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.

Robes make sense how? And "bondage gear" does NOT make sense how?

The "strips of leather" look (1) allows free movement, (2) illustrates the Repentia's penitential indifference/loathing regarding their physical bodies (i.e., in favor of the soul--no woman hating here, you internet psychoanalysts), (3) make for striking models that fit the world of 40k specifically rather than just being generic Reaper mish-mash.

Manchu wrote:Robes make sense how?

Because robes are the typical vestments of the Ecclesiarchy. The Sisters, outside of their armor, wear robes, and indeed even their armor has robes incorporated into it. Ecclesiarchal robes do not provide protection, but they do signify servitude to the Immortal God-Emperor of Man.

Sisters are not priests. They do not wear vestments. They wear "habits" (i.e., their power armor). The Repentia are not technically in good standing within their orders. Symbolically, they are stripped of their habits, including shaving their distinctive hair. This is in Faith & Fire, remember?

Manchu wrote:They do not wear vestments.

Erm, yes, they do. It's listed as part of their starting gear in Dark Heresy even.

This is an oversight by someone who does not understand what the difference between a vestment and a habit is. Vestments are liturgical garments--i.e., worn by officiants at mass. The members of a religious orders wear habits as their day-to-day raiment.

So, for example, here is a Dominican priest out-and-about (wearing the habit of his order):



. . . and here is a Dominican saying mass (wearing vestments):

The latter is closer to what the Sisters wear than the former.

The sleeves alone show that much.

We really have no idea what the liturgical rites of the Imperial Creed are or even what they are like. Imperial citizens are strangely never (to my knowledge) described at their worship. But we do know that the material and organizational culture of the Ecclesiarchy is modeled on (a parody of) medieval Christianity. It stands to reason, therefore, that the priestly hierarchy of deacon-presbyter-episcopos is reserved for males. I have never heard of a Priestess of the Emperor, at least. Vestments are the clothing of priests officiating the rites of worship and so a Sororita would not be wearing them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:The sleeves alone show that much.

Those aren't sleeves. That garmet is a chasuble. It's the green part in the picture below:



As you can see, it is patently not like what the Sisters wear.

Then it is neither vestments nor a habit, as the Sisters robes look absolutely nothing like the habit you presented.

To clarify, "habit" is a general term just like "robe." The only thing about it that is specific is, unlike the word "robe," it refers to the garments that someone in a religious order wears. The one pictured above is specific to the Dominican order. I wasn't pointing out how the Sisters dress like Dominicans because they clearly don't.

Anyway, the main point is that there is nothing at all slowed about how Repentia currently look. They look awesome, in fact.

Asrodrig wrote:Sorry for going back to the OT, but here's some pictures I like. Sorry if I've posted any repeats.

Camel toe? Really?

Most of the rest are quite good, thanks for sharing!

Didn't even see that. J'ai ri. Proves Melissa's point . . . regarding fanart rather than GW, however.

Melissia wrote:Actually I mostly just dislike the Repentia models. I wish they were wearing robes instead of tiny stripperific strips of leather.

Robes make sense, but bondage gear doesn't really...

she is made uncomfortable my woman parts, to sum up this entire topic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

warboss wrote:

Nightsbane wrote:
Do you know a single thing about ancient repentance? Ripping your clothes and wearing sack cloth? If not then you don't get to have an opinion on the unit referenced.

Phallic symbol? Really? That's an argument used my militant female college lit professors, not the rest of the thinking world.

\

i'm quite familiar with the biblical acts of wearing sack cloths and covering yourself with ashes, NEITHER of which is pertinent to the models referenced since they're not doing that. if you don't realize this then you don't get to have an opinion (your trolling words, not mine). if you don't realize that a giant sword whose hilt is held to the crotch of a scantily clad S&M female model is a phallic symbol then you shouldn't consider yourself a part of the thinking world (your words again). if you don't see the blantant sexuality in those models then you must be the most innocent minded pure hearted virgin on dakka.

Look at the image, torn cloths, and covered in cloth, repentance. It's a stylized version of the same idea.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:Then it is neither vestments nor a habit, as the Sisters robes look absolutely nothing like the habit you presented.

Manchu, even if you were to conjure the 40k universe into being, so that melissia could sit down with the sisters and verify her claims she would still argue. There is not any sense to be made here. Melissia will argue every single point regardless of the amount of sense or logic it contains. She is convinced that the sisters need to be stripped ( ) of all sexuality and made into man girls. No makeup, no breasts, no legs, no female garments. Make men into women, and then they will be equal.

Outside of that she won't be happy.


Perhaps they should turn the space marines into overweight socially awkward men wearing second hand star wars t-shirts next? I keed, I keed.

Last note, that image you posted of the sisters with color by majestic is all metal armor up top. It's not a corset.

Well, for what it's worth, whether they are metal or cloth, I dig the corsets. They fit into the whole gothic/punk feel of 40K in my opinion, and if there is a touch of sexiness (if there is, I think it's very subdued) to the models, it's a welcome contrast when everything else is a hulking monstrosity, a freakish alien or some barely-human cybernetic amalgam.

It's been a long time since I commented and am a bit upset that this temporarily devolved into a minor tiff but some of that art was amazing.

Also yeah, the 40K universe could do with a bit of sexy-ing up as long as it doesn't get extreme or weird. (Sanguinary guard...) That's got more to do with what GW thinks Continental Europeans from 700 years ago think is pretty than anything else. Nothing wrong with being attractive though but that shouldn't be the mini's only point. I'd paint Reaper mini's if that's what I wanted..

Being pretties nice but I'd rather the unit fight well in the army.

Thankfully, with most of the new kits I get to have both.

Melissia wrote:

Manchu wrote:To paraphrase Freud, sometimes an Eviscerator is just an Eviscerator.

To paraphrase the internet: "Yeah, and sometimes it's a big chainsaw [deleted]"

Please remember that Dakka Dakka is, as much as possible, a 'family friendly' forum.

Alpharius wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Manchu wrote:To paraphrase Freud, sometimes an Eviscerator is just an Eviscerator.

To paraphrase the internet: "Yeah, and sometimes it's a big chainsaw [deleted]"

Please remember that Dakka Dakka is, as much as possible, a 'family friendly' forum.

no saying chainsaw ****, rgr that.

~The more you know!~

I am shocked, shocked I say, that anyone here could possibly claim that GW would resort to phalic symbols in thier models. Obviously, that Bonesword that that Hive Tyrant is stroking is just that, a Bonesword! Who the devil could ever suggest it might possibly mean anything else? Why, the gall of some people, to even suggest that GW might sexualise models to cater to an obviously non-existent sex-starved teenage market. Harumph!

1.) 90% of this thread is off topic, as most Sororitas threads since 19th May.
2.) Warhammer 40k is not meant as a realistic simulation of warfare in 38.000 years, it is just SciFi. Neither is Conan meant as a realistic simulation of the Middle Ages, that's why noone argues there that the clothing is far from historical evidence.
3.) The target customers are male teens, not aggressiv female feminists. And the grossly exaggerated differences in male and female anatomy and clothing are common stereotypes to please these target customers.

At first it was amusing, but now I am annoyed that every single thread on Sororitas turns into an off-topic adult flaming feast by the same few people. I sincerely hope that some time in the near future it is possible again to discuss WH/Sororitas issues in a civil and on-topic way again. The fans of this army deserve that much respect.

Kroothawk wrote:not aggressiv female feminists.

If I see one who plays 40k, I'll be sure to tell them that

Kroothawk wrote:

At first it was amusing, but now I am annoyed that every single thread on Sororitas turns into an off-topic adult flaming feast by the same few people. I sincerely hope that some time in the near future it is possible again to discuss WH/Sororitas issues in a civil and on-topic way again. The fans of this army deserve that much respect.

Seconded. It's a shame, because the actual point of the thread is good, and we've seen some great art.

Terminus wrote:Camel toe? Really?

That's practically worksafe compared to some of the other stuff by that artist!

Or a Repentia Mistress being a... well... let's just say the artist had DIFFERENT ideas on what it meant to be a mistress of penitent Sisters.

I just think they should be more brutal and bulky instead of stripped down power bra stripper boots. It fits the 40k theme better. I really don't care about sci/fantasy cliches of hot chicks in skimpy armor, or what wierd S&M fetishes go into the idealism of it, they just don't look that tough. I think it's kind of lame and wouldn't want to field an army of 14 yr sci/fantasy fetish models if I'm playing a game about giant killing machines, superhuman hulks, and horrid aliens. I had some D&D figs when I was a kid who were doing the chainmail bikini, or short cut robe sorceress thing for an outfit and they were embarrassing back then as they are now. Dragon magazine had a cartoon back in the 80s where some chick is in the tavern, in her big boob chainmail bikini outfit chatting with some lusty gamer looking guy.. bunch of arrows stuck in her armored areas... and the quote underneath is "...thankfully I was wearing my armor..." kind of shows whats up with women characters in games mostly played by men. Why aren't they tanked up like the guys are? oh yeah... cuz they're chicks. When I see a fat angry bald lesbo bitch model for sister supreme I'll be a little more convinced.

If you think the current Sisters of Battle are rocking "stripped down power bra stripper boots", you put the "tard" in "Guitardian".

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

Terminus wrote:Camel toe? Really?

That's practically worksafe compared to some of the other stuff by that artist!

Spoiler:

Chainsword strap-on.

Oh THAT I have to see. Talk about penance! Link to this guy's stuff?

Terminus wrote:If you think the current Sisters of Battle are rocking "stripped down power bra stripper boots", you put the "tard" in "Guitardian".

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

Terminus wrote:Camel toe? Really?

That's practically worksafe compared to some of the other stuff by that artist!

Spoiler:

Chainsword strap-on.

Oh THAT I have to see. Talk about penance! Link to this guy's stuff?

wow, total destructive ownage

personal attack removed.

Well, I'm not sure if this image is any good, but...



Hope I helped.

Necroman wrote:[img1]
[img2]
Hope I helped.

The first one is a nice action shot, the second one is... well, not really a Sororitas. Looks more like an assassin of some kind.

I'm still waiting to be linked to that bizarro artist. He sounds like Oglaf, which breaks all hilarity boundaries.

I'm not sure who that artist is in specific. I've only seen a few pictures in my (rare) forays into 4chan.

Yikes, I may be intrigued, but nowhere near curious enough to venture into THAT cesspool.