapon upgrade would have sufficed over what they did) but I would rather not double down on bad lore changes.



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:10:07


Post by: Octopoid


 Grimskul wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
And what does a female Space Marine look like if it doesn't have boob armor?


Does it matter? Give Space Marines "female" heads, like the Guard just got, and call it a day. In the end, modelers will make their own minis for female Space Marines.

The minis matter less than the inclusion: make female Space Marines canon, give them a few head swaps, and you're done.


See, that's what I'm talking about. Modelling wise, there's nothing stopping you from using headswaps and having your own headcanon, you're entitled to that. Why however, would you want to impose changes that would change the established canon of the lore that you and many others have clearly liked for over 20 years? The focus on inclusion doesn't make sense to me when its clearly just a focus on making what's most popular fit into the "everything must be equally represented" narrative of people who want these changes. You don't see people be as desperate to push female models for things like Orks (people say they're asexual and use that to avoid changes, but if you want to go revise the lore anyways with SM, what's stopping you from retconning Orks to being male/female? We even have "historical" and even model precedent with the Orc cheerleader from BB), Ogors, Necrons (you can say the models are unisex, but there aren't any explicit female characters that have been named or given models).

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I personally really dislike the lore explanation for Primaris (a simple armour/weapon upgrade would have sufficed over what they did) but I would rather not double down on bad lore changes.



Why is this a bad lore change? As has been noted, the lore was made to sell miniatures. It's not sacrosanct. Sure, as social injustices go, the lack of female representation among Space Marines is pretty far down on the list, but it's also pretty easy to fix. Why not do so? What are the arguments against making the change except, "It's always been this way"?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:12:30


Post by: blood reaper


There are actually multiple female Necron characters. The last FW Necron big bad was female.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:18:58


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Jesus, what sport are we even playing now? I don't have a metaphor apt for the amount of times the nos have shifted the goal posts. I think the argument now is Because Wonder woman has boobs, they can't be pervs, because that movie made a lot of money, and Some space marines have bad haircuts? I don't know anymore. I can't spend any more time trying to empathize with people who's fragile little world would crumble if women were allowed to be Astartes. CLUTCH THE MAGA HATS!


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:20:00


Post by: Gert


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
And what does a female Space Marine look like if it doesn't have boob armor?

What does any post-human layered in armour plating look like? I'd you can't imagine a female armoured character without colossal breast plates then that's on you.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:28:56


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Sgt_Smudge 798058 11126067 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I think we can all agree that 40k is not MLP in terms of inclusivity or open mindedness to new ways of thinking. That being said, attacking a stance by the shareholders as "deserving of contempt" is slightly odd. Why attack a company for attempting to make itself more inclusive?

It already is inclusive. You have Sisters of Battle if you want a female in Power Armor.
Call me when Sisters have the same market presence Space Marines do.

Otherwise, can we get rid of Space Marines, because we already have Custodes as "men in power armour"?

They do have marketing presence. You literally forget they were the primary hero in the video promotions for 9th, going as far as to defeat Necrons with relative ease?
So I'll hear you complaining about how many Sisters releases and Codexes there are, just like you have with Space Marines?

Remind me, is it a statue of a Sister of Battle that stands by Warhammer World? Is it a cardboard Sororitas that greets me as I go into my local GW? Is it a funko pop Celestian that GW released?

Don't play coy. You know just as well as I do that you've not got a leg to stand on here.

Also many people have problems with Custodes, myself included, because of the design space issue created along with lore. Actually, if anything, I'm for female Custodes and have pushed that idea before.
As have I. So why not both? After all, they're both "established lore".


You have that boob Armor to stare at already.
Just because you can't stomach the idea of wanting something without sexualising it doesn't mean the rest of us can't.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Outside Blood Angels and Space Wolves, none of the Marines are exactly pretty boys and have long flowing hair.
So, two of the more iconic Chapters? And let's not forget the Raven Guard and White Scars.

And, well considering that those Chapters all have successors...
So the female heads will have what to define them exactly outside the bobcuts you want to steal from the Sororitas?
Literally any hairstyle they want? Bald, mohawks, bangs, fringes, long flowing hair, dreadlocks, cornrows, whatever you want. Just make them an option.

Hell, many people were complaining that the female commisar released just not long ago didn't look female enough.
And those people's opinions were ridiculous too.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:And what does a female Space Marine look like if it doesn't have boob armor?
Like a woman in power armour, just like a Space Marine looks like a man in power armour.

If you want to go down the whole "but they'd be genetically engineered, why would they look like wimminz" route, I have to ask "if they're genetically engineered, why do they look distinctly masculine"?

If we're going down that line, Space Marines should barely look human, so the male coded heads they have are already breaking muh immerzions.

Octopoid wrote:Does it matter? Give Space Marines "female" heads, like the Guard just got, and call it a day. In the end, modelers will make their own minis for female Space Marines.

The minis matter less than the inclusion: make female Space Marines canon, give them a few head swaps, and you're done.
Exactly.

Grimskul wrote:See, that's what I'm talking about. Modelling wise, there's nothing stopping you from using headswaps and having your own headcanon, you're entitled to that. Why however, would you want to impose changes that would change the established canon of the lore that you and many others have clearly liked for over 20 years?
Because when people use that "established canon" to stomp all over someone's creativity, and create the impression of "you're not allowed to join the Big Boys Club, the LORE TM says so", that's more than a little gakky.

If it wasn't for people throwing a hissyfit when women Space Marines are brought up, we wouldn't have this issue, but here we are. The only way to show people that their headcanons of "women Astartes" are something we're entitled to is to make it canon, because we've seen enough people scream and poop bricks when women Astartes are brought up.
The focus on inclusion doesn't make sense to me when its clearly just a focus on making what's most popular fit into the "everything must be equally represented" narrative of people who want these changes. You don't see people be as desperate to push female models for things like Orks (people say they're asexual and use that to avoid changes, but if you want to go revise the lore anyways with SM, what's stopping you from retconning Orks to being male/female? We even have "historical" and even model precedent with the Orc cheerleader from BB), Ogors, Necrons (you can say the models are unisex, but there aren't any explicit female characters that have been named or given models).
Because, and I don't know if you're aware, but Space Marines are kind of a Big Deal in 40k?

I dunno, maybe you've missed the massive marketing pushes and focuses GW have on Space Marines? I get it, it can be an easy thing to miss, but if you look, you just might see it!

Also, as mentioned, there are explicitly female Necrons in the lore.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Evidently, it's broken. Maybe it's time to fix it.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:30:27


Post by: Grimskul


 blood reaper wrote:
There are actually multiple female Necron characters. The last FW Necron big bad was female.


Right, but what I'm saying is the push for recognition and visibility that you guys clearly want for SM having distinctly female traits/looks front and center in some way in either the canon or the models. There's like a one note mention of the Maynark dynasty's overlord being female (implied) by her being called the Mother of Oblivion? She's not even the one who takes active part of the FW campaign book, nor does she have rules, unlike her male Nemesor. What about female necrons with rules and models? Not just one note names that show up and then never get referenced again? Or are you so easily tamed by a token reference?

If you're satisfied with the way current Necron's are with having a unisex look, why are SM not fine the way they are now? If you guys keep pushing the genetics of angle of them looking the roughly the same anyways due to the genetic modifications, then what does adding females officially to the line do? It doesn't add anything visually that doesn't already exist in some form in the current 40k range, and it doesn't give a new perspective in terms of lore since they'll be infertile and brainwashed to be a child soldier like all the other SM anyways. SoB work precisely because being women, distinctly unmodified human women with mortal faults and physical ails, a dimension of feminity that contrasts with the inhuman aspect of SM and Custodes.



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:34:46


Post by: Octopoid


 Grimskul wrote:
If you're satisfied with the way current Necron's are with having a unisex look, why are SM not fine the way they are now? If you guys keep pushing the genetics of angle of them looking the roughly the same anyways due to the genetic modifications, then what does adding females officially to the line do? It doesn't add anything visually that doesn't already exist in some form in the current 40k range, and it doesn't give a new perspective in terms of lore since they'll be infertile and brainwashed to be a child soldier like all the other SM anyways. SoB work precisely because being women, distinctly unmodified human women with mortal faults and physical ails, a dimension of feminity that contrasts with the inhuman aspect of SM and Custodes.


Because for true representation, we don't WANT distinctly unmodified human women with mortal faults and physical ails. We have that. We want INHUMAN women, with all the larger-than-life representation of male Space Marines (who are also infertile and brainwashed), with all the same traits and faults, except that they are represented.

I'm really not sure why this is a hard sell. All people, male and female, black and white and anything else, should be equally represented. Why does this hurt you?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:38:22


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


That's a fantastic attitude. Luckily there are black Space Marines but there's no pictures of black Sisters of Battle last I checked. Start there.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:40:16


Post by: Octopoid


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's a fantastic attitude. Luckily there are black Space Marines but there's no pictures of black Sisters of Battle last I checked. Start there.


Sure! Let's do that! While we're at it, let's make female Space Marines, since that's what we're discussing in this thread.

EDIT: Also, please notice the black Sister of Battle in the picture... on Games Workshop's website.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Adepta-Sororitas-Battle-Sisters-Squad-2020


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:41:30


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Grimskul wrote:Right, but what I'm saying is the push for recognition and visibility that you guys clearly want for SM having distinctly female traits/looks front and center in some way in either the canon or the models. There's like a one note mention of the Maynark dynasty's overlord being female (implied) by her being called the Mother of Oblivion? She's not even the one who takes active part of the FW campaign book, nor does she have rules, unlike her male Nemesor. What about female necrons with rules and models? Not just one note names that show up and then never get referenced again? Or are you so easily tamed by a token reference?
Because Necrons don't look like people. Because Necrons aren't the flagship faction. Because Necrons aren't Space Marines.
Making women Astartes canon would be enough. Literally just making them canon would work, because it removes the last refuge that people have against it before their mask slips.

If you're satisfied with the way current Necron's are with having a unisex look, why are SM not fine the way they are now?
Because Necrons don't look like human men? Because Necrons aren't the main faction in the game?
If you guys keep pushing the genetics of angle of them looking the roughly the same anyways due to the genetic modifications, then what does adding females officially to the line do? It doesn't add anything visually that doesn't already exist in some form in the current 40k range, and it doesn't give a new perspective in terms of lore since they'll be infertile and brainwashed to be a child soldier like all the other SM anyways. SoB work precisely because being women, distinctly unmodified human women with mortal faults and physical ails, a dimension of feminity that contrasts with the inhuman aspect of SM and Custodes.
So why do Space Marines look like men, if they're supposed to be so freakishly modified?

Either you make Space Marines look visually androgynous and inhuman, or you make them gender-neutral. It's simple as that.
Again, if Space Marines would functionally all be the same by the end anyways, why do you have an objection to that meat puppet in the armour being a woman? What's the issue here?

Octopoid wrote:I'm really not sure why this is a hard sell. All people, male and female, black and white and anything else, should be equally represented. Why does this hurt you?
Waiting for an answer too that doesn't involve falling back on lore that gets invalidated with every new book.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:That's a fantastic attitude. Luckily there are black Space Marines but there's no pictures of black Sisters of Battle last I checked. Start there.
Might wanna check again there then - look at the Seraphim Superior.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:46:25


Post by: beast_gts


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's a fantastic attitude. Luckily there are black Space Marines but there's no pictures of black Sisters of Battle last I checked. Start there.


There's loads. "The Book of Martyrs" was on the GW home page a few weeks ago, for example -

Spoiler:


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:47:12


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's a fantastic attitude. Luckily there are black Space Marines but there's no pictures of black Sisters of Battle last I checked. Start there.
Oh boy this comment's aging like fine wine.

Just say you don't want to talk about the topic and bow out without trying to move the goalposts and deflect, yeah?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 21:53:10


Post by: insaniak


 Grimskul wrote:

See, that's what I'm talking about. Modelling wise, there's nothing stopping you from using headswaps and having your own headcanon, you're entitled to that.

And while technically that is the case, I've seen comments from women on Twitter who have done this and received torrents of abuse, up to and including death threats, because they dared model something that 'breaks the lore'... Making female marines canon at the very least fixes that particular issue.



Why however, would you want to impose changes that would change the established canon of the lore that you and many others have clearly liked for over 20 years?

The process of both personal growth, and the development of a society, means that there wind up being things that we considered perfectly acceptable 20 years ago that no longer seem quite right. 20 years ago women in the hobby just accepted that it was a male dominated hobby and made the most of it. These days, more people regardless of gender are realising that representation matters.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/17 22:06:29


Post by: blood reaper


 Grimskul wrote:
 blood reaper wrote:
There are actually multiple female Necron characters. The last FW Necron big bad was female.


Right, but what I'm saying is the push for recognition and visibility that you guys clearly want for SM having distinctly female traits/looks front and center in some way in either the canon or the models. There's like a one note mention of the Maynark dynasty's overlord being female (implied) by her being called the Mother of Oblivion? She's not even the one who takes active part of the FW campaign book, nor does she have rules, unlike her male Nemesor. What about female necrons with rules and models? Not just one note names that show up and then never get referenced again? Or are you so easily tamed by a token reference?

If you're satisfied with the way current Necron's are with having a unisex look, why are SM not fine the way they are now? If you guys keep pushing the genetics of angle of them looking the roughly the same anyways due to the genetic modifications, then what does adding females officially to the line do? It doesn't add anything visually that doesn't already exist in some form in the current 40k range, and it doesn't give a new perspective in terms of lore since they'll be infertile and brainwashed to be a child soldier like all the other SM anyways. SoB work precisely because being women, distinctly unmodified human women with mortal faults and physical ails, a dimension of feminity that contrasts with the inhuman aspect of SM and Custodes.



I mean I would actively like to see a lot more 'feminine' Necron models! I imagine the fact we aren't making that push right now is because we're talking about Space Marines in this thread. If we were to make another thread about Necrons, I would fully push the development of female Necrons.

I mean to be clear, there are multiple female Necrons mentioned - but so are a majority of male characters (a vast majority of characters in 40k codexes do not even have a paragraph worth of lore to their name). I don't see why you are assuming I am satisfied - oh wait i do - it's because you're acting incredibly dishonest and making major assumptions of my position.

And if your argument is "Space Marines should look as they do' - I'm largely in agreement. The only change I would advocate were some somewhat feminine heads - there's also Space Marines who clearly do not look, from their facesculpts, over grizzled, so obviously the potential for fairly feminine face


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I love the sheer degree of false dichotomies going on in this thread. It shows how utterly dishonest the anti-female SM crowd is.

Oh you want female Space Marines? Why aren't you wanting female Orks or black Sisters of Battle? As if it's not possible to want both things at the same time.

As usual, the anti-female Space Marines cannot make an argument for why it is so important there are only male Space Marines and are forced to engage in incredibly fallacious and dishonest debate tactics.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 01:28:09


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I still want to know what the ret-con would be named by Cawl. The Secundus Marines? We could completely get rid of all the old fluff that just drags the genre down. Battle Sisters could be chosen from any world, not just ones with martial skills. Oh man the Sisters of Silence with fully funtional Custodes armor gives me chills. Female Grey knights!


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 02:18:34


Post by: Castozor


 insaniak wrote:
 Grimskul wrote:

See, that's what I'm talking about. Modelling wise, there's nothing stopping you from using headswaps and having your own headcanon, you're entitled to that.

And while technically that is the case, I've seen comments from women on Twitter who have done this and received torrents of abuse, up to and including death threats, because they dared model something that 'breaks the lore'... Making female marines canon at the very least fixes that particular issue.

First of all people on Twitter claim lots of things, none of which needs to be true. Secondly why break/change lore to satisfy, I dunno, like 20 people on the world? It makes 0 sense. If we are going down that route we might as well trow out all established cannon to satisfy every weird fanfic someone ever came up with.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 02:30:27


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's a fantastic attitude. Luckily there are black Space Marines but there's no pictures of black Sisters of Battle last I checked. Start there.
Oh boy this comment's aging like fine wine.

Just say you don't want to talk about the topic and bow out without trying to move the goalposts and deflect, yeah?

I'm not moving thr goal posts and am in fact impressed they even bothered to draw a black Sister of Battle. However nobody has bothered with female Orks or male Sisters.

Simy because it isn't the representation YOU want. No, it doesn't matter Space Marines are the most popular army. There are female models all over. Y'all also have yet to tackle why Custodes wouldn't be the better place to insert your female fan fiction characters.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 02:34:02


Post by: insaniak


 Castozor wrote:

First of all people on Twitter claim lots of things, none of which needs to be true.

Having seen the way that female space marine discussions on various forums have gone over the years, it's not just taking their word for it, though. We had a blanket ban on related discussion here for some years precisely because some people were consistently incapable of discussing it in a civil and reasonable fashion.

Hell, in my time as a moderator here I've received threats of violence for asking people to not insult each other. Even if I hadn't seen the public fallout from these sorts of discussions in the past, I would have no problem believing the women on various social media platforms claiming to receive daily abuse just for existing.


Secondly why break/change lore to satisfy, I dunno, like 20 people on the world? It makes 0 sense. If we are going down that route we might as well trow out all established cannon to satisfy every weird fanfic someone ever came up with.

If you think that having female representation is something of interest to '20 people in the world' you seriously need to step outside your bubble. I suspect that there are far more women in the hobby than you realise.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 02:48:04


Post by: Castozor


We already have female representation though, not sure why it needs to be the poster boys too? I'd equally balk at people wanting male SoB.
If you are so insecure you absolutely need each and every faction to be filled to the brim with females as well the problem might very well be you. Let's not pretend superhuman monastic death machines are in anyway representative of your average male wargamer.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 02:58:55


Post by: insaniak


 Castozor wrote:
We already have female representation though, not sure why it needs to be the poster boys too?

The poster 'boys' are precisely the faction that needs female representation, on account of being the most visible faction.

That, and the fact that when the only real argument against it is 'But it's not been that way before' then there is really no reason to not do it, if by doing so you make your product appealing to wider audience.


If you are so insecure you absolutely need each and every faction to be filled to the brim with females as well the problem might very well be you. Let's not pretend superhuman monastic death machines are in anyway representative of your average male wargamer.

Representation isn't about being a 1:1 analogue. It's about aspiration.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 03:07:24


Post by: Castozor


 insaniak wrote:
 Castozor wrote:
We already have female representation though, not sure why it needs to be the poster boys too?

The poster 'boys' are precisely the faction that needs female representation, on account of being the most visible faction.

That, and the fact that when the only real argument against it is 'But it's not been that way before' then there is really no reason to not do it, if by doing so you make your product appealing to wider audience.


I feel this is were we disagree. Firstly because if I had my way SM wouldn't be as omnipresent in marketing as they are, secondly, and more importantly, "it hasn't been that way before" is a perfectly fine argument to me. I despise (lore) changes for the sake of changes. Again if the product needs to change for some groups to be interested in it, then maybe the product isn't meant for them in the first place.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 03:21:26


Post by: Grimskul


 Castozor wrote:
We already have female representation though, not sure why it needs to be the poster boys too? I'd equally balk at people wanting male SoB.
If you are so insecure you absolutely need each and every faction to be filled to the brim with females as well the problem might very well be you. Let's not pretend superhuman monastic death machines are in anyway representative of your average male wargamer.


I'd argue it's precisely this as the problem. It's the same problem that's leaked into many mainline franchises where people have put ideology and the idea behind needing "equal representation" in everything they see as some kind of new dogma for popular entertainment. They know it's hard to actually take the time to create an interesting original story or character to prop up that kind of representation without it falling apart under its own vacuousness if diversity is its only real selling point, so they latch onto existing ones and try to subvert it towards what they feel is ideal, when in doing so they change a core part of the setting that has existed for years only for the sake of a very shallow belief that they're making "progress" of some sort. Even from a purely monetary standpoint, I don't think they'll make THAT much more money from having SM suddenly be female, especially if there's just heads, since it's not like you couldn't use other heads from the GW range to begin with if you wanted to make your own homebrew female SM.

Why not find a different setting that fulfills your need for bioengineered adryognous soldiers in power armour? If there isn't one, why not do you part to help and create it? Not necessarily even as a self-sufficient franchise, but it's not like you can't make up your own RPG/game, etc. There's tons of other outlets if you want that kind of fix.

I'm Asian, I can play and have fun with settings where the majority presented is white, female, black, or whatever. I don't need 100% representation of me for everything I interact with. Hell, I play Orks, which are nothing like me. I don't understand this bizarre desire to have this optimal diversity when it isn't even that indicative of what that's like IRL. There's plenty of homogenous societies of primarily one type of race like in Japan, just as there are places that are incredibly multicultural, like where I live.



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 04:07:09


Post by: insaniak


 Grimskul wrote:
...I don't understand this bizarre desire to have this optimal diversity when it isn't even that indicative of what that's like IRL. ..

And this, I feel, is where a big part of the disagreement comes from. People are too quick to say 'I don't understand the problem, therefore it isn't worth addressing'...

Perhaps taking the time to understand the issue would provide a better grounding on which to take a stance.



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 04:23:07


Post by: the_scotsman


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's a fantastic attitude. Luckily there are black Space Marines but there's no pictures of black Sisters of Battle last I checked. Start there.
Oh boy this comment's aging like fine wine.

Just say you don't want to talk about the topic and bow out without trying to move the goalposts and deflect, yeah?

I'm not moving thr goal posts and am in fact impressed they even bothered to draw a black Sister of Battle. However nobody has bothered with female Orks or male Sisters.

There are female models all over.


As I pointed out earlier in the thread, the factions that are intended to be '50-50' are generally more like '1-99' in the model ranges.

CWE: 5 torsos in one troop kit, one elite squad (which hilariously when they updated to plastic GW made sure to include male heads in just so the boys don't feel left out

Drukhari: 2/8 I think characters, torsos and heads in 5 boxes. the Gold Star!

tau: 4 heads in 1 box.

GSC: 2 models in the biker box, the crewmember on the achilles, 2/12ish characters

Guard: 4 heads in 1 box - hooray, we're on the board!

Comparing to Age of Sigmar, there's almost no good way to make female models in 40k. If you want to, your options are like 4 heads in the sisters of battle troop box that aren't wearing the distinctive "That's A Sister of Battle" haircut, and now the 4 heads in the guard box. Otherwise, you're stuck pilfering bits from other game systems or buying third party minis.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 04:26:31


Post by: Rihgu


when in doing so they change a core part of the setting that has existed for years

Ah yes, that famous quote:
"IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE THERE IS ONLY MALE SPACE MARINES."
I had nearly forgotten, somehow, despite it being the setting's tagline for decades.

Comparing to Age of Sigmar, there's almost no good way to make female models in 40k. If you want to, your options are like 4 heads in the sisters of battle troop box that aren't wearing the distinctive "That's A Sister of Battle" haircut, and now the 4 heads in the guard box. Otherwise, you're stuck pilfering bits from other game systems or buying third party minis.

I haven't tried or seen it done, but couldn't you use the FW Stormcast upgrade or Escher heads (to stick within 40k)?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 06:22:28


Post by: Aszubaruzah Surn


I generally can't stand the female marines crowd. They just rub me the wrong way.

And more concretely they are bad for two reasons:
-1. Warhammer 40k is an established setting that lots of players love and in every single of over 100 Space Marines novels in the setting and the fluff Space Marines are male, and must be male because gene seed requires it, while at the same time lots of non-marine characters are female. So a person bringing in a female Space Marine army or wanting GW to make female Space Marines is basically saying that every single Space Marine novel and all the fluff is invalid. Like it's an attitude to the hobby that is, like, objectively bad and aiming at ruining fun of fans of fluff and novels.
-2. Another thing is many of these people actually have issue with Space Marines being male because they are too bigoted to read about characters that don't have their genitals despite that, like, having different genitals is literally the least significant difference between Space Marines and basically anyone.
Like it's literally what these people believe and how they read fiction:
Furthermore it’s an objective fact people identify with their own sex more easily and readily. That’s just objective truth, it’s been surveyed and analyzed mnumerous times. If you are unable to comprehend simple objective facts then there is little help I can give you.

Like, it takes a special kind of an donkey-cave to find gender to be a barrier in enjoying collecting fascist transhumans and reading novels about them. Like they don't realise it's them that is the problem. I have zero problems reading novels and watching movies and playing games with female protagonists, maybe they should stop excusing their bigotry with saying "it's natural" and "it's scientific fact" because it clearly isn't.

Of course they have male enablers that are virtue signalling how progressive they are and how they are all about manipulating people instead of respecting the setting.

What's interesting that the same kind of bigots but with a different set of genitals are the reason why Space Marines are all male in the first place.
https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2020/10/warhammer-40k-the-real-story-of-female-space-marines.html
Then GW has buried chances for female Space Marines because it decided to make this logistic/cultural problem canon, which it didn’t do with any other faction which is why you can have tons of female characters from almost every faction imaginable but you can’t have female space marines because it would turn over 100 Space Marine novels and over 20 years worth of fluff into trash.

Like, technically speaking if GW wanted to add female Space Marines, which they clearly don't, they could have just retconned them in in 3rd edition because they were really brutal with retcons at that point since it was basically a reboot of 40k after Kitchammer - like how they completely remade Orks and Tyranids and there was no novels besides Ian Watson tetralogy which they made non-canon and they were adding many female soldiers to Elves and Eldar.
Or they could have made mass production Space Marines instead of super space marines in 8th edition - like they could have made new technobabble about Cawl creating new geneseed variant that is much easier to reproduce and accepts more recruits including women - with perhaps some side effects like half of implanted people dying horribly and some being unstable to keep things properly grimdark. Like Primaris were just so unnecessary because Space Marines are already over the top and mass production marines would be a nod to the fact that Space Marines are the most popular faction.

But they didn't. GW clearly doesn't want female Space Marines. They "miss" every chance they got to implement them without messing things up.

So, these people are an impotent nuisance but then they turn it all around and call you a gatekeeper and exclusionist and sexist or whatever if you don't want to ruin canon to accommodate for their bigotry and manipulation.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 06:23:21


Post by: techsoldaten


 insaniak wrote:
 Castozor wrote:
We already have female representation though, not sure why it needs to be the poster boys too?

The poster 'boys' are precisely the faction that needs female representation, on account of being the most visible faction.

That, and the fact that when the only real argument against it is 'But it's not been that way before' then there is really no reason to not do it, if by doing so you make your product appealing to wider audience.


Dunno.

This is what a GW designer had to say on the subject.



GW is a $4B company that really, really understands how to sell models. They want to continue to grow, Kevin Roundtree would love nothing more than to tap into an otherwise inaccessible market.

Presuming it exists.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 06:38:32


Post by: Aszubaruzah Surn


 techsoldaten wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
 Castozor wrote:
We already have female representation though, not sure why it needs to be the poster boys too?

The poster 'boys' are precisely the faction that needs female representation, on account of being the most visible faction.

That, and the fact that when the only real argument against it is 'But it's not been that way before' then there is really no reason to not do it, if by doing so you make your product appealing to wider audience.


Dunno.

This is what a GW designer had to say on the subject.



GW is a $4B company that really, really understands how to sell models. They want to continue to grow, Kevin Roundtree would love nothing more than to tap into an otherwise inaccessible market.

Presuming it exists.

*Insert the bike meme*

Bigots in 1985: Waah! I want to play only army of my sex! I will complain if they are other sex!
Bigots in 2020: Waah! I want to play only army of my sex! Why there are no female space marines?!

Well, played bigots, they really did it to themselves.

In the 80s they were opposing creator's freedom to create new setting as they please in 2020s they are opposing creators freedom to maintain and respect canon and demand turning every single Space Marine novel and 30 years of fluff into trash.
Luckily nowadays GW is much more powerful than in the 80s.

By the way, I like how he's "forgetting" the fact that nobody actually forced them to make Space Marines all male and that writing the fluff in a way that made female space marines impossible was their deliberate choice. They left a door open for female members of all other Imperial factions and made some female Army trooper miniatures. Like Space Marines being all male was 100% their deliberate decision. They also could have made female Space Marines in 3rd ed when they have rebooted the setting. Like adding female Marines would be incomparable with what they did to Orks and Tyranids.
The female miniatures in Power Armour are Adepta Sororita - it's shown by the creature skull on their shoulderpads. And by the way Adepta Sororita were much more powerful back then and from the description they were more like inquisitors than what they became later.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 06:49:06


Post by: insaniak


 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:
... and must be male because gene seed requires it,


This has been mentioned a few times. Where is it actually stated in the fluff?


So a person bringing in a female Space Marine army or wanting GW to make female Space Marines is basically saying that every single Space Marine novel and all the fluff is invalid.

That would obviously depend on whether they added them as a retcon, or introduced them as a new development.

Even if it was the former, though, a retcon doesn't actually mean that GW operatives come to your house and burn your copies of those books. You'll still have them, and you can still read them, and they can be just as valid for you as they were before. You don't actually need GW to tell you what is and isn't canon. In fact, in the words of a relevant wise man:
"With Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. [...] Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong
Gav Thorpe, Lead Designer GW"

Let's assume for a moment that canon is a thing, though. Introducing women doesn't actually invalidate anything that came before, any more than any of the previous additions to the game did. Storm Talons were never mentioned in the fluff... until the model was created. Did that immediately invalidate every book published prior to that date? Hell, most of the weapon and vehicle options available to Horus Heresy armies were never mentioned in the books prior to their models being created. Do we assume that the first half of the Horus Heresy novel series is now invalid?

The 40K background is a constantly evolving thing. It always has been. So arguing that this one specific change would somehow break everything, when none of the previous changes have done so, seems somewhat absurd.




-2. Another thing is many of these people actually have issue with Space Marines being male because they are too bigoted to read about characters that don't have their genitals despite that, like, having different genitals is literally the least significant difference between Space Marines and basically anyone.
Like it's literally what these people believe and how they read fiction:

This is quite possible the most warped interpretation of what representation means that I've ever read. Congratulations.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 techsoldaten wrote:

This is what a GW designer had to say on the subject.

To be clear, that's what a GW designer had to say about a business decision from the late '80s or early '90s. Times have changed. And it's fairly clear that GW are well aware of that, given that they have made steps towards introducing more diversity into the range, if at a somewhat slower pace than some fans would like.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 07:31:17


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 the_scotsman wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's a fantastic attitude. Luckily there are black Space Marines but there's no pictures of black Sisters of Battle last I checked. Start there.
Oh boy this comment's aging like fine wine.

Just say you don't want to talk about the topic and bow out without trying to move the goalposts and deflect, yeah?

I'm not moving thr goal posts and am in fact impressed they even bothered to draw a black Sister of Battle. However nobody has bothered with female Orks or male Sisters.

There are female models all over.


As I pointed out earlier in the thread, the factions that are intended to be '50-50' are generally more like '1-99' in the model ranges.

CWE: 5 torsos in one troop kit, one elite squad (which hilariously when they updated to plastic GW made sure to include male heads in just so the boys don't feel left out

Drukhari: 2/8 I think characters, torsos and heads in 5 boxes. the Gold Star!

tau: 4 heads in 1 box.

GSC: 2 models in the biker box, the crewmember on the achilles, 2/12ish characters

Guard: 4 heads in 1 box - hooray, we're on the board!

Comparing to Age of Sigmar, there's almost no good way to make female models in 40k. If you want to, your options are like 4 heads in the sisters of battle troop box that aren't wearing the distinctive "That's A Sister of Battle" haircut, and now the 4 heads in the guard box. Otherwise, you're stuck pilfering bits from other game systems or buying third party minis.

1. Eldar really shouldn't be absurdly close to human proportions anyway. That there aren't exaggerated tits on every single model doesn't mean some of them won't be female. Absolutely absurd argument, especially as most of the bodies will be wearing helmets.
2. Drukhari really aren't that bad as you're making them to be, especially as, like I already stated, Eldar shouldn't be that proportioned like humans even on the 28mm scale. Nothing is stopping your Kalabites from being female outside that you don't like they're not baring midriff like on the Wyches.
3. Literally the only way to tell for Tau is fhe frickin nose. Lousy complaint.
4. I would figure that for Cults the women would be too busy giving birth to more mutants but sure, whatever.
5. Once again, with mostly helmets, how are you able to tell with Imperial Guard?

It's literally like all y'all want is exaggerated female features on the models as otherwise they're not female. That female Commisar done a couple years ago proves my point exactly: there were tons of complaints it didn't look like a woman, and to be honest many of you reek of this attitude, not even with the topic on hand.

Lastly, you could have requested female Custodes and literally nobody would bat an eye because of how little their fluff is established outside there's 10,000 of them sitting around doing nothing. I've literally suggested this before and we got the whole "but they're not on the posters".

Who. fething. Cares.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 08:02:42


Post by: Aszubaruzah Surn


 insaniak wrote:
 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:
... and must be male because gene seed requires it,


This has been mentioned a few times. Where is it actually stated in the fluff?

In The Origins of Legiones Astartes from Rogue Trader which details the creation of Space Marines and then is followed in every single Space Marine novel and every single piece of Space Marine fluff. They reprinted the article verbatim in 3rd edition when they rebooted the setting and then in 2008:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080411194030/http://uk.games-workshop.com/spacemarines/initiation/3/
And then in 2016:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2016/11/16/rites-of-initiation-the-making-of-a-space-marine/

Blame GW for how it wrote the canon, not me. As I said they had opportunity to add female marines in 3rd ed (no novels/massive retcons - like for example the difference between 2nd ed Orks and 3rd ed Orks is staggering - they are unrecognizable) and 8th ed (Cawl and nu-marines). They preferred to keep things as they are in 3rd ed and make Primaris super super space marines with additional organs on top of the already male-only organs in 8th ed instead of just making a way for massive Space Marine reinforcements through a new production method. Like Primaris were just so bad - listening to Dark Imperium about how they were just slaughtering Chaos Space Marines was so cringe. I'd take something like mass production marines over it any day :| .

 insaniak wrote:
So a person bringing in a female Space Marine army or wanting GW to make female Space Marines is basically saying that every single Space Marine novel and all the fluff is invalid.

That would obviously depend on whether they added them as a retcon, or introduced them as a new development.

Even if it was the former, though, a retcon doesn't actually mean that GW operatives come to your house and burn your copies of those books. You'll still have them, and you can still read them, and they can be just as valid for you as they were before. You don't actually need GW to tell you what is and isn't canon. In fact, in the words of a relevant wise man:
"With Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. [...] Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong
Gav Thorpe, Lead Designer GW"

Let's assume for a moment that canon is a thing, though. Introducing women doesn't actually invalidate anything that came before, any more than any of the previous additions to the game did. Storm Talons were never mentioned in the fluff... until the model was created. Did that immediately invalidate every book published prior to that date? Hell, most of the weapon and vehicle options available to Horus Heresy armies were never mentioned in the books prior to their models being created. Do we assume that the first half of the Horus Heresy novel series is now invalid?

The 40K background is a constantly evolving thing. It always has been. So arguing that this one specific change would somehow break everything, when none of the previous changes have done so, seems somewhat absurd.

If you weren't grasping at straws to push the agenda, it would be immediately clear - they didn't have to invent women nor they had believed women can't be powerful fighters - so you have various female fighters since early novels and in Horus Heresy series. GW has specifically excluded women from Astartes. Saying that there were always female astartes would absolutely invalidate everything that came before since the novels are primarily novels about people not about hardware.

 insaniak wrote:
-2. Another thing is many of these people actually have issue with Space Marines being male because they are too bigoted to read about characters that don't have their genitals despite that, like, having different genitals is literally the least significant difference between Space Marines and basically anyone.
Like it's literally what these people believe and how they read fiction:

This is quite possible the most warped interpretation of what representation means that I've ever read. Congratulations.

It's not my interpretation. It's something that few women that were rabidly demanding female space marines explained and claimed that it's an objective scientific fact. They are literally the same kind of people who were responsible for this mess in the first place but with swapped genitals. Like if you don't understand they can't read novels and collect armies with male space marine characters you have no empathy and stuff. I guess I need to improve my empathy until I'll be able to understand people who would complain about female Space Marine characters being included in marine units for a completely new setting back in the 80s. Though knowing GW they'd probably make female Space Marines with boobplate and in thongs (these are Adepta Sororita by the way, as shown by the creature skull on their shoulder pads).


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 08:32:59


Post by: blood reaper


The vile agenda ... of wanting female Space Marines.

The amount of poisoning the well on the part of anti-female Space Marine people here is utterly insane. Very typical rightoid crank "infiltrating agenda" stuff.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 08:53:22


Post by: insaniak


 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:

In The Origins of Legiones Astartes from Rogue Trader which details the creation of Space Marines...

Thank you. It's been a while since I read that particular article, and I don't recall it ever being mentioned anywhere else.

It doesn't really change any of the arguments about the mutability of 'canon', but it's good to actually have a reference for it.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 10:26:19


Post by: Sgt. Cortez


If they produced female heads for Marines I'd be all for it. Also, please don't just produce female Marines for Emperor's Children because reasons...

What I'd also like though, since the Imperium is painted in a more positive light recently, if Cawl came up with the ability to produce female Marines and Guilliman or most Chapter masters were like, no, we don't do women here. It's a fascist state after all, women are allowed to produce and be cannon fodder, but women in the Elite cadre outside of the church? Nah...
Either way, the current status with that strange reasoning seems a little... Lackluster.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 10:58:29


Post by: Gert


"Wanting representation in media makes you a bigot" is quite probably the spiciest and dumbest take I think I've ever seen. Coupled with the "GW would make female Marines overly sexualised" despite literally no evidence to suggest they would do that makes for an argument with more holes than a chunk of Swiss cheese.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 11:24:39


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Did he really just "He who smelt it dealt it" Bigotted Misogyny?

This is where the curtain falls away and we see the true colors of the people who feel the status quo of oppression can ever be the one way. All other ways are somehow hurting their tiny genitals.

Seriously, I don't see why you fellas hate women, no, wait, I think I just answered my own question.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 11:38:49


Post by: the_scotsman


Yeah, I really really do love the amount of Mr Fantastic stretching required to make "people who do not want any women in their little spaceman toys and will throw their toys out the pram if even someone else can make them and GW says that's OK for them to do" and "people who think it would be nice if it were possible to make any number of space marines female out of the kits instead of having to get heads from other kits to do so" on the exact same moral footing.

Step one is, apparently, imagine that the REAL people who want female space marines are a secret kabal of....I guess female...supremacists, who want ONLY female space marines and want every male space marine STRIKEN FROM THE CANON, bwahahahahahaah, sitting in their castle of evil like skeletor and commanding their foolish duped virtue-signaling minions.

Bravo. Fantastic, truly inspiring performance. You've shattered the world record standing logic long-jump and stuck the landing.

The ship has almost certainly sailed at this point, at least for this round of selling the marine whales a new army. Maybe when Robute finds the secret vault of Primprimmarismaris marines in the lost archives of terra in 11th edition, but right now, it's clear that GW is aware that the fanbase of 40k is massively more change-averse and conservative than the fanbase of their other game system, and they're respecting that cancel culture juggernaut and treating marine fans with the ultimate delicate silk gloves.

They wrote a short story on Warhammer Community at one point where a woman (who had a giant power-greatsword and incidentally was fighting alongside a fething Custode) managed to kill a renegade primaris marine captain, and they learned their lesson from the amount of furious screeching from the eternally-online among the 40k fanbase to be much, much more careful about ever portraying their precious babies losing a fight and especially losing a fight to a woman.

Case in point, the brand new dark eldar codex - the story from the last codex where a group of wyches and hellions in the arena kill the first captured squad of primaris space marines has been stripped out, the fluff blurb about the drukhari capturing a custode has been retconned to they are TRYING to capture a custode. The only time in the 'dex they dare portray a dark eldar as superior to an astartes is Urien Rakarth capturing and experimenting on Primaris Marines for unknown purposes, but they don't dare actually show that in first person, they just mention it quickly in one sentence to resolve the whole 'Urien is sending out all his minions on a giant mission for some unknown purpose'....I hesitate to say "plotline"? from the previous codex.

So snuggle up in your beds and cuddle your blankies boys, you are well and truly safe. Your persistent social media tantrums have made it abundantly clear that the wild, crazy releases GW has been putting out for Age of Sigmar will never ever threaten you in your safe space, and as long as you keep buying, GW will keep making Primaris Rockoblasters and Primaris Smashinators and Primaris Infenestrators for years and years and years to come with nary a ponytailed head in sight to give you a spook.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 11:54:15


Post by: VonGerrow


 Gert wrote:
Coupled with the "GW would make female Marines overly sexualised" despite literally no evidence to suggest they would do that makes for an argument with more holes than a chunk of Swiss cheese.


Compare GW's depiction of the armour of the Sisters of Battle:


with the classic depictions of Joan of Arc.



The only female minature I've seen from GW that isn't overly sexualized is the Commissar Severina Raine model.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 11:56:14


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, I really really do love the amount of Mr Fantastic stretching required to make "people who do not want any women in their little spaceman toys and will throw their toys out the pram if even someone else can make them and GW says that's OK for them to do" and "people who think it would be nice if it were possible to make any number of space marines female out of the kits instead of having to get heads from other kits to do so" on the exact same moral footing.

Step one is, apparently, imagine that the REAL people who want female space marines are a secret kabal of....I guess female...supremacists, who want ONLY female space marines and want every male space marine STRIKEN FROM THE CANON, bwahahahahahaah, sitting in their castle of evil like skeletor and commanding their foolish duped virtue-signaling minions.

Bravo. Fantastic, truly inspiring performance. You've shattered the world record standing logic long-jump and stuck the landing.

The ship has almost certainly sailed at this point, at least for this round of selling the marine whales a new army. Maybe when Robute finds the secret vault of Primprimmarismaris marines in the lost archives of terra in 11th edition, but right now, it's clear that GW is aware that the fanbase of 40k is massively more change-averse and conservative than the fanbase of their other game system, and they're respecting that cancel culture juggernaut and treating marine fans with the ultimate delicate silk gloves.

They wrote a short story on Warhammer Community at one point where a woman (who had a giant power-greatsword and incidentally was fighting alongside a fething Custode) managed to kill a renegade primaris marine captain, and they learned their lesson from the amount of furious screeching from the eternally-online among the 40k fanbase to be much, much more careful about ever portraying their precious babies losing a fight and especially losing a fight to a woman.

Case in point, the brand new dark eldar codex - the story from the last codex where a group of wyches and hellions in the arena kill the first captured squad of primaris space marines has been stripped out, the fluff blurb about the drukhari capturing a custode has been retconned to they are TRYING to capture a custode. The only time in the 'dex they dare portray a dark eldar as superior to an astartes is Urien Rakarth capturing and experimenting on Primaris Marines for unknown purposes, but they don't dare actually show that in first person, they just mention it quickly in one sentence to resolve the whole 'Urien is sending out all his minions on a giant mission for some unknown purpose'....I hesitate to say "plotline"? from the previous codex.

So snuggle up in your beds and cuddle your blankies boys, you are well and truly safe. Your persistent social media tantrums have made it abundantly clear that the wild, crazy releases GW has been putting out for Age of Sigmar will never ever threaten you in your safe space, and as long as you keep buying, GW will keep making Primaris Rockoblasters and Primaris Smashinators and Primaris Infenestrators for years and years and years to come with nary a ponytailed head in sight to give you a spook.



::Slow Clap:: ::Rise into standing ovation:: I was wondering when we would be treated to another patented Scotsman 5 paragraph burn.

In the words of Master Roshi - Gonna need a Senzu for that one.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 12:42:20


Post by: techsoldaten


 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:
 techsoldaten wrote:


Dunno.

This is what a GW designer had to say on the subject.



GW is a $4B company that really, really understands how to sell models. They want to continue to grow, Kevin Roundtree would love nothing more than to tap into an otherwise inaccessible market.

Presuming it exists.

*Insert the bike meme*

Bigots in 1985: Waah! I want to play only army of my sex! I will complain if they are other sex!
Bigots in 2020: Waah! I want to play only army of my sex! Why there are no female space marines?!

Well, played bigots, they really did it to themselves.

In the 80s they were opposing creator's freedom to create new setting as they please in 2020s they are opposing creators freedom to maintain and respect canon and demand turning every single Space Marine novel and 30 years of fluff into trash.
Luckily nowadays GW is much more powerful than in the 80s.

By the way, I like how he's "forgetting" the fact that nobody actually forced them to make Space Marines all male and that writing the fluff in a way that made female space marines impossible was their deliberate choice. They left a door open for female members of all other Imperial factions and made some female Army trooper miniatures. Like Space Marines being all male was 100% their deliberate decision. They also could have made female Space Marines in 3rd ed when they have rebooted the setting. Like adding female Marines would be incomparable with what they did to Orks and Tyranids.
The female miniatures in Power Armour are Adepta Sororita - it's shown by the creature skull on their shoulderpads. And by the way Adepta Sororita were much more powerful back then and from the description they were more like inquisitors than what they became later.


Not sure what you're talking about. GW used to sell Female Space Marines, here's pics.



You can call people all the names you want, but nobody wanted to pay money for them. Not sure how to build a business selling things no one wants.

Maybe things are different today. Pretty sure GW knows what would happen if they started, say, putting 3 female torso in with each box of Interceptors.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 12:52:05


Post by: the_scotsman


https://live.staticflickr.com/1768/28455238027_0251bb7590_b.jpg

Yeah, modern GW is really terrible at making those highly sexualised female miniatures.

https://i.redd.it/jg8wbt79sq101.jpg

Terrible, basically softcore

https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/catalog/product/threeSixty/60010799006_Nightvault3360/01.jpg

God GW leave something up to the imagination!!!

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7_Vouc30Po0/W0domCJn7XI/AAAAAAAAEl8/bf0ViVYyF9A5n8nw-d5Tt0CO9IW7CoHWgCLcBGAs/s1600/01%2B%25281%2529.jpg

Horrible, sexist, can't even believe anyone lets them get away with something so shameless.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 12:54:40


Post by: Rihgu


My favorite part is that a lot of people use that first one as a base body for Space Marine conversions.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 12:54:48


Post by: Gert


Spoiler:
VonGerrow wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Coupled with the "GW would make female Marines overly sexualised" despite literally no evidence to suggest they would do that makes for an argument with more holes than a chunk of Swiss cheese.


Compare GW's depiction of the armour of the Sisters of Battle:


with the classic depictions of Joan of Arc.



The only female minature I've seen from GW that isn't overly sexualized is the Commissar Severina Raine model.

You have a poor understanding of oversexualisation if you think SoB fall into that category. Do you also think SM are oversexualised because they have crotch plates? If the SoB breastplates were over emphasised and eclipsed the rest of the model then yes I would agree they fall into the category. But they don't. As for non overlysexualised models, AoS Stormcast, the recent Cadian head swaps, a bunch of Necromunda and most of the female-esque GSC stuff don't fit that description.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 13:13:46


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 the_scotsman wrote:
https://live.staticflickr.com/1768/28455238027_0251bb7590_b.jpg

Yeah, modern GW is really terrible at making those highly sexualised female miniatures.

https://i.redd.it/jg8wbt79sq101.jpg

Terrible, basically softcore

https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/catalog/product/threeSixty/60010799006_Nightvault3360/01.jpg

God GW leave something up to the imagination!!!

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7_Vouc30Po0/W0domCJn7XI/AAAAAAAAEl8/bf0ViVYyF9A5n8nw-d5Tt0CO9IW7CoHWgCLcBGAs/s1600/01%2B%25281%2529.jpg

Horrible, sexist, can't even believe anyone lets them get away with something so shameless.



From R.I.P.D. "Look at the ankles on that girl!"


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 16:38:06


Post by: Irbis


 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:
I generally can't stand the female marines crowd. They just rub me the wrong way.

Yeah, they challenge your bigotry. And instead of what normal people would do, examine and potentially change your views, you decided to project a concentrated torrent of sexism, insults and bigotry, then did oldest and dumbest trick in the book - accuse anyone who doesn't agree with you of what you just did. It's called projection, look it up.

 insaniak wrote:
This has been mentioned a few times. Where is it actually stated in the fluff?

Nowhere. In fact, in one of new Space Wolf books a female Fenrissian warrior stuns a Wolf Priest with a question of why she would be a bad SM candidate - and after he thinks a bit, he finally admits it's just tradition and he can't give her a good reason, then smirks and says maybe it's time to discard it, SW need more marines than ever these days so they really could use more candidates.

Just don't mention that story to bigots, they will REEE at you all day afterwards


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 16:51:50


Post by: Mr. Burning


 Irbis wrote:
 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:
I generally can't stand the female marines crowd. They just rub me the wrong way.

Yeah, they challenge your bigotry. And instead of what normal people would do, examine and potentially change your views, you decided to project a concentrated torrent of sexism, insults and bigotry, then did oldest and dumbest trick in the book - accuse anyone who doesn't agree with you of what you just did. It's called projection, look it up.

 insaniak wrote:
This has been mentioned a few times. Where is it actually stated in the fluff?

Nowhere. In fact, in one of new Space Wolf books a female Fenrissian warrior stuns a Wolf Priest with a question of why she would be a bad SM candidate - and after he thinks a bit, he finally admits it's just tradition and he can't give her a good reason, then smirks and says maybe it's time to discard it, SW need more marines than ever these days so they really could use more candidates.

Just don't mention that story to bigots, they will REEE at you all day afterwards


Won't someone please think of the canon?..............

I don't think I have ever met anyone in the hhhobby virulently anti female Space Marine or virulently Pro shoehorning female bodies into Power Armour and deal with it bigots!

I certainly dont trust the current crop of writers to effectively write a change in game lore, leading to new product (again, same as the old product).


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 19:42:53


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Castozor wrote:Secondly why break/change lore to satisfy, I dunno, like 20 people on the world?
Because it's more than 20 people, even if you're ignoring people because "hurrr twitter".

Far better is to ask "why *shouldn't* we make the lore more attractive for those people".
If we are going down that route we might as well trow out all established cannon to satisfy every weird fanfic someone ever came up with.
Because having Space Marines have women clearly means everything needs throwing out.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:I'm not moving thr goal posts
So why bring up black Sisters in a conversation that didn't bring it up at all?
However nobody has bothered with female Orks or male Sisters.
When I see people clamouring for women Orks, you'll have my attention. But right now, I'm seeing people clamouring for women Astartes, and as the centrepiece faction, I think that makes all the difference.

No, it doesn't matter Space Marines are the most popular army.
Sticking your hands over your ears doesn't change the truth - Space Marines being the most popular faction and poster boys is exactly the reason here.
There are female models all over.
And that doesn't mean squat if they're not on the most marketable faction.
Y'all also have yet to tackle why Custodes wouldn't be the better place to insert your female fan fiction characters.
Because Custodes aren't the poster boys. Simple as that.

Castozor wrote:We already have female representation though, not sure why it needs to be the poster boys too?
That's exactly why. If the poster boys are reflecting a boys only image, that's the issue.
I'd equally balk at people wanting male SoB.
Sisters aren't anywhere near as iconic as Astartes.
If you are so insecure you absolutely need each and every faction to be filled to the brim with females as well the problem might very well be you.
I'm asking for them in *one* faction. Is that too much for your delicate sensibilities.
Let's not pretend superhuman monastic death machines are in anyway representative of your average male wargamer.
But they look like men, yes?

Either they need to look noticeably inhuman, or be gender neutral.

Castozor wrote:Firstly because if I had my way SM wouldn't be as omnipresent in marketing as they are
But they are, so there's your first problem.
secondly, and more importantly, "it hasn't been that way before" is a perfectly fine argument to me.
So you hate that there aren't any women Space Marines? Because, you know, women Space Marines *have* existed before.
I despise (lore) changes for the sake of changes.
So, as I said, you dislike that women Space Marines were canned in the first place?
Again if the product needs to change for some groups to be interested in it, then maybe the product isn't meant for them in the first place.
... that's literally not how that works at all, and is super gatekeeping.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 20:06:28


Post by: Gert


"Gatekeeping is OK if it keeps out women and minorities who might make me feel bad for treating women and minorities badly". Sums up quite a few of these arguments I think.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 21:15:33


Post by: Bosskelot


Well, I wouldn't assume that just inserting marginalized groups into things will automatically make them more comfortable with the setting and the hobby.

I know plenty of women into nerdy hobbies and some who do tabletop gaming and not one of them really cares about the Sisters of Battle refresh and push because, in the words of my missus, they're indoctrinated religious fanatics with little personality who mindlessly enforce and uphold a patriarchal fascist hierarchy. And this is only exacerbated by them being part of the PoV faction and treated like the good guys within the narrative.

Obviously most people are able to divorce themselves from reality and engage in fantasy, but it's easier to do that when the underlying meta-text of your story isn't so problematic and inherently uncomfortable. My missus loves the Drukhari lore because you have true equality within their society but the narrative doesn't hide that they're just comically evil and awful and that's where the endearing and fun nature of the faction comes in. People love villains after all and if they're equal opportunity villains then that's even better.

But when you have a (practically) mono-gendered faction that outwardly looks to be about bad-ass women being heroic when the actual reality of their existence is really the total opposite, while the women themselves hold incomprehensible and abhorrent views and they're treated as being protagonists? It ends up not being as appealing as people think. Just in 40k my ANECDOTAL experience of women in the hobby is that they almost always gravitate towards the Xenos factions because they can more easily portray equal gender distribution in their collections (Eldar have the actual models to do it and a Tau battlesuit can be whatever gender you want it to be) or because you can play horrible irredeemable pieces of gak (Orks or Drukhari) but not be treated as the good guys or shown in a positive light.

This is more about a wider issue with 40k as an IP and how GW continues to develop and market it as time goes on, where the actual satirical and self-aware nature of it is long gone and is dead and buried and we're now in a world where the Imperium and its fascist nature is just never challenged within the text and is excused and reinforced to a ridiculous degree. When you have the blue-eyed blonde superman outsider coming in to drain the swamp and Make the Imperium Great Again and at no point is this portrayed as potentially a negative and worrying thing then it tends to raise a few eyebrows. You can ACKSHULLY all you want and say how the Imperium may very well have eliminated gender discrimination, or point to hints about gay characters, or how there's a black Ultramarine on a novel cover or how Xenocide is fine because they're not killing other humans.... it doesn't matter because the subtext (not very sub mind you) and imagery of the MAIN PROTAGONIST FACTION of the setting calls back to political movements and governments that have historically discriminated against and/or tried to exterminate the previously mentioned groups (and if you can't understand the role of aliens in sci-fi often just being obvious parallels to real world ethnicities and races then, uh, okay dude). And in current 40k writing, there's basically no attempt made to refute or challenge the awfulness of the Imperium and its many subfactions.

This is not to say a gay black woman will never like 40k. I'm a bisexual man and I like 40k. People are individuals after all. But it's very telling in my local area, that despite living in a very diverse and open-minded part of the country, with a 40k community that is incredibly cool and accepting, and a local wargaming scene that isn't just white men.... that the 40k community is just 99% white men. I see more diversity in AOS and some fething historicals than 40k.

EDIT: And also, some of the replies in this thread are why people are so dissuaded by 40k and why GW will always be very conservative about making big changes towards it. I bet someone had to fething fight hard to actually put a black Ultramarine on that novel cover because if you saw the reaction to it from some of the 40k grognards you can just imagine the marketing and management guys fething sweating. There's a short story in the new Lumineth battletome and BR Teclis of two female crew of one of the Ballista's and how they're in a romantic relationship with each other. It's basically impossible to imagine something like that being put in any 40k Codex right now.

I mean fething hell, GW couldn't even make any female Incubi. Doesn't exactly fill you with much hope for good gender representation in any potential Craftworld refresh. Meanwhile AOS is just throwing female sculpts into boxes left and right whereas they're locked away and confined to their own faction in 40k or just made a gakky upgrade kit.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 22:25:01


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Bosskelot wrote:Well, I wouldn't assume that just inserting marginalized groups into things will automatically make them more comfortable with the setting and the hobby.
Oh, you're absolutely right! Without wider systemic change in the way that the hobby treats previously marginalised groups, it won't ever be perfect. But getting rid of that "hey, you can't have Women be a part the Most Iconic Faction, because, uh, 'lore', that's why!!" threshold would do wonders for actual practical representation. Because unfortunately, it doesn't matter how many women pop up in the Guard, or the Cults, or the Eldar, or whatever else - because the Guard, Cults and Eldar (ESPECIALLY Eldar) don't see any time in the limelight compared to the Mighty Space Marines.

But it's very telling in my local area, that despite living in a very diverse and open-minded part of the country, with a 40k community that is incredibly cool and accepting, and a local wargaming scene that isn't just white men.... that the 40k community is just 99% white men. I see more diversity in AOS and some fething historicals than 40k.
Yeah, considering that AoS and 40k are literally made by the same company, it is rather telling that the more unsavoury elements are found predominantly in the 40k pile.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 23:04:44


Post by: insaniak


OK, just a reminder to keep it civil, folks. This thread has managed to stay on track for a record-breaking length of time for the subject matter, which is great to see, but it would be a shame to derail it now. Let's all dial back the antagonism, hmm?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 23:29:44


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


So the topic was female Primaris marines yes?

I don't see why we can't have both? You have the old boys who for (Insert lore here) they had to be male. Then Cawl came along and installed JAVA 3.2.4.1 and hey presto! We've got Female Space Marines. Primaris did more than break the rules, it broke the lore, but I'm starting to see positive steps now. We have literally black representation, which to be honest I had not seen in 40k. Salamanders don't really suffer rascism, and they have what I would call Astartes privaledge. Hell, you would think there would at least be 1 or 2 black Chaos marines, given the sheer number of Desert planets that must get raided by chaos.

But still, Female Primaris marines can be a thing, and the "others" can have their Gen 1s. Fair?

Edit: removed offensive language


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 23:36:43


Post by: insaniak


Given the way they have advanced the story with the return of Guilliman and the addition of Primaris Marines, I'd like to see them go further with that and have the full blown schism within the Imperium that was rumoured when we first found out that Guilliman was coming back. Have the current Imperium, led by the High Lords on one side, and Ultramar and those who side with Guilliman on the other trying to put in place a less totalitarian regime. That lets them have their 'good guy' space marines while simultaneously emphasising just how corrupt and evil the Imperium has become.

Hell, female marines could even be the breaking point there... The purists were horrified enough about Cawl messing with the Emperor's design, so adding women to the ranks could well be that one step too far for the High Lords to accept.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/18 23:59:25


Post by: Gert


I think the biggest problem with 40k is the inability to end the setting like with WHFB. AoS was given a blank slate with certain characters (Sigmar, Nagash, Allariel, etc.) able to return as advanced versions of their End Times power boost forms. You can keep the old guard at least a smidge happy (as dumb as that sounds considering the reaction AoS got and still gets) and draw in new ideas. Since AoS 0.0, the setting has advanced like 200 years IIRC and the big events have all actually been big events. The Age of Chaos, Age of Sigmar and the Realmgate Wars, the Necroquake and the Soul Wars, now with Broken Realms and AoS 3 both new and old major players pop up all over the place with either reimagined updates (Cities of Sigmar, Slaves to Darkness), brand new factions based on a small selection of WHFB units (Daughters of Khaine, Sylvaneth), and even new concepts (Stormcast, Kharadron Overlords).
40k just doesn't have that. Advance the setting more than 20 years and any character who isn't anti-aging (Astartes, Orks, Aeldari, Nids, Crons), dies and you have an army with no characters. Make any change and you have loads of people ranting and raving for years on end. Primaris, Centurion suits, and the new Beast Snagga Orks are just a few examples.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 00:05:14


Post by: insaniak


 Gert wrote:
Advance the setting more than 20 years and any character who isn't anti-aging (Astartes, Orks, Aeldari, Nids, Crons), dies and you have an army with no characters.

That's never actually been a problem in 40K. Quite a lot of the characters introduced to the game over the years have been already dead in the 'current' timeline. Solar Macharius, Eldrad, Chaplain Xavier, Nork Deddog (although I think they changed that to him being in retirement) , just off the top of my head.

40K games have never been intended to be taking place solely in the 'current' time. Battles can be fought at any point from the end of the Heresy onwards.


There's also the fact that when characters can wind up spending a century in the warp, their physical age becomes less relevant to the timeline.


Not being able to 'end' the setting is nowhere near being a problem... and the fact that they chose to end the Old World to create AoS rather than launching it as a parallel product for a completely different game style is still a huge disappointment.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 00:48:14


Post by: Gert


You can play in whatever time period you want but as with AoS, most people are playing in "current year.M41" and most named characters are alive in "current year.M41", with the exception of Tycho who seems incapable of being discontinued despite being dead for ages in lore, like seriously he's been dead for 20 years or something by now.

40k is a setting always on its "the end of days" narrative. Even after the Rift and into Vigilus, there is complete stagnation in the setting. There's more Space Marines but there are more CSM/Daemons, Orks, Nid's, and 'Crons. The Imperium takes back some worlds but loses 200 more in the process. Abbadon crushes Cadia and opens the Rift but immediately loses all cohesion in his Black Crusade and can't get his big win. The Imperium nearly loses its only safe link to Imperium Nihilus but at the last minute, it's fine.

I heavily disagree with the point about AoS and WHFB being parallel lines. Fantasy was a stagnant game and story that needed to change to survive. With a complete reboot (however haphazard the launch), GW gave its teams a blank slate with the basic principles of:
- Make it Fantasy.
- These select individuals survived.
- Make it easy to access.
- Make it profitable.
IMO AoS has succeeded on all of these points. Most armies weren't "invalidated" until around AoS 2 IIRC barring those armies (Tomb Kings and Brettonia) and units (Empire Knights, Cannons) that were too generic to come under copyright and trademarks.

I know people like to point out the Total Warhammer games as a big interest for the Old World but I would counter that by saying they're only interested in the setting, not WHFB the game. GW still resells stories set in the Old World regarding the Elves, Empire, and the rise of Nagash but outside of the Internet (which in most cases is just people hating the change from WHFB to AoS in my experience), I've never seen a drive to return to the Old World setting.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 00:52:24


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Speaking of dead characters in 40k
Spoiler:
I'm actually surprised they gave Gaunt and his guys a model line up.Usually if a character is dead they don't. Try again Brag is the first time I've seen a dead character in the canon be given a table top model


That being said, given how long GW has outright refused to even give us female Guard Heads (Missed a great chance with the Tanith release) I'm being more and more inclined to go 3rd party for heads. That being said, would you be allowed to put models on table at a GW event with 3rd party heads? Would GW poke that legal turd? "player told to leave event for having Female Astartes"

Just saying, they could pull the we didn't make that line, but with Greenstuff and skill there is nothing they can say right?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 00:59:17


Post by: Gert


I think the problem with the Tanith is the novels are "history" books, in that they take place in 750ish.M41. There's not even been a Second War for Armageddon yet in the time of the Sabbat Worlds Crusade. It's like reading Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe, you know that Napoleon loses the Napoleonic Wars, and Sharpe at some point dies of old age but it's about telling a story from that time period. The same argument applies to the Horus Heresy. We know how it ends, Emperor in the big chair, Sanguinius dead, Horus dead, the Legions are turned into chapters and a bunch of Chaos Legions escape to become the CSM. But you can still tell the stories of those characters who would have been around.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 01:09:10


Post by: insaniak


 Gert wrote:
You can play in whatever time period you want but as with AoS, most people are playing in "current year.M41" ...

I very much doubt that most people put any thought at all into what year their game is taking place in, to be honest.


I heavily disagree with the point about AoS and WHFB being parallel lines. Fantasy was a stagnant game and story that needed to change to survive.

The setting was only 'stagnant' if you choose to look at it as a story instead of a setting. I never really had a problem with the setting not advancing... a setting doesn't need to, it's just the backdrop for the games to exist in. I don't need it to advance any more than I need the setting for Heroquest, or Space Hulk, or Beware the Wolf to advance. The novels can do that.


The game absolutely needed some work, and potentially a reboot... but AoS was not a reboot of WHFB, it's a completely different game.



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 01:09:57


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I'm just gonna say we start a new thread about known dead characters getting playable models in current 40k.

For this thread, I would like to know what if any kickback GW would face if a player's army were deemed "illegal" because there were no female SM heads to use?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 01:50:51


Post by: Mr Nobody


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm just gonna say we start a new thread about known dead characters getting playable models in current 40k.

For this thread, I would like to know what if any kickback GW would face if a player's army were deemed "illegal" because there were no female SM heads to use?


With the current state of things, I imagine GW would not want to open a can of worms like that and wouldn't make a fuss if someone played a tournament with them. Or some tournament judge out there will be a stickler for the rules and we get to read an endless deluge of articles about GW banning female marines to varying degrees of accuracy.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 03:00:48


Post by: Curvaceous


Gert, all those dead characters like Macharius, Naaman, Cortez, and Xavier were dead when they were introduced. They’d be an entry in a codex, and right next to the entry it would describe how and where they had died.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 04:37:39


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 insaniak wrote:
Given the way they have advanced the story with the return of Guilliman and the addition of Primaris Marines, I'd like to see them go further with that and have the full blown schism within the Imperium that was rumoured when we first found out that Guilliman was coming back. Have the current Imperium, led by the High Lords on one side, and Ultramar and those who side with Guilliman on the other trying to put in place a less totalitarian regime. That lets them have their 'good guy' space marines while simultaneously emphasising just how corrupt and evil the Imperium has become.

Hell, female marines could even be the breaking point there... The purists were horrified enough about Cawl messing with the Emperor's design, so adding women to the ranks could well be that one step too far for the High Lords to accept.

Precisely an example why most fan fiction is just far worse than whatever GW puts out LOL


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 07:04:17


Post by: Insectum7


 insaniak wrote:
Given the way they have advanced the story with the return of Guilliman and the addition of Primaris Marines, I'd like to see them go further with that and have the full blown schism within the Imperium that was rumoured when we first found out that Guilliman was coming back. Have the current Imperium, led by the High Lords on one side, and Ultramar and those who side with Guilliman on the other trying to put in place a less totalitarian regime. That lets them have their 'good guy' space marines while simultaneously emphasising just how corrupt and evil the Imperium has become.

Hell, female marines could even be the breaking point there... The purists were horrified enough about Cawl messing with the Emperor's design, so adding women to the ranks could well be that one step too far for the High Lords to accept.
I was honestly a little surprised that GW didn't use the Primaris release as an opportunity to integrate females into Marines. I was hoping they would.

I still wouldn't have collected them, as I hate Primaris I'd probably hate them a little less though.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 10:00:35


Post by: DalekCheese


 Grimskul wrote:
 Castozor wrote:
We already have female representation though, not sure why it needs to be the poster boys too? I'd equally balk at people wanting male SoB.
If you are so insecure you absolutely need each and every faction to be filled to the brim with females as well the problem might very well be you. Let's not pretend superhuman monastic death machines are in anyway representative of your average male wargamer.


I'd argue it's precisely this as the problem. It's the same problem that's leaked into many mainline franchises where people have put ideology and the idea behind needing "equal representation" in everything they see as some kind of new dogma for popular entertainment. They know it's hard to actually take the time to create an interesting original story or character to prop up that kind of representation without it falling apart under its own vacuousness if diversity is its only real selling point, so they latch onto existing ones and try to subvert it towards what they feel is ideal, when in doing so they change a core part of the setting that has existed for years only for the sake of a very shallow belief that they're making "progress" of some sort. Even from a purely monetary standpoint, I don't think they'll make THAT much more money from having SM suddenly be female, especially if there's just heads, since it's not like you couldn't use other heads from the GW range to begin with if you wanted to make your own homebrew female SM.

Why not find a different setting that fulfills your need for bioengineered adryognous soldiers in power armour? If there isn't one, why not do you part to help and create it? Not necessarily even as a self-sufficient franchise, but it's not like you can't make up your own RPG/game, etc. There's tons of other outlets if you want that kind of fix.

I'm Asian, I can play and have fun with settings where the majority presented is white, female, black, or whatever. I don't need 100% representation of me for everything I interact with. Hell, I play Orks, which are nothing like me. I don't understand this bizarre desire to have this optimal diversity when it isn't even that indicative of what that's like IRL. There's plenty of homogenous societies of primarily one type of race like in Japan, just as there are places that are incredibly multicultural, like where I live.



I’m in 40k ‘cos I like 40k, not because I’m after equality. But if something approaching equality can be reached, I’d rather like that.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 14:14:49


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I'm in the US because I like the US, but if we could make the US better, I'd like that. Same exact logic with the NY Mets. 40k is a hobby, and I prefer my hobbies to be more of a influence for positivity, rather than a detractor. If they continue to be a source of the ugliest of our society I'll just go back to a different hobby.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 14:45:59


Post by: the_scotsman


 Insectum7 wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
Given the way they have advanced the story with the return of Guilliman and the addition of Primaris Marines, I'd like to see them go further with that and have the full blown schism within the Imperium that was rumoured when we first found out that Guilliman was coming back. Have the current Imperium, led by the High Lords on one side, and Ultramar and those who side with Guilliman on the other trying to put in place a less totalitarian regime. That lets them have their 'good guy' space marines while simultaneously emphasising just how corrupt and evil the Imperium has become.

Hell, female marines could even be the breaking point there... The purists were horrified enough about Cawl messing with the Emperor's design, so adding women to the ranks could well be that one step too far for the High Lords to accept.
I was honestly a little surprised that GW didn't use the Primaris release as an opportunity to integrate females into Marines. I was hoping they would.

I still wouldn't have collected them, as I hate Primaris I'd probably hate them a little less though.


It is extremely clear that GW is treating 40k with an order of magnitude greater safety and conservatism than they are treating their fantasy franchise.

And you only need to take a quick peek at the last few reveals for AOS vs 40k to see how badly 40k is paying for that in terms of creative and interesting ideas. Everything 40k is either just an extremely straightforward remake of an existing unit brought to plastic from finecast, or the teeniest, tiniest, most predictable variation on an existing theme (basically we've just got Orks like Atlas holding up the entire burden of original ideas in the 40k universe) and every release for AOS and Specialist Games is an insane, balls to the wall crazy awesome idea.

AOS took an idea as basic and simplistic as "zombie" or "giant bat" or "Skeleton on a horse" and executed them all in the most spectacular way imaginable. there are more interesting ideas on the single model of the recently previewed Necromunda noblewoman than in the entire latest wave of primaris stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Like, just take a look at the Zombies they just put out in the Cursed City game:

Every single one you can clearly tell from their appearance who the zombie used to be, and you can even tell they come from this insane grimdark world where getting resurrected as a zombie by a necromancer is a normal occurrence, to the point where civilians regularly pin corpses into the ground with steel spikes, and many zombies have to drag their whole headstone along with them to counteract that.

That's absolutely incredible. What ideas are present in Primaris Eradicators, Heavy Intercessors, Primaris Captain with Heavy Bolt Rifle, etc?

What if intercessor....wearing aggressor armor? Well...he'd have an aggressor's statline...and he could probably hold a bigger rifle, yeah? So like the normal bolt rifle, but heavy. That'd have like. Heavy bolter stats.

You know how space marines can have multi-meltas, and meltaguns? What if we done a primaris with one of those. Yep, that's a primaris melta gun haver.

What if space marine bike, but primaris?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 15:18:50


Post by: beast_gts


Slightly related - the next Marvel comic series is a SoB one:

Spoiler:


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 15:55:15


Post by: Not Online!!!


Looks good.... except where the feth are the sisters left and right holding their boltguns excactly?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 16:21:54


Post by: Gert


Is that Rogue from the Xmen?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 16:57:11


Post by: beast_gts


Not Online!!! wrote:
Looks good.... except where the feth are the sisters left and right holding their boltguns excactly?

Either an unseen side grip or a poor hold on the magazine?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 17:00:11


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Not going to lie, anyone discharging a firearm with that much muzzle flash that close to their face is no "Expert warrior".

That cover needs work. As in a better artist.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 20:25:23


Post by: Not Online!!!


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Not going to lie, anyone discharging a firearm with that much muzzle flash that close to their face is no "Expert warrior".

That cover needs work. As in a better artist.


It's a gw Made problem that, aka what i have dubbed the "no Stockitis". Gw seems to ignore autogun riflelbutts and it Leads to the Same Problem on some cultists.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
beast_gts wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Looks good.... except where the feth are the sisters left and right holding their boltguns excactly?

Either an unseen side grip or a poor hold on the magazine?

I mean i am someone forced to wear glasses permanently but there is no Hand on a mag, nevermind that you should not so that.... So the Trained warrior archetype geht's thrown out a window of the Prager castle.. also to my knowledge in the far future there's no Grip modifactions for most things either....


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 20:40:00


Post by: beast_gts


beast_gts wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Looks good.... except where the feth are the sisters left and right holding their boltguns excactly?

Either an unseen side grip or a poor hold on the magazine?


Someone said in another thread they look like they originally had pistols and they were given bolters later.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/19 21:38:53


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Yeah, I kinda thought they might be Seraphim at first, kinda flanking the obvious main character?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/22 10:37:25


Post by: Karak Norn Clansman


This bears repeating, since it's the crux of the matter:

40k plays on archaic strings. It's better worldbuilding by being more archaic by having the exclusive elite warrior orders mimic monks and nuns and be separate. Female Sisters of Silence and Sororitas on the one hand, and male Astartes and Custodes are much better worldbuilding ploys than mixed orders of Astartes and Custodes. You don't mix monks and nuns and retain an archaic impression.

This is one example where GW has stayed a lot truer to the spirit of 40k through all these decades, than one would expect. Kudos to GW for playing the right strings to build their setting, where so many others would have fallen for outside pressure and muddled the setting.

Of course, the elite monks and nuns situation does not apply to the Mechanicus/Titanicus (who cares little about fleshly matters) or the ragtag plebeian hordes of Imperial Guard (where any setup conceivable, such as mixed or separate regiments, or just male or even just female regiments will happen somewhere depending on local culture). Neither does the Inquisition need it, since it's such an excentric individually focused organization. Sororitas/Astartes and Custodes/Sisters of Silence is the relevant arena. They are the big shining warrior orders.

And they ought to feel archaic. This isn't the Dark Age of Technology, but the regressed, myopic and parochial Age of Imperium, where things often do not make sense and weird traditions are king. There is a good reason why Games Workshop in the 1990s abandoned the idea of female Space Marines and gave the Sisters of Battle a true remake into their very own cool thing.

Cheers



Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/22 10:48:42


Post by: Gert


Yeah because female SM models weren't selling. That's it. The sales influence the lore as they always have.

And to reiterate my earlier point, where are the similarities between monks and SM? They live in a monastery and are all dudes, but they're only dudes because the Emperor (famous Aethist BTW) didn't like girls.

The Custodes are fancy bodyguards for the Emperor, none of them are girls because again the Emperor thinks girls are icky.

SoB are SciFi warrior nuns because a core tenant of their character is that they are religious and only exist to skirt around a rule that the religious institution wasn't allowed to have "men" in its armed forces.

The Sister of Silence are all women but GW hasn't given a reason why. Best explanation is the Emperor wanted to emphasise how much he didn't like girls by making the ONLY female exclusive warrior order full of people who literally repulse normals with their unsettling aura.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/22 10:58:05


Post by: Altima


Spoiler:
 the_scotsman wrote:


It is extremely clear that GW is treating 40k with an order of magnitude greater safety and conservatism than they are treating their fantasy franchise.

And you only need to take a quick peek at the last few reveals for AOS vs 40k to see how badly 40k is paying for that in terms of creative and interesting ideas. Everything 40k is either just an extremely straightforward remake of an existing unit brought to plastic from finecast, or the teeniest, tiniest, most predictable variation on an existing theme (basically we've just got Orks like Atlas holding up the entire burden of original ideas in the 40k universe) and every release for AOS and Specialist Games is an insane, balls to the wall crazy awesome idea.

AOS took an idea as basic and simplistic as "zombie" or "giant bat" or "Skeleton on a horse" and executed them all in the most spectacular way imaginable. there are more interesting ideas on the single model of the recently previewed Necromunda noblewoman than in the entire latest wave of primaris stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Like, just take a look at the Zombies they just put out in the Cursed City game:

Every single one you can clearly tell from their appearance who the zombie used to be, and you can even tell they come from this insane grimdark world where getting resurrected as a zombie by a necromancer is a normal occurrence, to the point where civilians regularly pin corpses into the ground with steel spikes, and many zombies have to drag their whole headstone along with them to counteract that.

That's absolutely incredible. What ideas are present in Primaris Eradicators, Heavy Intercessors, Primaris Captain with Heavy Bolt Rifle, etc?

What if intercessor....wearing aggressor armor? Well...he'd have an aggressor's statline...and he could probably hold a bigger rifle, yeah? So like the normal bolt rifle, but heavy. That'd have like. Heavy bolter stats.

You know how space marines can have multi-meltas, and meltaguns? What if we done a primaris with one of those. Yep, that's a primaris melta gun haver.

What if space marine bike, but primaris?


Yeah, ain't that the truth. AoS has really impressed with its model line so far. I mean, there's nothing wrong with how Primaris look, but they're just so...generic? And for the Imperium to suddenly have access to all this super special tech to the point where they can outfit entire Chapters with, say, anti-grave tech when it used to be limited to a single company in a single founding chapter and the custodes...is just weird.

When you look at what's come out of AoS that didn't even really have FB equivalents--the deepkin, fyreslayers, steampunk dwarves, etc., they're just so much more interesting modelwise than anything that's really come out on the 40k side except maybe the recent SoB. Other than that, we have the new orks which look like...AoS orks with guns.

I'm starting to wonder if the initial AoS fiasco hit GW harder psychologically than just it starting out a bit crap. From what I understand, they were pushing the stormcast to basically being the space marines of AoS which failed. Maybe GW is afraid of Space Marines becoming just another army in 40k like stormcast are just another army in AoS.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/22 16:44:22


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Karak Norn Clansman wrote:40k plays on archaic strings.
Is that why the Astra Militarum is mono gender? The Inquisition? The Assassinorum?
It's better worldbuilding by being more archaic by having the exclusive elite warrior orders mimic monks and nuns and be separate.
But it's terrible when one of those exclusive elite warrior orders is the poster boy for the whole setting, and is given explicitly more treatment and attention than everything else (nearly) combined.

Furthermore, we already have Custodes as the "exclusive elite" if you need that. Space Marines don't also need to be.
You don't mix monks and nuns and retain an archaic impression.
And that's why the mixed gender Inquisition don't have an archaic impression? Oh, hang on - they're more archaic than many Space Marine Chapters are.

This is one example where GW has stayed a lot truer to the spirit of 40k through all these decades, than one would expect. Kudos to GW for playing the right strings to build their setting, where so many others would have fallen for outside pressure and muddled the setting.
Giving women fair representation in a toy solider hobby is "falling for outside pressure and muddling the setting"?

Sorry, but I think making sure that people feel welcome in the hobby is more important than any made up words written to justify sales of toy soldiers.

Neither does the Inquisition need it, since it's such an excentric individually focused organization.
You mean, like every Space Marine Chapter, which operate independently as fiefdoms within the wider Imperium, with greater autonomy than the Inquisition?
Sororitas/Astartes and Custodes/Sisters of Silence is the relevant arena. They are the big shining warrior orders.
Sisters, yes, because it is, and has ALWAYS been integral to their identity and image. Lest I remind you that women Space Marines *were* a thing, and only didn't make it because they didn't sell in the 80s/90s?

Also, by that same token, why do the Custodes even need to exist? We have Space Marines, why do we need another "big shining warrior order"?

And they ought to feel archaic. This isn't the Dark Age of Technology, but the regressed, myopic and parochial Age of Imperium, where things often do not make sense and weird traditions are king.
But *we* live in the 21st century, and I'd very much like that people don't feel like they're being excluded because "noooooooo you can't be the cool elite faction, you're not allowed enhanced soldiers with this particular aesthetic because REASONS!"

When the worldbuilding gets in the way of creativity and inclusion, worldbuilding should take a step back. There's no excuse for exclusionary behaviours.
There is a good reason why Games Workshop in the 1990s abandoned the idea of female Space Marines
Unless you're going to say "because they didn't sell well in the 80s/90s", whatever reason you give ain't accurate.

So, given now that we're 30/40 years down the line, and the hobby has opened its doors somewhat, I don't exactly think consumer data from the previous millennium will be much use.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/22 17:15:16


Post by: Rihgu


It's very common in fantasy settings to have "archaic institutions" with mixed gender representation.
Like paladins in every dnd setting, tv show, movie, video game, etc.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/22 17:55:07


Post by: RaptorusRex


 Karak Norn Clansman wrote:
This bears repeating, since it's the crux of the matter:

40k plays on archaic strings. It's better worldbuilding by being more archaic by having the exclusive elite warrior orders mimic monks and nuns and be separate. Female Sisters of Silence and Sororitas on the one hand, and male Astartes and Custodes are much better worldbuilding ploys than mixed orders of Astartes and Custodes. You don't mix monks and nuns and retain an archaic impression.

This is one example where GW has stayed a lot truer to the spirit of 40k through all these decades, than one would expect. Kudos to GW for playing the right strings to build their setting, where so many others would have fallen for outside pressure and muddled the setting.

Of course, the elite monks and nuns situation does not apply to the Mechanicus/Titanicus (who cares little about fleshly matters) or the ragtag plebeian hordes of Imperial Guard (where any setup conceivable, such as mixed or separate regiments, or just male or even just female regiments will happen somewhere depending on local culture). Neither does the Inquisition need it, since it's such an excentric individually focused organization. Sororitas/Astartes and Custodes/Sisters of Silence is the relevant arena. They are the big shining warrior orders.

And they ought to feel archaic. This isn't the Dark Age of Technology, but the regressed, myopic and parochial Age of Imperium, where things often do not make sense and weird traditions are king. There is a good reason why Games Workshop in the 1990s abandoned the idea of female Space Marines and gave the Sisters of Battle a true remake into their very own cool thing.

Cheers



I think your ideas and art are great, but I think your takes about inclusivity here aren't that great.

The Imperium doesn't care about gender or sex. If it could jam gene-seed in a woman and have it succeed, it would do so in a heartbeat. That's double the Space Marines, their best asset.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 00:46:02


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


And before anyone brings it into question: I had a talk with my GW store owner over Friday's lunch break, and he said the 9th edition Base SM codex explicitly states the lore saying SMs have to be male. I lent my book to my coworker a week ago, can anyone please confirm?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 01:07:53


Post by: Voss


 RaptorusRex wrote:
. If it could jam gene-seed in a woman and have it succeed, it would do so in a heartbeat. That's double the Space Marines, their best asset.


Well, yes to the first, but no to the second. The limiting factor is geneseed, not bodies. The number of space marines vs the sheer mass of humanity in m41 makes that a non-factor. As it stands they could double anyway (and with the addition of Primaris, probably did, really).

At this point the only real limitation in this regard is GW not be willing to mess with the fluff.


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:And before anyone brings it into question: I had a talk with my GW store owner over Friday's lunch break, and he said the 9th edition Base SM codex explicitly states the lore saying SMs have to be male. I lent my book to my coworker a week ago, can anyone please confirm?

Referencing a store manager is pretty much the most questionable thing you can do.
Anyway, it doesn't. 'Creation of a Space Marine' is now a single page. It vaguely refers to the products of the process as gene-sons and battle-brothers for some gendered language, but the only actual requirements are that they be 'youths' and 'hardy.' After 'years of arduous training, agonizing surgery and psycho-indoctrination' yielding 'post-humans,' I can hardly see why it would matter. Space Marines that are technically mixed gendered, but effectively non-binary eunuchs/neuters wouldn't be any different.

If you want to go hunting for some obscure reference elsewhere in the book, knock yourself out.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 01:25:57


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Voss wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
. If it could jam gene-seed in a woman and have it succeed, it would do so in a heartbeat. That's double the Space Marines, their best asset.


Well, yes to the first, but no to the second. The limiting factor is geneseed, not bodies. The number of space marines vs the sheer mass of humanity in m41 makes that a non-factor. As it stands they could double anyway (and with the addition of Primaris, probably did, really).

At this point the only real limitation in this regard is GW not be willing to mess with the fluff.


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:And before anyone brings it into question: I had a talk with my GW store owner over Friday's lunch break, and he said the 9th edition Base SM codex explicitly states the lore saying SMs have to be male. I lent my book to my coworker a week ago, can anyone please confirm?

Referencing a store manager is pretty much the most questionable thing you can do.
Anyway, it doesn't. 'Creation of a Space Marine' is now a single page. It vaguely refers to the products of the process as gene-sons and battle-brothers for some gendered language, but the only actual requirements are that they be 'youths' and 'hardy.' After 'years of arduous training, agonizing surgery and psycho-indoctrination' yielding 'post-humans,' I can hardly see why it would matter. Space Marines that are technically mixed gendered, but effectively non-binary eunuchs/neuters wouldn't be any different.

If you want to go hunting for some obscure reference elsewhere in the book, knock yourself out.


Thank you, for the response. I apologize for the fopaux, I was merely trying to illustrate the information I was told. Would it be better if I said a guy on the street told me, would that be better.

I realize it was a claim to authority, and that was wrong.

For the record, I am on the side of letting female Astartes be a thing, I wasn't trying to argue the lore prevents it. I just wanted to say a "source" told me something that contradicted what I thought was a factual statement. (There was never lore that explicitly states no male is required).

Just wanted to make that clear.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 01:38:34


Post by: Pointer5


God forbid you have women space she might paint her armor pink and join chaos or something. Wait guys already did that. I think sisters does a great job including women models into the game. I think they should be included in Guard also but definitely not Orks. Next thing you know they will be ordering the nobz about and making everything gets clean and all their shootas will have to be put away.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 02:30:47


Post by: Altima


 RaptorusRex wrote:


I think your ideas and art are great, but I think your takes about inclusivity here aren't that great.

The Imperium doesn't care about gender or sex. If it could jam gene-seed in a woman and have it succeed, it would do so in a heartbeat. That's double the Space Marines, their best asset.


Quoting arbitrary lore is not really a defense when it comes to inclusivity, because the lore says whatever Games Workshop says it does. If tomorrow they said that the Alpha Legion was always a loyalist traitor legion and can now ally with Imperium forces as if they were a chapter of space marines and everything bad that they ever did was just a misunderstanding, that's the lore.

Because the argument sounds like "Girls can't be Space Marines (even though they were) because Space Marines have always been dudes (which is not the case) and there's no way Games Workshop can retcon something as significant as that (which they have in the past)."

Personally, I'm not invested in Space Marines, female or otherwise. I think they actively hurt the game because of the extreme focus GW has given and continues to give them, and I suspect that the reason that girls aren't allowed in Space Marines falls somewhere on a spectrum between GW not wanting to do any recasts and that they believe that a sizable chunk of their SM base are immature man-children who will fly into a frothing rage that how dare GW cater to gender diversity in their army--which I hope the recent success of SoB will help dissuade GW of that notion but GW is weird when it comes to Space Marines presumably because they don't want to kill the golden goose.

Though, to be honest, I probably would look into IG if they were a bit more even in their gender diversity or even released a regiment entirely of women, since I hear lore-wise that most regiments are divided on gender and that mixed-gender regiments are more the exception that the rule. And, of course, if the sculpts didn't look awful like the current IG troops.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 03:03:36


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


Why not just go with the unavoidable fact that women are physically inferior from men (by design) and if Chapters take just the very best candidates from an entire planets population then a woman would never make it as a candidate, much less survive the training after being selected?


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 03:10:30


Post by: Tyran


 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Why not just go with the unavoidable fact that women are physically inferior from men (by design) and if Chapters take just the very best candidates from an entire planets population then a woman would never make it as a candidate, much less survive the training after being selected?

Not applicable, because Space Marines aspirants are usually 8-10 year old (I think Space Wolves take older candidates). At that age, there are no physical differences between genders.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 03:12:37


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


No man in the entire imperium has had to deal with the intense difficulties that a woman has had to reach the same point.

If Dante had to deal with period cramps and being told he was inferior all his life, we'd never have had the savior of Baal Secundus. If Larkin had to deal with half the gak Creed has to deal with in a regular week, he'd be 50x the sniper.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 03:45:13


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


 Tyran wrote:
 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Why not just go with the unavoidable fact that women are physically inferior from men (by design) and if Chapters take just the very best candidates from an entire planets population then a woman would never make it as a candidate, much less survive the training after being selected?

Not applicable, because Space Marines aspirants are usually 8-10 year old (I think Space Wolves take older candidates). At that age, there are no physical differences between genders.


Warhammer site says 16-18. Highly applicable. I would still venture that the top .01% of candidates from a populous of billions would still always be male, even using 8 year olds.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
No man in the entire imperium has had to deal with the intense difficulties that a woman has had to reach the same point.

If Dante had to deal with period cramps and being told he was inferior all his life, we'd never have had the savior of Baal Secundus. If Larkin had to deal with half the gak Creed has to deal with in a regular week, he'd be 50x the sniper.


Please, God, tell me this is just trolling...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 03:50:25


Post by: RaptorusRex


 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Why not just go with the unavoidable fact that women are physically inferior from men (by design) and if Chapters take just the very best candidates from an entire planets population then a woman would never make it as a candidate, much less survive the training after being selected?


Couple of things here.

1.) “Women being weaker than men” does not matter in a transhuman context, first of all. If the Imperium could pump out even a monkey model Astartes using women, they would. The Afriel Strain exists. As do Gland Warriors. As does Sathona. They have tried to make a better soldier. Who’s to say Cawl or some random Biologis Magos doesn’t succeed?
2.) Chapters do not select Feral Worlders or Hive scum based on physical strength alone. This would be obvious if you read any of the fluff surrounding recruitment and initiation of Neophytes.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 03:58:59


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


1. Because anything done to make a female equivalent to a male could just as easily be done to the male as well.
2. Yes,yes, your nerd-dick is probably bigger than mine...lol I am aware the recruitment isn't solely based upon physical strength. It is still enough of a priority that women would be statistically weeded out ( even if your precious lore didn't already clearly forbid it.) When dealing with an entire planets population.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 04:07:37


Post by: RaptorusRex


 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
1. Because anything done to make a female equivalent to a male could just as easily be done to the male as well.
2. Yes,yes, your nerd-dick is probably bigger than mine...lol I am aware the recruitment isn't solely based upon physical strength. It is still enough of a priority that women would be statistically weeded out ( even if your precious lore didn't already clearly forbid it.) When dealing with an entire planets population.


I don’t think you understand me.

We need *clap* more *clap* bodies *clap* for *clap* the *clap* meat-grinder.

Broadening the selection pool would only benefit the Imperium. More elite soldiers.

And I am only arguing from lore because of people like you. Because I know that’s the lingua franca and will be the most rhetorically effective. I think, personally, there should be both transgender MTF and cisgender woman Astartes. The lore is made up. It can change and be changed at will.

And I see plenty of good arguments for why it should change here. All the other side has is inchoate rage.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 04:52:43


Post by: Tyran


 SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Warhammer site says 16-18. Highly applicable. I would still venture that the top .01% of candidates from a populous of billions would still always be male, even using 8 year olds.

You would be wrong, both from a biological point of view and even from a lore pov.

In The Last Days of Ector, we actually see a young girl being that top .01%. Of course she is turned away because No Female Space Marines Allowed, but it is clear it is not a question of skill.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 09:39:07


Post by: Gert


Spoiler:
 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Why not just go with the unavoidable fact that women are physically inferior from men (by design) and if Chapters take just the very best candidates from an entire planets population then a woman would never make it as a candidate, much less survive the training after being selected?

You know its not just about physical aspects right? Candidates have to show brains as well as brawn, otherwise why not just use Ogryn kids. Candidates are taken at a young age where their bodies and minds are easier to mold into an Astartes. Its usually around 16-18 years of age they are elevated to "Battle Brother" status after passing the trials and their tenure as a Scout. 10 years of genetic and mental manipulation are going to make the difference between a male and female initiate pretty small.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 12:15:08


Post by: Formosa


blimey such cringe, must be that time of year again haha.

For what its worth, if you want to paint your models and convert them a certain way you crack on, your money your choice, otherwise just leave the established lore created by men and woman over 30+ years alone and go do your activism (because that is the real reason behind this) somewhere its actually needed.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 12:49:38


Post by: Gert


Ahhh yes, equal representation in media is cringe.
Pack it up team, our sinister SJW plot to put wiminz in Space Marines has been found out.
If we're going for the "but it's always been that way" argument, then I'm going to say axe Necrons, T'au, Tyranids, Druhkrari, Harlequins, GSC, Knights and any other factions that aren't Space Marines, Guard, OG Eldar and Orks. That's how dumb that argument is.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 13:49:07


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


SlaveToDorkness wrote:Why not just go with the unavoidable fact that women are physically inferior from men (by design)
By design? Who's design?

Also, by that same logic, the only Astartes recruits should be children with good diets, healthy living conditions, and physically nurturing environments - so all your death world and hive world children living in irradiated ruins and starving to death in the gutters of Hab-Block 28-9C-Gamma should be ruled out immediately. The only appropriate recruits, from a physically "superior" standing would be ones from civilised worlds or suchlike, as they're the only ones getting all the nutrients they need, the proper healthcare and living conditions to actually grow strong.

This all points that Astartes recruitment is not solely (or even primarily) based on physicality (let alone that trying to measure physicality in pre-pubescent children is ridiculous), but rather on aspects like mental fortitude and willpower - things that living in a hive slum or lethal wasteland would actually propagate.

SlaveToDorkness wrote:1. Because anything done to make a female equivalent to a male could just as easily be done to the male as well.
Exactly - so it extends beyond physicality, and onto less tangible concepts, like willpower or mental fortitude, which, last I checked, aren't gendered - not that you really should be gendering pre-pubescent children.
2. Yes,yes, your nerd-dick is probably bigger than mine...
That's a strange way of saying you don't know what you're talking about, other than the select arguments you cherry pick.

RaptorusRex wrote: I see plenty of good arguments for why it should change here. All the other side has is inchoate rage.
Pretty much. It's all references to lore built on foundations of sand, and veiled references to some kind of conspiracy or agenda.

Formosa wrote:blimey such cringe, must be that time of year again haha.
I know, it really *is* cringey that people would be so against what gender your power armoured toy soldiers are.

For what its worth, if you want to paint your models and convert them a certain way you crack on, your money your choice
If only it was - unfortunately, nearly any time I see a woman Space Marine posted, its accompanied by a deluge of "WOMEN CAN'T BE SPACE MARINES/get your SJW politics out of my games/NONCANON!!" comments. Without making them canon, you'll never shut up the chuds unable to accept that people don't just want masculine-presenting Astartes.
otherwise just leave the established lore created by men and woman over 30+ years alone
You mean the established lore that was changed to make Space Marines all male?

Come on, you can't go calling for lore sanctity when the lore isn't a permanant thing.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 14:54:22


Post by: the_scotsman


Lets take a moment and step back here.

Necromunda: The original game included entirely monogendered gangs: eschers all female, everyone else all male.

The 2017 necromunda release came out about the same time as the Primaris Space Marine reboot began.

Every necromunda gang at this point besides Corpsegrinders and Enforcers (the latter has only like 2 helmetless heads) has models that appear both male and female.

Did GW stick to their guns and stay true to the original spirit of the warhammer 40k setting with primaris space marines, and betray the spirit of the setting and cave to outside pressure with Necromunda? Having the gangs be monogender would be more archaic.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 14:58:40


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Can I also point out AGAIN, there is no actual lore established that specifically states Men are the only ones who can become SM? Like No one has posted proof of this. The best I could find was a store rep who said it's in the 9th edition codex, which I was tend told was not correct.

So please, provide and cite the lore or STFU.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 15:25:04


Post by: Lord Zarkov


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Can I also point out AGAIN, there is no actual lore established that specifically states Men are the only ones who can become SM? Like No one has posted proof of this. The best I could find was a store rep who said it's in the 9th edition codex, which I was tend told was not correct.

So please, provide and cite the lore or STFU.


The index Astartes article ‘Rites of Initiation’ has it stated (copy on WarCom here https://www.warhammer-community.com/2016/11/16/rites-of-initiation-the-making-of-a-space-marine/) with the reasoning given being the same as for why they need to be children (10-13 is the range given to start) - because the process is tied to that of male puberty and hormones released during such.

Now frankly the Imperium’s biotech is such there’s no reason they couldn’t artificially induce male puberty in a prepubescent girl (we can pretty much do it now) although 1) genitals aside, the end result will look much the same as the changes of puberty are largely what cause male and female appearances; and 2) it’s presumably an extra step that can go wrong in an already risky process (not that that stops a lot of chapters adding dodgy extra steps anyway).

Tbh though the Imperium is a big place with a lot of space for things to happen - I’m also slightly surprised this is not something Crawl has ‘solved’.

Index Astartes wrote: The various implants cause vital changes in a Marine’s physique and mental state. Many of these changes are controlled by natural hormonal secretions and growth patterns. Implants may not prove effective, or may not become fully functional, if they are carried out once the recipient has reached certain stages of natural development. It is therefore inevitable that recruits must be reasonably young. Tissue compatibility is also essential, otherwise organs may fail to develop properly.
...
These considerations mean that only a small proportion of people can become Space Marines. They must be male because zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types, hence the need for tissue compatibility tests and psychological screening.


Edit: clearly this is all ‘Watsonian’, the Doyalist reasoning has been given repeatedly in this thread (sales in the 80s)


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 15:33:51


Post by: Catulle


Lord Zarkov wrote:
The index Astartes article ‘Rites of Initiation’ has it stated (copy on WarCom here https://www.warhammer-community.com/2016/11/16/rites-of-initiation-the-making-of-a-space-marine/) with the reasoning given being the same as for why they need to be children (10-13 is the range given to start) - because the process is tied to that of male puberty and hormones released during such.


From the article linked, right near the top: "Editor’s Note: This article comes from one of yesteryear’s publications called Index Astartes I, originally printed in 2002, and the information contained within has been revisited and updated in many a Codex: Space Marines since. For posterity’s sake, we wanted to present the original article in full, despite changes that have been rendered to the detail (some subtle; others less so) in the intervening years."

So even there it's explicit that it doesn't reflect the "current" state of things.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 15:52:52


Post by: Lord Zarkov


Catulle wrote:
Lord Zarkov wrote:
The index Astartes article ‘Rites of Initiation’ has it stated (copy on WarCom here https://www.warhammer-community.com/2016/11/16/rites-of-initiation-the-making-of-a-space-marine/) with the reasoning given being the same as for why they need to be children (10-13 is the range given to start) - because the process is tied to that of male puberty and hormones released during such.


From the article linked, right near the top: "Editor’s Note: This article comes from one of yesteryear’s publications called Index Astartes I, originally printed in 2002, and the information contained within has been revisited and updated in many a Codex: Space Marines since. For posterity’s sake, we wanted to present the original article in full, despite changes that have been rendered to the detail (some subtle; others less so) in the intervening years."

So even there it's explicit that it doesn't reflect the "current" state of things.


Yeah true, and that’s a detail that is probably ripe for a retcon but I don’t think it’s been explicitly contradicted yet.

Interestingly the related age thing might be one of the subtle changes mentioned, more recent stories of pre-selection initiates IMO give the impression of them being early teens rather than 10 year olds.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 16:22:23


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Contradicted, it's not even stated yet? All you have is an implication. Considering we have indepth lore about the functioning of much lesser issues, I don't think we even have a concrete basis of statement here.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 16:47:38


Post by: BrookM


I've gone through all alerts generated and am going to leave a general warning to all participants: rule #1 is not optional.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 22:10:04


Post by: Lord Zarkov


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Contradicted, it's not even stated yet? All you have is an implication. Considering we have indepth lore about the functioning of much lesser issues, I don't think we even have a concrete basis of statement here.


Um it literally says ‘They must be male because zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types’ (emphasis mine) in the section on who can be Space Marines in the article I linked and quoted above? That’s the very definition of an explicit statement!

Now I agree it’s totally retconable (and with frankly less lore gymnastics than Primaris), but that is what the lore has said previously without contradiction yet.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 22:17:46


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Lord Zarkov wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Contradicted, it's not even stated yet? All you have is an implication. Considering we have indepth lore about the functioning of much lesser issues, I don't think we even have a concrete basis of statement here.


Um it literally says ‘They must be male because zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types’ (emphasis mine) in the section on who can be Space Marines in the article I linked and quoted above? That’s the very definition of an explicit statement!
And as mentioned, it also explicitly states that the article is old, and has undergone "changes that have been rendered to the detail (some subtle; others less so) in the intervening years."

Considering that the whole "keyed to male zygotes" isn't actually *mentioned* in modern lore, I think it's safe to say that maybe that's one of those subtle changes that happened. I'll be honest, quoting from an article from 2002 which GW outright admit isn't up to date isn't exactly explicit at all.
Now I agree it’s totally retconable (and with frankly less lore gymnastics than Primaris), but that is what the lore has said previously without contradiction yet.
It's also not been reinforced either.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 22:54:30


Post by: Lord Zarkov


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Lord Zarkov wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Contradicted, it's not even stated yet? All you have is an implication. Considering we have indepth lore about the functioning of much lesser issues, I don't think we even have a concrete basis of statement here.


Um it literally says ‘They must be male because zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types’ (emphasis mine) in the section on who can be Space Marines in the article I linked and quoted above? That’s the very definition of an explicit statement!
And as mentioned, it also explicitly states that the article is old, and has undergone "changes that have been rendered to the detail (some subtle; others less so) in the intervening years."

Considering that the whole "keyed to male zygotes" isn't actually *mentioned* in modern lore, I think it's safe to say that maybe that's one of those subtle changes that happened. I'll be honest, quoting from an article from 2002 which GW outright admit isn't up to date isn't exactly explicit at all.
Now I agree it’s totally retconable (and with frankly less lore gymnastics than Primaris), but that is what the lore has said previously without contradiction yet.
It's also not been reinforced either.


I mean it was explicit which was the only point I was making, and while I have no idea when it was most recently explicitly reinforced it has clearly been consistently implicitly reinforced by the exclusive use of male-gendered language and more recent shorts where appropriately aged girls are not allowed/able to become Space Marines.

Personally I don’t care either way whether there is female SMs or not (they don’t hugely interest me), but I can see why people would want them.

It’s just the claim made a few times upthread that it has never been explicitly stated that/why there can only male SM is flat out wrong and offends my sense of accuracy.

Tldr: female SMS would be a clear retcon, not a bad retcon, but a retcon nonetheless.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 23:05:10


Post by: Gert


Its not a retcon if its added in as a specifically new thing. A retcon would be GW saying there have always been gender neutral SM since the days of the Great Crusade with the Emperors 20 Children giving the gene seed. If GW more likely does "with the advancements made with the Primaris project and its later works, the first female Astartes have landed in the 41st millennium. While some hardline chapters view this development with the same scorn as the original Primaris inductees, many more accept the ability to replenish their losses more readily and better defend the Imperium."


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/23 23:22:48


Post by: Lord Zarkov


 Gert wrote:
Its not a retcon if its added in as a specifically new thing. A retcon would be GW saying there have always been gender neutral SM since the days of the Great Crusade with the Emperors 20 Children giving the gene seed. If GW more likely does "with the advancements made with the Primaris project and its later works, the first female Astartes have landed in the 41st millennium. While some hardline chapters view this development with the same scorn as the original Primaris inductees, many more accept the ability to replenish their losses more readily and better defend the Imperium."


Fair point, a change rather than a retcon then. And I agree, that’d be exactly the best way to do it.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/24 00:51:55


Post by: insaniak


Lord Zarkov wrote:

Now I agree it’s totally retconable (and with frankly less lore gymnastics than Primaris), but that is what the lore has said previously without contradiction yet.

Although if we're assuming that not being specifically contradicted means it's still canon, Chief Librarian Tigurius is half Eldar...


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/24 01:10:20


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Lord Zarkov wrote:I mean it was explicit which was the only point I was making
Yes, with the emphasis on *was*. People were asking for recent explicit statements, of which none exist.
it has clearly been consistently implicitly reinforced by the exclusive use of male-gendered language and more recent shorts where appropriately aged girls are not allowed/able to become Space Marines.
Absolutely, but people were asking for explicit statements in modern canon, which don't really seem to be around any more.

It’s just the claim made a few times upthread that it has never been explicitly stated that/why there can only male SM is flat out wrong and offends my sense of accuracy
I mean, again, it *was* once a thing, but is no longer reinforced - so, in all terms of accuracy, it's not an explicitly stated thing any more, and a nearly 20 year old article shouldn't really be referenced for its validity.


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/24 01:12:26


Post by: Lord Zarkov


 insaniak wrote:
Lord Zarkov wrote:

Now I agree it’s totally retconable (and with frankly less lore gymnastics than Primaris), but that is what the lore has said previously without contradiction yet.

Although if we're assuming that not being specifically contradicted means it's still canon, Chief Librarian Tigurius is half Eldar...


Haha, touché - though I’d argue the current lore is completely incompatible with that still being the case (or indeed half Eldar in general)


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/24 01:26:42


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Can I also point out AGAIN, there is no actual lore established that specifically states Men are the only ones who can become SM? Like No one has posted proof of this. The best I could find was a store rep who said it's in the 9th edition codex, which I was tend told was not correct.

So please, provide and cite the lore or STFU.


So I'm going to assume this has been posted but you found some justification to dismiss the Lexicanum, but here goes...

Recruits must be fairly young, because implants often do not become fully functional if the recipient has reached a certain level of physical maturity. They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types. Only a small percentage of people are compatible to receive the implants and hypno-suggestion to turn them into Marines. Before the process of implantation begins the potential recruit receives tissue compatibility tests and psychological screening. If the testing proves successful the recruit becomes an aspirant. After the organ implantation process begins he becomes an neophyte. When the final implant is in place and the requisite training and hypnotherapy underway, he becomes a full brother. [1][2a][3]


https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Creation_of_a_Space_Marine


Heresy of the worst kind @ 2021/05/24 01:49:36


Post by: Lord Zarkov


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Lord Zarkov wrote:I mean it was explicit which was the only point I was making
Yes, with the emphasis on *was*. People were asking for recent explicit statements, of which none exist.
it has clearly been consistently implicitly reinforced by the exclusive use of male-gendered language and more recent shorts where appropriately aged girls are not allowed/able to become Space Marines.
Absolutely, but people were asking for explicit statements in modern canon, which don't really seem to be around any more.

It’s just the claim made a few times upthread that it has never been explicitly stated that/why there can only male SM is flat out wrong and offends my sense of accuracy
I mean, again, it *was* once a thing, but is no longer reinforced - so, in all terms of accuracy, it's not an explicitly stated thing any more, and a nearly 20 year old article shouldn't really be referenced for its validity.


The specific comments I was originally replying to definitely read as it was *never* an explicit thing which is not correct. And it may be old, but plenty of old Lore is still valid, it’s mainly RT and early 2Ed stuff that’s from before the setting fully crystallised that is more notably and incompatibly divergent (and even some of that gets brought up from time to time - cf Sons of Medusa primaris in RT era camouflage scheme in this month’s WD). 3Ed and later stuff (Necrons aside) is generally still on point for the most part, just built on and evolved. Heck the whole HH series is based on the outline from the IA series. How old is too old?

That said, it’s not surprising GW’s not emphasising that specific detail now, since it’s a bit dumb given IoM’s tech, rather exclusionary, and almost certainly not how’d they’d have written it now if they were starting afresh (cf SC in AoS). But they’ve seemingly taken pains not to contradict it either, which they could very easily do (especially with the introduction of Primaris).

Less an actual contradiction/incompatibility (which are admittedly not uncommon), I really hate the ‘I don’t like it so it doesn’t count’ approach - regardless of if I agree with the source of dislike or not. IMO we should be accepting as much of the lore a valid as we can, accepting rationalisations of minor contradictions, and discarding only where something is truly incompatible with the bulk of the modern lore, which seems to me the line GW generally try to take.