Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
macluvin wrote: They already answered that question. Female miniatures didn’t sell in the 80’s. They sell now. Their reasoning for why they codified that is not valid anymore.
If that was the case, why the female Eldar? I think there's some misinterpretation on your part going on here.
Going purely off of pop culture knowledge and how Eldar were, at the time, known as Space Elves, it's most likely they were playing into the whole "female elves" trope that dominated fantasy media.
Gert wrote: Obviously I emphasised some parts for the joke but the reality is that if you make your Orks look like WW2 Wehrmacht or have your custom Chapter be obsessed with "genetic purity", that's perfectly OK. But if you dare to make SM women then you've crossed a line. Where's the logic in that?
Orks intentionally play towards the humorous part of the setting, and the Imperium itself is obsessed with "genetic purity," to the point of killing people born with physical disabilities, intersex, etc at birth (though they're obviously too stupid to tell if those disabilities or other conditions are the result of genetics or the amount of toxins they skeet into the environment with their rampant overindustrialization, natch.)
Yeah, the Imperium *is* obsessed with genetic purity, but in the case of *abhumans* - I think Gert was implying more race related (a la Nazis) than abhuman related, which the Imperium is certainly not.
Andykp wrote: I have kitbashed female marines so please don’t talk rubbish about my motivations. Your argument seems to be that it wouldn’t improve the setting because you wouldn’t like it. There’s no reason for that, you just wouldn’t. Please explain further if I’m wrong on that but that appears to be the case from what you have said.
No, I wouldn't like it because it wouldn't improve the setting.
In what way though?
In many ways a given setting is defined by its idiosyncracies rather than anything else. Having an all-male contingent of future warrior monks is along those lines.
Except the Custodes fill that idiosyncrasy far better. Space Marines actually being all-male is actually an anomaly and less befitting of the Imperium's nature than having them be mixed gender.
I also repeat that Space Marines aren't depicted on the whole as warrior monks, so that comparison is moot too.
And I know some horrible, despicable people who think female marines are a good idea, so that argument doesn't work for me.
Which ones have made death threats because someone put a woman's head on a Space Marine again?
Andykp wrote: As for this being a core part of marines identity, it was first brought up by your side and then thoroughly debunked by ours. It’s not core at all. Every codex for marines ever, from 2nd edition when they started up to now has a section on the creation of a marine. None of them, not one ever, has stated they have to be male only. That “fact” is not in print now and has not been since it was in WD in 2017, it has only ever been in WD and and in anthologies of WD articles. It is so peripheral to marines that it does not make it into their books and isn’t in print anywhere now. Now, you are claiming it is core to them.
The process is clearly intended to only work on male humans.
But why? And why not mention it in any core material? If it was so important, you'd think it be mentioned there.
This actually sets up a bit of a thing I'd like some clarification on, actually - what exactly *is* the reason for Space Marines being all male? Is it because their biology simply doesn't allow it (arbitrarily)? Is it because they're (supposedly) warrior monks and just refuse to take women even though they probably could? Is it because the Emperor is sexist and decreed that no women could be Space Marines (even though he didn't actually make them, and clearly was fine with mixed gender guardsmen)? Is it because Space Marines would suddenly start breeding like rabbits and the HLOT don't want that (even though we have it on good reason that Space Marines are infertile, or otherwise *not interested*?
Because I've heard a lot of reasons, but there's no real consensus on *why* Space Marines are how they are.
You are vastly misrepresenting my point and trying to imply that I'm bringing a puerile angle into this discussion.
Hey, I'm not the one who jumped headfirst into how Space Marines would start having sex if women Astartes existed.
You've yet to actually even elaborate on *why* you thought that was appropriate for this discussion, but continue with the faux outrage, I guess.
Anyone with a shred of intellectual integrity can tell you're misrepresenting my words
Says the one who literally just misrepresented my entire argument and reposted it as "*lies*"?
You've not got a leg to stand on here.
and I'll stick to discussing things with people who aren't lying in the hopes of earning white knight points.
Is that your solution? Call anyone who challenges you on a pretty laughable point a "white knight" and run away?
Very mature, I think.
the_scotsman wrote: it can't be that there's a tendency for female authors to create less physically powerful, physically confrontational protagonists because males grow up in our society bombarded by stories of men solving their problems through physical confrontation and women are not, it must be that women are hard coded by their monkey dna to want to submit to a dominant alpha male who can overpower other masculoids with his big stronk monkey muscles! Nobody is ever influenced by stories they read and watch to create similar stories and narratives, that's crazy talk!
Whether it's something innate or not, the tendency is there
Is it? Or is that tendency only due to societal pressures and certain attitudes being pushed by dominant powers in society?
Why stick to tendency if people want to break them? Why must tendency be preserved?
so the push for female "warrior women" is more about satisfying a particular kind of man than women.
Suuuuuuure. And that why we've totally not been linking examples of women-led projects pushing for this. /s
Andykp wrote: It has been and still is that the reason for recruit tests and rituals is that it is difficult to find suitable candidates. Then even more fail. Just just physically, but mentally too. Most fail long before they need any organs. THAT is in all the current texts. So having the ability to choose women too would double the number of potential recruits. They could be even more selective before implanting any organs.
They are also often limited by available gene-seed anyway, and the process is only described as working on male humans.
A process which, need I remind, is completely arbitrary.
Hecaton wrote:Well it's infinitely more evidence than "Here's this blog post that says that powerful warrior women is what women want in their fantastical fiction."
It's really not, considering that those blog posts are written by women* - and I think your idea of "infinitely" perhaps is just a little lacking in scale.
*unless you're now claiming to speak for those women?
Sure. Not when you're trying to establish whether we have an inbuilt gender bias as a species, however. 30 is a ludicrously low sample size for that.
Pretty common in psychological studies. And if you're able to make statistically significant claims with it, then that's fine. Sample size is taken into account when determining significance.
So, this is an entirely insignificant study - because 30 really is ridiculously low to make such a claim with.
some bloke wrote:It's very difficult to determine, just by sampling novels, what might be causing any gender bias that is present.
For example, if someone is basing their story on medieval times, when women were literally property, then it is going to be influenced by the fact that men were the fighters and women were not. That's not necessarily any reflection of the authors bias, because the historical period they picked is one where women and men were not treated equally. Take Game of Thrones - the majority of women in there were either of the "oh, please send a man to help me!" vein or they were simply passed without mention. A couple of token women fighting, and them being regarded as the exceptions to the rules anyway, further highlights this. That's not necessarily because GRR is sexist, because it's based on a medieval fantasy world, and the medieval times would have been considered Sexist, if that had even been a considered thing back then.
Agreed, because that is considered important for the verisimilitude of that setting, which is being evocative of a real world period.
However, the very existence of individuals like Brienne, no matter how exceptional and rare they are, indicates towards that drive for inclusivity, and sacrificing that "no women knights!!" idea in favour of telling a better story, one that will appeal to more people.
We easily see in GoT that women are not considered equal to men in the setting, but in the actual narrative and their representation within it, they are still empowered, through characters like Arya and Brienne.
Similarly, you cannot claim that any of the black library writers who write books about space marines are themselves sexist for not writing in strong female characters, when the book is based around characters which are all male by necessity of being a space marine.
I can't call *them* sexist, but I can question the "necessity" of all-male Space Marines, and GW's wider reluctance to review that.
By the time you filter out all the books with any inspiration from history, and any books playing the stereotypes, then you'll be left with pure fiction, where there's no influence from the real world at all, and then the decisions about male and female roles in the world become entirely arbitrary, and as such cannot be right or wrong.
Eh, I'm not sure I entirely disagree, as even a purely fictional book can still be influenced by those stereotypes, which contribute to the existence of those "arbitrary" restrictions.
And, irrespective of that, an arbitrary restriction that excludes women is still excluding women, and, without context as to how that contributes at all to the setting, if it offers no artistic merit, it's not exactly *good*.
Furthermore, in a world where everyone is treated equally, and everyone can do anything, with no oppression whatsoever and all that - how dull are the stories going to be? Darker worlds tend to make better stories for heroes - otherwise they can't fight anyone!
Sure, but including women Space Marines won't make the setting all perfect and sunshine and rainbows. The Imperium already treats gender very even handedly, on the macro scale - the oppression comes from elsewhere, not from gender segregation.
Darker worlds don't need to be pitch black.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/25 11:27:54
Orks intentionally play towards the humorous part of the setting, and the Imperium itself is obsessed with "genetic purity," to the point of killing people born with physical disabilities, intersex, etc at birth (though they're obviously too stupid to tell if those disabilities or other conditions are the result of genetics or the amount of toxins they skeet into the environment with their rampant overindustrialization, natch.)
Like I said, I'm fine with people kitbashing female space marines. So your strawman is pretty overbearing there.
Ah so it's OK to dress up your Orks like real world fascists because Orks are funny. That'll hold up.
As for your point about the Imperium, please cite which publication you found evidence of the Imperium killing babies who had disabilities or were intersex.
Yeah, the Imperium *is* obsessed with genetic purity, but in the case of *abhumans* - I think Gert was implying more race related than abhuman related, which the Imperium is certainly not.
It was exactly that but Hecaton chose to deliberately misread it and put their own inflection on what I said.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/25 11:29:00
Orks intentionally play towards the humorous part of the setting, and the Imperium itself is obsessed with "genetic purity," to the point of killing people born with physical disabilities, intersex, etc at birth (though they're obviously too stupid to tell if those disabilities or other conditions are the result of genetics or the amount of toxins they skeet into the environment with their rampant overindustrialization, natch.)
Like I said, I'm fine with people kitbashing female space marines. So your strawman is pretty overbearing there.
Ah so it's OK to dress up your Orks like real world fascists because Orks are funny. That'll hold up.
As for your point about the Imperium, please cite which publication you found evidence of the Imperium killing babies who had disabilities or were intersex.
Yeah... that is *quite* the tip of the hand there. :/
The Imperium is a bad empire to live in but just because it does Xenocides and kills people born with Goats legs or tentacle arms, doesn't mean it does things the actual real-life Nazis did.
I want that citation and I have a sneaking suspicion that it falls under DHOTYA.
I think we're all in agreement and awareness that the Imperium is an absolutely awful place to live in.
However, according to all publications (as far as I'm aware) it's simply not shown as being institutionally sexist and racist (and by racist, I mean in regards to human ethnicity), and I don't think it would need to be changed to be. The Imperium's awful and dehumanising enough - we don't need to start throwing in other real life prejudices too.
...........Anyway, we can obviously infer that the imperium would clearly slaughter people born with real-world genetic conditions thinking that they were mutants, and they probably perform racial purges based on current human understandings of ethnic groups, despite there having been as much time between the present day and this setting for humans to have developed just as many new minor ethnic signifiers as we have on earth since the time we lived in caves. OH, and they'd most definitely have sex-based descrimination like we do today as long as you ignore the fact that women are among the high lords of terra like the one GW just made a model for like a month ago.
Anyway, Keep current political conversations out of my 40k! And by that I mean, include them, but only depict the ones I specifically mentioned above for reasons I choose not to specify!"
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
This one point by Hecaton has actually really ticked me off so we're going to do a deep dive on which "modern" issues apply to the 40k setting.
Racism - Humanity exists in the trillions spread across worlds that number in the thousands. The populations of two Hive Cities have the potential for more than modern-day Earth. There is such a critical mass of humanity that it wouldn't even be possible for a central government to take a census let alone ask someone what race they thought they were.
LGBTQ+ - See above for why this isn't an issue in-universe. IRLGW has made more progress in featuring LGBTQ+ characters, which is good because these people exist and there's no way they wouldn't 40k years from now.
Sexism - Instances of sexism in the 40k setting are always exceptions to the rule. Women can be anything from High Lords to Sump Dwellers, from Lord Generals to Conscripts. GW just doesn't portray the fact women can be anything in their model range very well.
Religion - There is one religion for the Imperium with many different sects, cults, and denominations. There's no disparaging or promoting of one religion over any others.
Disability - Life is terrible but you still serve the Emperor. If you have the money, there are chances for assistance with a disability (I believe Ravenor has a hoverchair). The Imperium doesn't care about you enough to know if you have autism or ADHD. Can you lift a crate? Good job, you have employment.
I'll respond to other people later (except Smudge, because he can't stop lying) but 40k has a lot of politics in it - it was created partially as a reaction to Thatcherite England and the horrible gak her government was doing. I'm ok with 40k being political, and am a formerly Bernie-supporting progressive myself. I find this push for female Astartes to be more about satisfying the borderline-kink desires of men in the community.
I'll respond to other people later (except Smudge, because he can't stop lying)
My pronouns are in my sig. I'd appreciate if you used them.
That is all.
but 40k has a lot of politics in it - it was created partially as a reaction to Thatcherite England and the horrible gak her government was doing.
Absolutely right - and yet, the Imperium is still largely neutral when it comes to gender, race, and sexuality.
This is irrespective of the fact that simply including women is not political.
I find this push for female Astartes to be more about satisfying the borderline-kink desires of men in the community.
So, you're speaking for men now?
Also, way to jump aboard that "accusing other users" train, instead of actually addressing, well, *any* of the arguments made, and going straight for ad hominems.
I'll respond to other people later (except Smudge, because he can't stop lying) but 40k has a lot of politics in it - it was created partially as a reaction to Thatcherite England and the horrible gak her government was doing. I'm ok with 40k being political, and am a formerly Bernie-supporting progressive myself. I find this push for female Astartes to be more about satisfying the borderline-kink desires of men in the community.
Smudge prefers "they", it's in their signature.
Implying that people only want female SM to satisfy sexual urges is not only laughable but very insulting.
Implying that people only want female SM to satisfy sexual urges is not only laughable but very insulting.
Obviously I disagree.
I'm sorry, but that's not really a matter to "disagree" on - unless you're happy announcing to everyone here that you're not arguing in good faith.
You are quite literally calling everyone who is arguing against you sexually motivated. Do you think for a second that's an acceptable way to have a discussion?
Not how that works chief. If you say something about me, I'm the one who decides if it's insulting.
Just because you find it insulting doesn't mean it's wrong. A white supremacist would find it insulting to be told they were the moral equal of non-whites.
Firstly it's an opinion not objective fact. You need to learn the difference.
Second, are you now comparing people who are pro-female SM to white supremacist? You want to ease up on the pedal before you say something you're going to regret?
Gert wrote: Firstly it's an opinion not objective fact. You need to learn the difference.
Second, are you now comparing people who are pro-female SM to white supremacist? You want to ease up on the pedal before you say something you're going to regret?
No, I'm comparing you specifically to someone like that and making the point that feelings of offense don't mean that anything wrong was said.
You don't seem to be following what I'm saying too well.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/25 20:16:21
Not how that works chief. If you say something about me, I'm the one who decides if it's insulting.
Just because you find it insulting doesn't mean it's wrong.
I mean, it *is* wrong - unless you're going to whip out some evidence on how all the men who are pro-women Astartes here are doing so for sexual reasons.
After all - onus of proof is on you, or else that's rather libellous of you, to make such a claim about so many users here.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hecaton wrote: No, I'm comparing you specifically to someone like that and making the point that feelings of offense don't mean that anything wrong was said.
Sure. Now prove that you *are* right in your comments that the men here are only arguing in favour of sexually gratuitous purposes. Otherwise, something wrong definitely was said.
After all, it is *your* place to prove that, having made the claim.
You don't seem to be following what I'm saying too well.
I think we're all seeing what you're saying. The thing is, what you're saying is *really* sketchy, and in incredibly bad faith.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/25 20:19:39
Seems like an opportune time for everyone to take a moment to recall that this topic, toy soldiers, does not need to be the basis for giving or taking offense. This topic can be discussed without ratcheting up the emotion and vitriol or playing into that kind of strategy.
Gert wrote: Firstly it's an opinion not objective fact. You need to learn the difference.
Second, are you now comparing people who are pro-female SM to white supremacist? You want to ease up on the pedal before you say something you're going to regret?
No, I'm comparing you specifically to someone like that and making the point that feelings of offense don't mean that anything wrong was said.
You don't seem to be following what I'm saying too well.
Would you care to explain on what basis you disagree. Just disagreeing is not real enough in a conversation. Or would you care to answer my previous question? Or care to explain why on Earth you think my wanting to have female marines is in any way sexually motivated.??? Or a kink? That’s just weird and I assure you it is not sexual. Nothing about my interest in 40K is in anyway sexual. So you can explain that accusation or leave it there? But do try and bring something useful to the conversation because right now all you are doing is insulting people and and going “nah” when anyone counters your ludicrous opinions.
On the front of sexism being absent in the imperium, the presence of women in leadership roles does not necessarily exclude the presence of sexism in the imperium. IRL, we have women in prominent roles of our government (Vice President, Governors, Senators, Congress, etc.) yet we still institute luxury taxes on female hygiene products, and products marketed towards women charge what is known as the "pink tax" for example. Sexism is also rampant in our culture; for a famous example just look up Tucker Carlson military uniforms. We use women as cannon fodder at their expense, and the expense of common human decency, all the time, to push sexist rhetoric to further political agendas. Other things I would consider sexist is certain anti-abortion legislation which at times have made some medically necessary abortions illegal and forced women to carry out stillborn pregnancies to term, and even resulted in deaths from sepsis because the removal of the rest of the dead fetus would technically be a violation of laws designed to strengthen abortion bans. Privileged, wealthy women have ways to sidestep such repercussions.
The fact is that women born into positions of privilege may find their personal privilege to diminish or completely hide sexist biases against them by the imperium. My point is that proudly proclaiming that 3 out of 9 of the high lords of terra are females, and that a few named female commissars/officers/etc. does not necessarily prove a lack of sexism in the imperium. That is ultimately up to the fluff writers; it is entirely possible that a high ranking female officer only obtained a position of prestige because of wealth and privilege, or because she was no less than twice the tactical genius of any other male officer of equivalent or even higher rank. It certainly wouldn't be out of place in the dystopic crap hole that is the imperium that a top ranking officer got his (or her) rank purely because of nepotism, bribery/purchasing of office, or even taking credit for someone else's tactical brilliance and leadership skills, and that any individual that actually made rank of of merit may have needed to have demonstrated a bit more aptitude and capability than those with the advantages of wealth and privilege.
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. -Kurt Vonnegut
The fact is that women born into positions of privilege may find their personal privilege to diminish or completely hide sexist biases against them by the imperium. My point is that proudly proclaiming that 3 out of 9 of the high lords of terra are females, and that a few named female commissars/officers/etc. does not necessarily prove a lack of sexism in the imperium. That is ultimately up to the fluff writers; it is entirely possible that a high ranking female officer only obtained a position of prestige because of wealth and privilege, or because she was no less than twice the tactical genius of any other male officer of equivalent or even higher rank. It certainly wouldn't be out of place in the dystopic crap hole that is the imperium that a top ranking officer got his (or her) rank purely because of nepotism, bribery/purchasing of office, or even taking credit for someone else's tactical brilliance and leadership skills, and that any individual that actually made rank of of merit may have needed to have demonstrated a bit more aptitude and capability than those with the advantages of wealth and privilege.
GW has made it pretty clear in the variety of publications it has that the Imperium cares about an individual's humanity, that is that they aren't Xenos/abhuman/Chaos tainted and not their sex/gender/sexuality. There can be sexist individuals within the setting because you can't legislate for people's opinions but overall there is nothing preventing a woman from becoming a Lord General/Factory Overseer/Planetary Governor/Militarum Sergeant over a man. There is a distinct difference between an individual being sexist and state-mandated or supported sexism. The Imperium undoubtedly has the former but does not conform to the latter.
If we look at specific examples, the Verghast Ghost influx brought many women into the Tanith 1st where some soldiers believed they were nothing but distractions or poor fighters. The reality was that many of the female Ghosts had fought either in the Vervunhive PDF or Scratch Companies (partisans basically) and were just as good as the Tanith Ghosts. Many female Ghosts would go on to become some of the regiments' best snipers, scouts (a great honour in the regiment), and officers.
The SoB are a religious order set up from an all-female cult, the Daughters of the Emperor. Goge Vandire tricked them (and most of the Imperium) into believing he was blessed by the Emperor and recruited them into his private army. After Vandire was deposed, the Daughters were maintained and expanded as the militant arms of both the Ecclesiarchy and the Ordo Hereticus. It's not sexism that doesn't allow men to become a Sister, it's cult logic combined with a law that was deliberately worded poorly to allow the Church to have soldiers.
Cadia has all children taken into the PDF to learn how to be soldiers and from there they can choose to serve in the Guard. All Cadians (before the planet broke) were soldiers first then men/women/children second.
Catachan tries to eat the people that live on it, and the critters there don't care what insides you have as long as you are tasty.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/26 21:29:24
Automatically Appended Next Post: Again, similar traits between my country and the imperium. We don't have anything explicitly preventing women from being officers in our military, or holding prestigious offices. We even claim to be a meritocracy. But we still force women to do horrible things out of religious dogma and self rightousness, like die of sepsis from a bit of still born fetus still inside their womb. Or carry stillborn births to term. Or even simply dictating what they can do with their body and womb in the first place. That's pretty horrid and misogynous. My point is that they could easily portray the Imperium as a sexist civilization, or that some cultures are sexist, and that space marine culture was inspired by sexism from the emperor, without retconning anything. Easily. I doubt the fluff writers and most in this forum are interested in pursuing that explanation, but nothing in the lore has actually excluded the presence of sexism in the imperium.
The fact is that women born into positions of privilege may find their personal privilege to diminish or completely hide sexist biases against them by the imperium. My point is that proudly proclaiming that 3 out of 9 of the high lords of terra are females, and that a few named female commissars/officers/etc. does not necessarily prove a lack of sexism in the imperium. That is ultimately up to the fluff writers; it is entirely possible that a high ranking female officer only obtained a position of prestige because of wealth and privilege, or because she was no less than twice the tactical genius of any other male officer of equivalent or even higher rank. It certainly wouldn't be out of place in the dystopic crap hole that is the imperium that a top ranking officer got his (or her) rank purely because of nepotism, bribery/purchasing of office, or even taking credit for someone else's tactical brilliance and leadership skills, and that any individual that actually made rank of of merit may have needed to have demonstrated a bit more aptitude and capability than those with the advantages of wealth and privilege.
GW has made it pretty clear in the variety of publications it has that the Imperium cares about an individual's humanity, that is that they aren't Xenos/abhuman/Chaos tainted and not their sex/gender/sexuality. There can be sexist individuals within the setting because you can't legislate for people's opinions but overall there is nothing preventing a woman from becoming a Lord General/Factory Overseer/Planetary Governor/Militarum Sergeant over a man. There is a distinct difference between an individual being sexist and state-mandated or supported sexism. The Imperium undoubtedly has the former but does not conform to the latter.
If we look at specific examples, the Verghast Ghost influx brought many women into the Tanith 1st where some soldiers believed they were nothing but distractions or poor fighters. The reality was that many of the female Ghosts had fought either in the Vervunhive PDF or Scratch Companies (partisans basically) and were just as good as the Tanith Ghosts. Many female Ghosts would go on to become some of the regiments' best snipers, scouts (a great honour in the regiment), and officers.
The SoB are a religious order set up from an all-female cult, the Daughters of the Emperor. Goge Vandire tricked them (and most of the Imperium) into believing he was blessed by the Emperor and recruited them into his private army. After Vandire was deposed, the Daughters were maintained and expanded as the militant arms of both the Ecclesiarchy and the Ordo Hereticus. It's not sexism that doesn't allow men to become a Sister, it's cult logic combined with a law that was deliberately worded poorly to allow the Church to have soldiers.
Cadia has all children taken into the PDF to learn how to be soldiers and from there they can choose to serve in the Guard. All Cadians (before the planet broke) were soldiers first then men/women/children second.
Catachan tries to eat the people that live on it, and the critters there don't care what insides you have as long as you are tasty.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/26 21:40:25
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. -Kurt Vonnegut
Or we could just say the fact that the Astartes project got bungled when the primary contributor turned against the Imperium and tried to destroy the project.
There are ways to add female SM in without even going near sexism, most of them just means the Imperium acknowledges their God wasn't as good at science as He said he was. Hell, there doesn't even need to be that, say that the Emperor had to rush the project but secret data vaults reveal how He was going to do it originally.
Obiviously I haven't read all of the novels/fluff, but I don't remember blatant sexism in the Imperium. Women seem to be expected to do their duty just like the men and no one has anything to say about that. I don't remember any stories that went out of their way to show that female characters were treated any differently.
The only exception that I know of is with some knight houses that explicitly forbid women pilots out of tradition. Knight houses aren't exactly representative of the Imperium, though. They're mostly considered backwards with the whole feudal lifestyle stuff and this isn't even a generalized thing; some houses realize that the gender of the person inside the giant death robot seriously doesn't matter...
I haven’t read the whole thread (49 pages and counting!!) but I’d be happy to see female space marines.
I don’t have any issues with updating or retconning the background. Like the OP said 49 pages ago, it would be a smaller change than the introduction of Primaris marines.
I think it would be cool to have a bit more variety to the SM models, in the same way I’d like to see more female imperial guard models.
For those against the idea, I don’t see how it would be negative, nobody would make you use female SM models, and 40K has always been about making your own head canon as much much as it is about sticking to the background, so if they were introduced and you don’t like the idea of female space marines, just don’t include them in your army.
Does anyone get upset if someone names there SM captain from a specific chapter and company differently than the name given in the background? Or if the squad markings aren’t exactly as depicted in the codex?
If a player headswapped their space marines with SOB heads would anyone actually refuse to play against them? I don’t see updating the fluff to include female marines as any different.
Edit: IIRC there originally were female space marines but they didn’t sell well, so were discontinued and the background was changed to acknowledge this ( back when SMs were mind-wiped convicts), reintroducing then because there might be a market for them and adjusting the background accordingly once again seems perfectly reasonable to me.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/06/27 05:27:26
It's also impossible to make that judgement based on thirty authors who may or may not be published through the same publishers.
Sure, so why are you suggesting it?
insaniak wrote: All we know is that in this study they observed a trend for male authors to write more powerful female characters, while also admitting that in many cases there was no significant difference.
It's admittedly been a while since I did high school maths, but I'm fairly sure that one thing is a reasonable distance from being 'ínfinite' anything...
As a matter of percentages (or a fraction), it's infinite. I was making the point that anecdotal evidence is meaningless.
Sure. And here we have a study of thirty samples in which many of the results were stated as being statistically insignificant.
And not all of them were... as much as you might wish they were.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LumenPraebeo wrote: Lets not forget this guy also assumes that wanting female marines means you find all-male marines repulsive.
Nope. Literally people in this thread are saying that it's "Not a good look" for the hobby to be predominantly male.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Andykp wrote: You might be happy for people to kit bash and head canon female marines but by refusing to acknowledge the need for change to the out dated background and trying to prop up flimsy arguments around how it’s designed to only work and men and it’s a quirk of the setting, you are enabling those who send threats and hate to people who do do that. As long as this sexist and pointless bit of old background is not corrected the. The hate mongers and bigots in the community will feel empowered to spew that hatred. It has happened on this thread. It happens every time it’s discussed. But only ever around this issue.
There is no need to de-segregate a fictional organization like the Astartes. None. I reject your premises.
Andykp wrote: Marines are not all warrior monks, and if they were monks are not all male.
Wrong, see above.
Andykp wrote: The science is entirely made up. It’s absolute nonsense. It has no grounding it real world science at all. A science argument does not stack up at all. In fact it’s laughable.
You're not cogent enough to make this argument. You're trying to claim it's wrongthink to even conceive of a fantastical medical procedure that would only work properly on male humans. That's ridiculous.
Andykp wrote: They are not fraternity either. If they are it’s only because of this outdated stupid and pointless line of text.
They call each other "battle brothers." That's pretty close to the definition of a "fraternity" (aka brotherhood).
Andykp wrote: There is NO credible argument to say that the official addition of female marines would do the setting any harm. None. If it would damage the setting to you and you place that higher than the damage been done by hatred and death threats then you need look at yourself and your motives. Why does it bother you?
What hatred? What death threats? Who cares?
Andykp wrote: That’s my argument for why we should change.
Ah so it's OK to dress up your Orks like real world fascists because Orks are funny. That'll hold up.
Depends on the company you keep.
Gert wrote: As for your point about the Imperium, please cite which publication you found evidence of the Imperium killing babies who had disabilities or were intersex.
The rulebook that came with the Rogue Trader KT set was the most recent explanation of it that I've read; they use the term "mutations" but that covers all forms of physical disability and deformity (and doesn't literally mean mutation in the scientific sense).
It was exactly that but Hecaton chose to deliberately misread it and put their own inflection on what I said.
The point is this - if there was a child born intersex or with a sixth finger or something, the Imperial authorities would kill the baby, and then kill the mother if she tried to interfere. Probably slowly and painfully, to make a point.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/06/27 06:45:08
Games Workshop have never marketed or sold female space marines. In 1988, there was an advert for "Adventurers" which features two miniatures called Female Warrior Jayne and Female Warrior Gabs. These miniatures were sold as part of the RT601 "Adventurers" blister pack. It is pure speculation that these two miniatures were actually something other than what they were advertised and sold as but, if they were supposed to be something else, that is almost certainly Sisters of Battle. On the miniatures themselves, the base tag says "sister" and there are a few other design elements that point towards this liklihood, as shown in the image below, which is a comparison between one of the miniatures and the Stephen Tappin artwork of Sister Sin, as seen in the back of the Rogue Trader rulebook near a background section talking about the Sisters of Battle.
As you can see, the miniature has the same style of powered armour, the same rebreather apparatus and the same horned skull device on the left shoulder pad.
EDIT: I suppose they both also have bare hands too, although Gabs is painted to have gloves, on the official model so, eh *shrug*
The idea that there were female space marines is from a misreading of a reply by Alan Merrett.
Spoiler:
Allegedly, so Alan explains, retailers told Games Workshop that customers weren't buying female models from the C01 Fighters range. Here's two examples of those miniatures.
Spoiler:
Not eaxctly the best looking minis nor do I suppose a kid in the 80's asking their parents for some half naked lady models would have been taken well.
Alan then goes on to say the customers told them they didn't want female models, but he already said he didn't include them in the production cycle because retailers told them, so which was it, retailers or customers? Possibly both? Maybe, but that doesn't seem likely to me, how many customers would realistically write in to ask Games Workshop to stop making any female miniatures what-so-ever or kick up such a fuss in a shop that the manager would pass it on?
He then goes on to say that they didn't include any female miniatures in with the marines because they knew people would complain and he says they didn't make any except for the occasional ones that pop up. What exactly does that mean? That they didn't make any female marines but did make some female models? He then says that the background that Rick Priestly wrote saying there were male only space marines was there to justify a 'commercial logistics issue'. Looking at it one way, that they wrote the background to appease customers who didn't want any female miniatures, why didn't they include that caveat for all the miniatures lines in 40k, why single out space marines? Afterall, these were all decisions being made by Games Workshop as they developed 40k for release, the two adventurer models were made in 1987, Rogue Trader was revealed to the world in 1988 so they already made all these decisions before any customers got to comment on it. On the other hand, what has customers not wanting female miniatures got to do with 'commercial logistics' and why does it only apply to marines and not to anything else? Then he finishes off by saying that the RTB01 box set had no female marines in it because they never even thought to make any and allegedly couldn't have done anyway which is utterly nonsense, any of the sprues could have had a female head on so job done.
What Alan says here, if the post is genuine, is frankly, bollocks, nothing much about what he says hangs together but this is the man who refused to touch a Chapter House resin part, in court, because of "quite nasty" chemicals, so not the most reliable or sensible witness.
Be Pure!
Be Vigilant!
BEHAVE!
Show me your god and I'll send you a warhead because my god's bigger than your god.
Cybtroll wrote: I think that if you puncture him he'll bleed some Contrast instead of blood because "it's better!!!".
That said, about mutations: the Imperium employs Abhuman and has entire worlds with Abhuman in it...
The problem is that the setting is contradictory by design, so it's funny to see people see certainties where there's none.
The bit about abhumans though is they're genetically stable, can reproduce and are not subject to mutations to a greater degree than is 'normal'. What normal is depends on world to world. It should be noted they are distrusted at best and outright persecuted by more puritan members of the imperium.
On the whole 'the imperium will execute you if you're intersex or have six fingers', it depends. Most references to mutants in 40k tend to be along the lines of:
In the doctrine of the theocratic Imperium, any deviation from the holy Human form is considered a sin to be punished with suppression, and even death.
There are variations. Some are minor. Some are major, to the point of disfigurement. Having six fingers on necromunda might be tolerated, having six fingers on the shrine world of Saint cuthbert might get you and everyone in your vicinity slain, just because.
I don't think intersex was known to a lot of people when 40k was written, I suspect the writers understanding of mutants was more xmen than xxy. I've read in places that in the realpolitik of 40k, exceptions can be made and there are tolerances and degrees that are allowed, or tolerated, depending on where you are. You might get away with six fingers, that weird mole that looks like a face or abnormal genetics, then again, you might not. Personally I lean towards the notion that unless you're rich, or can hide it, you're going on the pyre. Folks in the imperium don't care that much. Life is pretty damn cheap and horrible.
greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy
"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are"
