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.

Melissia wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:They're most likely referring to the Y Chromosome which only men have.

That itself is not entirely true (not only men have it, and indeed there's things on the X and Y genes that code for the same thing...), but regardless, the unique parts of the Y chromosome code for little more than the presence and regulation of the male genitalia. Which the Marines do not use.

Interesting, but doesn't entirely answer the idea that the stuff necessary to become a marine forms to the the Y Chromosome. Yeah the X and Y have some similar genes, which I remember from biology being called "autosomes". So while there's some similarities, the Y chromosome is still needed because it does have some differences, regardless of whether or not Marines take advantage of it.

Vladsimpaler wrote:Of course, you're most likely referring to exceptions.

Nope! My entire point was that the difference between male and female isn't as great as people think it is, and most of it is artificially inflated due to cultural enforcement. Women are expected by society to be softer and weaker, and society tries to enforce this expectation on children as they grow up.

Melissia wrote:My point was that the argument that women in 40k are less martially competent than men is a junk argument. If this position offends you
... I couldn't care less. Be offended all you want.

I don't think anyone is arguing the martial prowess (which includes skill, experience, agility, etc) of 40k women, but it isn't correct to assume that just because regiments are mixed gender in 40k that it means they are exactly equal physically. If you're looking for evidence to support this (even though the burden of proof is on you to provide evidence to the contrary) Gaunt's Ghosts, a typical mixed gender regiment, has several examples of female troopers being overpowered by male troopers or enemies and no examples of female heavy weapons teams, despite several uses of heavy stubbers and missile launchers throughout the novels.

On the other hand, many of the female characters are specifically described as excellent snipers, marksmen and scouts which makes them invaluable to the regiment. They are also described as being good knife fighters, which is a weapon specifically requiring great skill, but not so much brute force.

Even if you go by height and weight alone, it drastically changes the muscle mass and leverage capability of your body. Women in 40k are still shorter and lighter than the men, on average, so why would they be just as strong? If they have been modified (via evolutionary, chemical, hormonal, etc) to have greater strength with less mass, then why wouldn't they have engineered the men, who are still taller and heavier, the same way? It's a self-defeating argument.

Shira Calpurnia is an excellent example of not needing to be overly physically strong to be a badass. She consistently beats up multiple individuals despite being described as around 5'6" and slender. It's a testament to her skill, agility, equipment and intelligence that she is able to best her opponents in combat regardless of their greater size and strength. I would say that's much more admirable than just being equally strong.

DoW

Vladsimpaler wrote:Interesting, but doesn't entirely answer the idea that the stuff necessary to become a marine forms to the the Y Chromosome. Yeah the X and Y have some similar genes, which I remember from biology being called "autosomes". So while there's some similarities, the Y chromosome is still needed because it does have some differences, regardless of whether or not Marines take advantage of it.

All of that still assumes that it's referring to the Y chromosome, which there isn't really any evidence of aside from conjecture in an attempt to try to justify GW's statement which contradict reality

As I said before, it's science fiction and runs on rule of cool, try not to think too hard on it.

Vladsimpaler wrote:Errr what? So there are some tough women. Doesn't mean anything when, as I stated, only potential males are taken. Not potential women. So no matter how strong a woman is, she won't be considered.

... you aren't actually paying attention to what I've posted, are you?

Vladsimpaler wrote:your argument just has no basis.

Aside from the entirety of 40k lore, I suppose not. But 40k lore itself is based only in rule of cool. And, of course, action girls and ladies of war are both very, very cool


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DogOfWar wrote:I don't think anyone is arguing the martial prowess (which includes skill, experience, agility, etc) of 40k women

That's pretty much exactly what was being argued by a couple posters in this thread.

Melissia wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:Interesting, but doesn't entirely answer the idea that the stuff necessary to become a marine forms to the the Y Chromosome. Yeah the X and Y have some similar genes, which I remember from biology being called "autosomes". So while there's some similarities, the Y chromosome is still needed because it does have some differences, regardless of whether or not Marines take advantage of it.

All of that still assumes that it's referring to the Y chromosome, which there isn't really any evidence of aside from conjecture in an attempt to try to justify GW's statement which contradict reality

As I said before, it's science fiction and runs on rule of cool, try not to think too hard on it.

Which is a fair assumption to make since it says that it's keyed to male hormones. So yeah, it's science fiction, and in this particular fiction it only works with males. Which is why you arguing that it makes no sense ultimately makes no sense, because WH40k is fiction.
I'm not really thinking too hard on it, thanks for the concern though.

Vladsimpaler wrote:Errr what? So there are some tough women. Doesn't mean anything when, as I stated, only potential males are taken. Not potential women. So no matter how strong a woman is, she won't be considered.

... you aren't actually paying attention to what I've posted, are you?

I would quote something about you not really caring and just skimming this thread, but yeah I'm reading it and it's not making sense to me.

Vladsimpaler wrote:your argument just has no basis.

Aside from the entirety of 40k lore, I suppose not. But 40k lore itself is based only in rule of cool. And, of course, action girls and ladies of war are both very, very cool

Different strokes for different folks, I find "forced" characters (especially fighter women) to be cliche and boring. Especially ones that somehow just go around beat up people. It's lazy writing.

Kind Regards,
Vladsimpaler

Melissia wrote:In 40k. Which is true

Nice to see you penning such full and well reasoned counter arguments.

In the 41st millennium women still have smaller (on average) upper bodies and wider hips than men in the 41st millennium - they're often shorter too. The art shows this. And as a direct result of this, you get less optimal muscular leverage and smaller heart/lung capacities. The feminine form is fundamentally less capable of physical performance, in this universe or theirs* - that's just how it is.

(*Really, do NOT get me into an argument about the laws of physics in 40k. I will go anthropic principle on you.)

Um, no, they are arguing that the superior physicality of the average male over the average woman provides an inherent advantage when building super soldiers. You are just creating a strawman because your own argument is nonsensical.

Your response to dogofwar is a perfect example. You quote the part that you see as supporting your argument (martial prowess of 40k women), but ignore the qualifying statement that disputes your claim that men and women in 40k are completely equal on physical terms. The rest of your posts are just as bad. "Geneseed being tied to male chromosomes is unrealistic, unjustifiable and wrong! But unrealistic, unjustifiable assumptions about biological differences between men and women is totally okay because of the rule of cool. Fiction I don't like is bad! Fiction I like is unassailable!"

Your whole contribution to this thread disingenuous at best. I'd call trolling, but I think we have Hanlon's razor at work here.

Melissia wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:I don't think anyone is arguing the martial prowess (which includes skill, experience, agility, etc) of 40k women

That's pretty much exactly what was being argued by a couple posters in this thread.

Hmm, well not me and I don't think Vlad either.

To be fair, I can't speak for him, but from what I've read it seems like we simply disagree with your assessment of a) strength not being a factor in combat abilities whatsoever and b) that women and men in 40k are equal, physically.

Unless that's not what you're saying. If not, then I apologise for the confusion and would like to ask that you restate what you were trying to say.

DoW

Vladsimpaler wrote:
A man is also likely (on average) to be more agile and faster then a woman. Even with the implants. And again, you're gonna have to get rid of breasts to fit in armor. The intense amount of testosterone and other drugs going into making a woman an Astartes would just be better used on a man in the first place.

Vlad, it might amuse you to learn that I've seen a five foot Israeli woman soldier kick the asses of not one, but two men in excess of 250 pounds and both were trained and experienced hand to hand combatants. Do not assume that testosterone makes you a better fighter.

Frazzled wrote:Meh. Its easy.
1) Admech from system BLAH BLAH come across some STC templates. I their thousand year proofing (look up the lightning) they find this STC actually works on women of a specific genetic subgroup. Bang shebam ERA.

2) The admech have been busy little beavers in league with the Adeptus Custodes, who are worried that their genetic improvement replications will fade over time. As part of their experiements to "fix" the process they focus on more stable female genes, creating AC female troopers comparable to marines. They, the Inquisition, (or even the Council if we want to be more legal about it) decide to develop a chapter styled force, which like the Nuns with Guns are much more loyal and less apt to "just go off and sulk or eat a planet's population." Woop Delioop Title IX.

3) In line with #3 above, they INSERT GOTHIC ORGANIZATION HERE decide to test this procedure on SOB volunteers. Twice the Fleur De Lis, Twice the 'tude! They could even be allied with the admech, sort of a Skitarii marine equivalent (lots of opportunities for conversions with all the best kit). After all, when it comes to obeying the Insquition's rules or The Big Book of Blue Marines, Honey badger, er Admech don't give a gak.

FRAZZ! Thank you for being the first person to actually come up with an answer to the question. Gold Star!

Vladsimpaler wrote:
The problem is that if you want to avoid amonhrrea, you then need to administer progesterone, which in turn will increase estrogen which is not a good thing for a super soldier. So yes you can avoid the effects of not having menstruation, but then you're gonna have a soldier who is menstruating and increasing its estrogen when in reality you want testosterone.

What you actually want is a myostatin inhibitor, not testosterone. Use that and neither estrogen nor testosterone are a factor in strength increase and muscle growth at that point.



You see here skinned mice who have a defective myostatin gene. The mouse on the far right was further enhanced by follistatin treatments.



Belgian Blue Cattle have two linked traits, they can produce neither myostatin nor it's receptors correctly.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Something about it only being able to work with a man's chromosomes. That's it. It goes back as far as Rogue Trader, and is one of the few parts of the background that actually hasn't changed.

Actually thier excuse was 'hormones'. Which, as we've all seen, does not hold water.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:Roleplaying games are an even more ludicrous source, since their mechanics have been artificially balanced between sexes for marketing/political correctness purposes for almost thirty years, and also that player characters are intentionally supposed to represent exceptional individuals, and not the average joes of any given universe.

And this is different from Space Marines.... HOW?

Vladsimpaler wrote:

ContemplativeSphinx wrote:But the majority of men i know in real life aren't Imperial navy cadets.

Yeah, and the majority of women you know in real life aren't Adeptus Arbites. Go figure.

This pretty much sums up that part of this discussion:

If I were to say that the 145 lb (fight weight, walks around 155-160) female mixed martial artist Cristiane Santos, the currently best and strongest female at that weight, could beat up a fair number of men, that would be correct.
BTW, this is what your Sisters of Battle will actually look like, lol.


However, it would be incorrect to say that because Cristiane Santos can beat up a fair number of men, that every 145 pound woman can beat up a fair number of men.

It would also be incorrect to say that Cristiane Santos is even the equal of men at 145 lbs, because it is generally accepted that the top male fighters at the 145lb weight class would be significantly stronger than her.

This is the analogy that a lot of people are trying to use. "Well, this one book had this chick in it and she was bad ass!" That's irrelevant. Perhaps she is an exceptional specimen, highly trained and/or genetically blessed (or, a steroid user like Santos). That's one character amongst a bajillion, and even if her being a bad ass, it isn't even evidence that she's better, or the equal of the best men similar to her size. That's why you can't use these single characters as "evidence". They don't prove anything. I told you it was an impossible thing to prove. It might seem like it makes things convenient for my argument that there's no way to prove it wrong. I'll let you in on something. I 'm a pretty smart guy, and there's a reason I chose this argument. Because it's right. Or, at least, most likely to be right, and impossible to prove wrong, so I cut the margin of error to a minimum by doing some deductive reasoning. It's a neat trick, that deductive reasoning stuff. I suggest people give it a shot. Yes, there are some women who are as good as some men. And then there will always be men who are bigger and stronger than those "some" women. And ultimately, the average will weight in favor of the males, all things the same (or, ceteris paribus, for any economists here). There's examples in the 40K fluff that say there are some tough women. There are no examples that say all women are as tough and strong as men, which is not true in real life, so by omission in 40K fluff defaults to reality, not the other way around, or to some idealized conceptualization. After all, literature is written with its audience in mind. If a work (or in this case many, many works) leaves something up to the assumption of the reader, then it will be based on the realistic expectations of that reader based on their understanding of contextual matters.

I understand that the reality of the physiological differences between men and women upsets the sensibilities of certain people. I guess that's tough luck. It has to be a difficult life to argue against proven science. But if the creationists can keep it up strong, I'm sure you can too. Nobody said an opinion had to be logical, so there's no reason yours has to.

If I am accepting that as part of the setting there are human beings stomping around in powered armour toting laser cannons, who have been transformed into walking war machines using some arcane science, I am already suspending my disbelief to a pretty significant extent - therefore imaging that some of them could have started out as normal human women requires no effort.

In other words, I've never had a problem with the idea of female Space Marines. If anything I find the prohibition to be a part of the fluff that's mystifying even by 40K standards when you consider some of the craziness flying about. I'd find it highly amusing if a new Space Marine Codex just casually mentioned female Astartes as if they had always been part of the background and then moved on.

Note: I'm just musing; I fully expect that none of the last sentence will happen, ever.

BaronIveagh wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:
A man is also likely (on average) to be more agile and faster then a woman. Even with the implants. And again, you're gonna have to get rid of breasts to fit in armor. The intense amount of testosterone and other drugs going into making a woman an Astartes would just be better used on a man in the first place.

Vlad, it might amuse you to learn that I've seen a five foot Israeli woman soldier kick the asses of not one, but two men in excess of 250 pounds and both were trained and experienced hand to hand combatants. Do not assume that testosterone makes you a better fighter.

It might also amuse you to learn that exceptions don't prove anything. Thanks for playing though; we've already gone over this.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
The problem is that if you want to avoid amonhrrea, you then need to administer progesterone, which in turn will increase estrogen which is not a good thing for a super soldier. So yes you can avoid the effects of not having menstruation, but then you're gonna have a soldier who is menstruating and increasing its estrogen when in reality you want testosterone.

What you actually want is a myostatin inhibitor, not testosterone. Use that and neither estrogen nor testosterone are a factor in strength increase and muscle growth at that point.

Well obviously you want a myostatin inhibitor, that's what the drugs in the Space Marine are. That's all of the AAS and growth hormone, except it's a futuristic version I'm sure. Also, I don't know enough about AAS to tell you what an increased amount of estrogen would do to someone who already has a very large amount of stuff in their system, but I feel like it's not necessarily a good thing.
And also progesterone is used to treat amonhrea, which is definitely not a myostatin inhibitor. So female Marines are gonna need 1 more drug to make sure that they're even in workable condition, since lack of it causes increased cortisol.

:edit: I must be a fast poster, you didn't get to edit in your pics haha
I've already seen them, they are quite interesting. Too bad that most people born with a myostatin deficiency die young, they're the closest to superhuman you can get.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Something about it only being able to work with a man's chromosomes. That's it. It goes back as far as Rogue Trader, and is one of the few parts of the background that actually hasn't changed.

Actually thier excuse was 'hormones'. Which, as we've all seen, does not hold water.

Deductive reasoning would show that it's the Y chromosome (male) that the zygotes or whatever link to, since that's the only thing women lack that men still have.

Kind Regards,
Vladsimpaler

Veteran Sergeant wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:

ContemplativeSphinx wrote:But the majority of men i know in real life aren't Imperial navy cadets.

Yeah, and the majority of women you know in real life aren't Adeptus Arbites. Go figure.

This pretty much sums up that part of this discussion:

If I were to say that the 145 lb (fight weight, walks around 155-160) female mixed martial artist Cristiane Santos, the currently best and strongest female at that weight, could beat up a fair number of men, that would be correct.
BTW, this is what your Sisters of Battle will actually look like, lol.


However, it would be incorrect to say that because Cristiane Santos can beat up a fair number of men, that every 145 pound woman can beat up a fair number of men.

It would also be incorrect to say that Cristiane Santos is even the equal of men at 145 lbs, because it is generally accepted that the top male fighters at the 145lb weight class would be significantly stronger than her.

This is the analogy that a lot of people are trying to use. "Well, this one book had this chick in it and she was bad ass!" That's irrelevant. Perhaps she is an exceptional specimen, highly trained and/or genetically blessed (or, a steroid user like Santos). That's one character amongst a bajillion, and even if her being a bad ass, it isn't even evidence that she's better, or the equal of the best men similar to her size. That's why you can't use these single characters as "evidence". They don't prove anything.

Pause this for a moment. You, ironically, are completely ignoring fluff, in this case. Because SM are stated to expressly look for those 'one in a bajillion' people to recruit to be space marines. So arguing 'well they're super rare!' does not mean anything in this case.

Vladsimpaler wrote:Different strokes for different folks, I find "forced" characters (especially fighter women) to be cliche and boring. Especially ones that somehow just go around beat up people. It's lazy writing.

Space Marines, as a whole, are lazy writing and forced, cliche, and boring cahracters. So I find this objection rather peculiar.

DogOfWar wrote:Unless that's not what you're saying. If not, then I apologise for the confusion and would like to ask that you restate what you were trying to say.

In essence, I'm saying the following:

-- GW's restriction of SM only being male makes no sense from a scientific standpoint, but what makes even less sense is the nerdrage that goes in to threads like these.

-- Despite assertions to the contrary, women in 40k are equally competent to men in terms of being able to fight. Especially amongst unaugmented human soldiers on an actual battlefield (muscle strength isn't actually that important when you have a gun, after all).

-- If there were such things as female Space Marines, the chemical diet and hormonal treatment that the females get would render the entire discussion on prowess pointless because it would change how the females developed during their formative years.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
It might also amuse you to learn that exceptions don't prove anything. Thanks for playing though; we've already gone over this.

Pick a fight with a random one. Fifty to one you eat dirt.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Well obviously you want a myostatin inhibitor, that's what the drugs in the Space Marine are. That's all of the AAS and growth hormone, except it's a futuristic version I'm sure.

Futuristic or not, they make the testosterone irreverent.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Deductive logic would show that it's the Y chromosome (male) that the zygots or whatever link to.

Deductive logic would show that it's just that GW's writers had no idea what they were talking about and wanted an excuse to not have SM women because their attempts to make minis of them were horrific.

BaronIveagh wrote:Pause this for a moment. You, ironically, are completely ignoring fluff, in this case. Because SM are stated to expressly look for those 'one in a bajillion' people to recruit to be space marines. So arguing 'well they're super rare!' does not mean anything in this case.

If that post went that far over your head, then I don't know of any simpler, or easier way to break it down for you. You so completely missed the point of an idea reduced to Barney Style, that the only thing left below it is Teletubbies style, and that just involves babbling nonsensically and a sun with a baby's face.

BaronIveagh wrote:
Pause this for a moment. You, ironically, are completely ignoring fluff, in this case. Because SM are stated to expressly look for those 'one in a bajillion' people to recruit to be space marines. So arguing 'well they're super rare!' does not mean anything in this case.

Your reasoning is so incoherent that it borders on nonsensical. The argument is that exceptional women can be better than average men, but exceptional women are still bested by exceptional men (let's be clear, we're talking just pure physical terms here). So, no, he's not ignoring fluff at all and you just further supported his argument. If it takes an exceptional male physical specimen to make a Space Marine, then even an exceptional female is not up to par.

I think I'm going to go and...bow out of this thread and return to my xenos...

BaronIveagh wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:
It might also amuse you to learn that exceptions don't prove anything. Thanks for playing though; we've already gone over this.

Pick a fight with a random one. Fifty to one you eat dirt.

Strike 2.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Well obviously you want a myostatin inhibitor, that's what the drugs in the Space Marine are. That's all of the AAS and growth hormone, except it's a futuristic version I'm sure.

Futuristic or not, they make the testosterone irreverent.

Not entirely, it's still important for development. And you ignored me talking about progesterone, conveniently just like Melissia. I'm beginning to sense a pattern

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Deductive logic would show that it's the Y chromosome (male) that the zygots or whatever link to.

Deductive logic would show that it's just that GW's writers had no idea what they were talking about.

Well no durr, you have 8 foot soldiers in tank armor. You have tons of unrealistic crud in 40k. But for some reason, female marines is the point of contention? Guess what, it's all fiction. And this is part of the fiction. You'll just have to deal with it, especially since it's one of those pieces of background that is not gonna change.

Kind Regards,
Vladsimpaler

Vladsimpaler wrote:[
Well no durr, you have 8 foot soldiers in tank armor. You have tons of unrealistic crud in 40k. But for some reason, female marines is the point of contention? Guess what, it's all fiction. And this is part of the fiction. You'll just have to deal with it, especially since it's one of those pieces of background that is not gonna change.

Kind Regards,
Vladsimpaler

So in then end, despite all your tries to give some vague justification your whole case boils down to...No reason really.

Melissia wrote:In essence, I'm saying the following:

-- GW's restriction of SM only being male makes no sense from a scientific standpoint, but what makes even less sense is the nerdrage that goes in to threads like these.

Surely you're including your own nerdrage at the canonical refutation of the idea of female Space Marines.

However, it seems disingenuous to claim that the science of 40K makes no sense if you've been shown to be arguing against real world science, obviously unsuccessfully. Besides, if it's 40K science, and it doesn't make any sense, but still has to be accepted as true in the universe of 40K, then it's irrelevant. You don't get to have it both ways. You can either argue all of the science or all of the fluff, but you don't get to cherry pick the parts that work for your argument.

Well, I take that back. You do. But that's probably because you're being disingenuous, like usual.

-- Despite assertions to the contrary, women in 40k are equally competent to men in terms of being able to fight.

Some women compared to some men in the absence of proof that all women are the equal of all men, or even that those some women are the equal of all men.

(muscle strength isn't actually that important when you have a gun, after all).

Categorically and unequivocally wrong. It's actually wrong to say that muscle strength isn't even important when you have a gun because the ability to carry and use the gun under extreme fatigue is important, especially in protracted engagements and deployments. So, even though, superficially, it would seem like so long as you possess the sufficient minimum arm strength to lift the gun after being at rest, and the sufficient finger strength to manipulate the trigger, the truth of the matter is that nearly everything in a combat scenario is going to be done with ever-increasing levels of fatigue. Of course, acknowledging this is the difference between someone who knows what they are talking about, and someone whose combat experience stems from holding a controller, rolling dice, or at best having gone to the shooting range a few times.

Melissia wrote:]muscle strength isn't actually that important when you have a gun, after all

I've already countered this point. It's completely relevant, as the ability to carry more gear further and faster (and still have the stamina left to fight at the end of it all) is very important in a soldier. If a man's extra strength means he can carry an extra four lasgun cells, two more frag grenades and isn't as exhausted by having marched thirty miles in heavy body armour, he is the more effective soldier.

If there were such things as female Space Marines, the chemical diet and hormonal treatment that the females get would render the entire discussion on prowess pointless because it would change how the females developed during their formative years.

And would give you a woman who wouldn't be in the slightest feminine.

Putting geneseed in a woman (if it worked) might give you something that performed like a Marine, but it sure wouldn't look like a lady.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:If that post went that far over your head, then I don't know of any simpler, or easier way to break it down for you. You so completely missed the point of an idea reduced to Barney Style, that the only thing left below it is Teletubbies style, and that just involves babbling nonsensically and a sun with a baby's face.

No, it didn't go over my head, I just ignored the parts that you presented nothing but supposition for.

BTW: have you ever have to carry a guy to the doc because some native woman did a pretty good job of slitting your buddy from balls to brisket?

If not, take my advice: women are just as deadly as men in hand to hand combat, and underestimating them because they're women is a good way to get laid out on a slab.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Well no durr, you have 8 foot soldiers in tank armor. You have tons of unrealistic crud in 40k. But for some reason, female marines is the point of contention? Guess what, it's all fiction. And this is part of the fiction. You'll just have to deal with it, especially since it's one of those pieces of background that is not gonna change.

That does essentially seem to be the primary point of contention.

If it is all fiction (as GW hasn't really done its due diligence in basic biology. heck, the folks who came up with the T-Virus in Resident Evil/Biohazard at least tried to piggyback off some results in virology/neurology) - then quite frankly anything is possible.

The reason why it wont happen then is a very real world/market driven one.

Like it or not - WH40K is geared toward men of a certain socio-economic background living in circumstances that allow for the amount of leisure time and possessing the necessary amount of disposable income to engage in it.

That "slice of the market" will not include women. Frankly because Women Wargamers are a rarer breed than Women Roleplayers or Women Video Gamers.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:Surely you're including your own nerdrage at the canonical refutation of the idea of female Space Marines.

I've never stated any intention to make said chapter, or even really stated any particular like in relation to the subject. So that's a rather trollish thing to say, methinks.

As for the rest of your post, when people become so offended that they start throwing insults around, I do try to not pay much attention.

I've already countered this point. It's completely relevant, as the ability to carry more gear further and faster (and still have the stamina left to fight at the end of it all) is very important in a soldier. If a man's extra strength means he can carry an extra four lasgun cells, two more frag grenades and isn't as exhausted by having marched thirty miles in heavy body armour, he is the more effective soldier.

Plus, in 40k, everything ends up in CC, always.

Hunterindarkness wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:[
Well no durr, you have 8 foot soldiers in tank armor. You have tons of unrealistic crud in 40k. But for some reason, female marines is the point of contention? Guess what, it's all fiction. And this is part of the fiction. You'll just have to deal with it, especially since it's one of those pieces of background that is not gonna change.

Kind Regards,
Vladsimpaler

So in then end, despite all your tries to give some vague justification your whole case boils down to...No reason really.

Lol, your weak-ass arguments are all based in opinion and mean nothing when my entire argument is backed by a piece of background that has been there since the game began.


Kind Regards,
Vladsimpaler

MarcoSkoll wrote: If a man's extra strength means he can carry an extra four lasgun cells, two more frag grenades and isn't as exhausted by having marched thirty miles in heavy body armour, he is the more effective soldier.

Which itself isn't actually necessarily proven by the facts-- as far as endurance goes, what I've read from Israeli research on the issue has shown that when using proper training technique and properly fitting clothing and armor, female soldiers aren't really lacking in endurance, but rather maximum capable strength. A lot of the problems that modern armies are having is being found to be linked more to them giving the female soldiers inferior, improperly fitting uniforms and armor which was designed for men, and training exercises which are designed with only men in mind.

And when you're taking power armor in to the equation, it's especially less important as fatigue becomes far less of an issue.

MarcoSkoll wrote:Putting geneseed in a woman (if it worked) might give you something that performed like a Marine, but it sure wouldn't look like a lady.

Isn't that what I just said?

I was a United States Marine, in an infantry company for much of it at that (and an additional amount of time weapons instructing, and then teaching weapons instructors). I was in for ten years, all in years that start with 2. I'll let you do the math on how many wars that means I served through. That's not to brag; it's just to give you an idea of my experience so you can ask more relevant and effective questions.

But you're still not offering anything relevant or useful. So one native woman sliced one idiot from balls to brisket. Okay. I mean, I can't counter that by walking from here to the beach and beating the absolute crap out of every woman I meet just to give you some anecdotal evidence to the contrary, lol. Well, I guess I could, but that seems a bit ungentlemanly and liable to lead to prosecution.

Vladsimpaler wrote:

Lol, your weak-ass arguments are all based in opinion and mean nothing

Funny I was thinking the very thing about your sad little arguments.

Vladsimpaler wrote: my entire argument is backed by a piece of background that has been there since the game began.

No. Your arument was based off bull that hass been shown to be wrong, it was based off false pudo science, and a clear lack of understanding both what women can do, have done, how they function in a military unit and an over all hand waving of "Oh men can do that better" even when shown some things they simply can not.

It was only afteryou kept being proven wrong that your threw up your hands and cried "well its always been that way" which avoids the very fact that the way it has always been is both Arbitrary and complete BS.

Which would mean that you are a trained marine and they are untrained civies? not really a fair contest of strength and combat ability is it?

Nom