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.
Wanting female space marines could be for many reasons. But to act like one of them isn't political is just as myopic. Where was the outrage and roar for inclusion 10 years ago?
The main thing that scares me is the absolute detachment from reality that some people seem to have. In life human males are stronger than human females. It is not just muscle mass. Men are built by biology to fight and hunt. There is a reason why sports are divided by sex. There is a reason why armies throughout history have been mostly male. And it is not because of "i hate girls".
Space Marines aren't human so "biology" doesn't apply and the majority of the Imperium's military organisations are mixed so there goes that argument.
Now 40k is a fictional universe, we all know this. So not all the rules of reality apply. But 40k, like most science fiction works when we have basis of comparison in our real world. There are very good reasons in game why space marines are male only. And once more, it isn't about "i hate girls". Well, for some it is I would guess. To paint everyone of that view point as the same as the he-man woman haters squad is just as bad as any bigotry. It only shows how small your perception really is.
Didn't say all people, just the majority of anti female-SM arguments come from sexist reasons like "women are weaker than men". As for your very good reasons, what would they be exactly? Biology? It's the future and genetic manipulation is common. Tradition? Only one of the segregated armies has any real explanation as to why it is segregated (SoB).
But I do have a question that pro female marine fans have never answered on this forum. WHY do you want female space marines? There is a faction of female warriors already in the game. And while GW has historically not been kind to that faction, things are changing. Inclusion for inclusions sake is not a real reason. Is it about forcing your morality on others for a fleeting feeling of power? Is it to signal your morality? is it to take things from others you find to be less than yourself? I seriously cannot think of a decent reason to do this and find at times the above examples to be true. But my observations are biased.
If you don't think there's been answers to that question, you haven't been reading the thread chief. Here's a few:
Adding female SM to the range would hopefully reduce toxic behaviour towards those who already make their SM female.
It would look cool.
The Imperium isn't a sexist place, so why are SM not allowed to be female?
Cawl made the Primaris changes so why can't he also find a way to make female SM?
SoB aren't equal to SM in any way regarding market presence, hell it took nearly 30 years to update the bloody model line. And are you seriously going to stand there and say that women should be happy that the only faction in the game that represents them is characterised by its religious zealotry and being dumped on by the writers for about 30 years? It's not inclusion for inclusions sake, it's inclusion because there is a serious problem of sexism and harassment of women in this hobby. Normalising the presence of women within the hobby by putting them in the flagship faction would hopefully help to reduce this issue. The only people in this hobby that I consider less than myself are the scumbags who send death threats to hobbyists for making female SM.
I would be 100% ok with sisters of battle being just as powerful as the marines in lore. And that is perhaps what people should be pushing for.
SoB aren't and should not be SM. They are fine as they are as a distinct faction.
On a side note, before I am called a number of names and my intentions are called out to be nefarious, I shall give you a tiny bit of personal history. I have a wife and a mother that I love more than any man. I in no way think that females are worth less than males. Perhaps there are good reasons why people do not want female marines. Just as I assume there are good reasons for people to want them.
When someone comes up with a reason that doesn't put a fictional setting above real people, isn't sexist nonsense, and isn't just "I don't want politics", then I'll agree that there are good reasons for not adding female SM.
You are right. It is fantasy. Or sci fi rather. And yes, the space marines are AUGMENTED humans. Well, it could be argued what exactly a human is. The idea is they are the evolution of humanity in the direction of a meat train with a sledgehammer. They are not xenos. That being said. Yes, in a fictional setting rules can be bent. But how would you think if in 40k, all humans were purple? There is a general baseline to all sci fi, and that baseline is almost always humans shared perception of reality. And in that reality, men are better hunters and fighters. In the animal and insect world this is not always the case. But it is with humans.
No one said that sisters should be marines. Well, perhaps someone did, but it was not me. I said, that perhaps the Sisters should have a bigger share of the spotlight and be as effective as a faction as marines. And I am totally ok with that. You should be to.
So you want female space marines because, politics. Gotcha. I have seen a lot of that. And perhaps that is a good thing. I am opposed to it because of all the reasons seen on this thread. On both sides.
But to say that a faction, that is the unapologetic face of a nightmare regime based off of hatred and fear and total domination of the individual. The imperium is the worst parts of extremist governments on earth. And you think there should be female marines because "equality" or "inclusion" is just silly. You are playing the bad guys. No matter how GW pushes SM, in the lore they are almost as bad as chaos. And in ways worse. Also, the Imperium does not discriminate............lol chief, I think you need to read more.
Table wrote: Wanting female space marines could be for many reasons. But to act like one of them isn't political is just as myopic. Where was the outrage and roar for inclusion 10 years ago? The main thing that scares me is the absolute detachment from reality that some people seem to have. In life human males are stronger than human females. It is not just muscle mass. Men are built by biology to fight and hunt. There is a reason why sports are divided by sex. There is a reason why armies throughout history have been mostly male. And it is not because of "i hate girls".
Now 40k is a fictional universe, we all know this. So not all the rules of reality apply. But 40k, like most science fiction works when we have basis of comparison in our real world. There are very good reasons in game why space marines are male only. And once more, it isn't about "i hate girls". Well, for some it is I would guess. To paint everyone of that view point as the same as the he-man woman haters squad is just as bad as any bigotry. It only shows how small your perception really is.
But I do have a question that pro female marine fans have never answered on this forum. WHY do you want female space marines? There is a faction of female warriors already in the game. And while GW has historically not been kind to that faction, things are changing. Inclusion for inclusions sake is not a real reason. Is it about forcing your morality on others for a fleeting feeling of power? Is it to signal your morality? is it to take things from others you find to be less than yourself? I seriously cannot think of a decent reason to do this and find at times the above examples to be true. But my observations are biased. So if you would kindly illuminate your reasons so I can adjust my views accordingly.
I would be 100% ok with sisters of battle being just as powerful as the marines in lore. And that is perhaps what people should be pushing for.
On a side note, before I am called a number of names and my intentions are called out to be nefarious, I shall give you a tiny bit of personal history. I have a wife and a mother that I love more than any man. I in no way think that females are worth less than males. Perhaps there are good reasons why people do not want female marines. Just as I assume there are good reasons for people to want them.
You're an American right? As an American, we are taught certain principles throughout our life, whether it be by our parents, our teachers, our mentors, our friends, or other close acquaintances. Those principles are very simple, ranging from judicial ones, to more individual ones. Freedom to express, freedom to defend yourself, and your loved ones. Right to be judged as an equal amongst peers. Then ones that are not clearly defined by our code of law, but taught to every youth on this cherished land as far as I know; such as: if you value your freedoms, it would be wise to respect those same freedoms in all other individuals, regardless of origin, of faith, of upbringing. Part of that is respect, part of it is preservation of dignity, for yourself, and for others. The ones who are found in evidence based court to have violated that dignity, and our code of law, have actively forfeited those rights.
Then there are some rights that are not in the American front consciousness yet. But have been nodded at, and theorized in some of the most hallowed documents in human history. The pursuit of happiness, and freedom of choice. Freedom of Choice.
As a freedom loving individual, if you ever say to me you can choose between having one option, or more, I will always choose to have more options. Only recently in the past years, through personal growth, have I come to realize how valuable the pursuit of happiness, and freedom of choice have become to me as an individual, how much I value those freedoms in those I love, and due to events over the past decade; how fragile those freedoms can be for us Americans.
If you give me an option, and say to me: "You can either not have a gun, or you can have a gun and not need to use it." I will always choose the more option.
If you say to me: "You can have one megacorporation and have your stuff delivered super-fast, or you can have a ton of small companies that fight each other and inadvertently promote fairness." I will always choose the more option.
If you say to me: "You cannot have abortions and same-sex marriage, or you can have both, and you need not practice either." I will always choose the more option.
Regardless of personal interest in having female space marines, if you give me an option, and say to me: "We can just have male space marines, or we can have both male and female space marines, and you can just make your army however you like to." I will always choose the more option.
For me, personal preference has a little to do with it. I took up 40K as a hobby when Space Marines were all male. I still have all male space marines. My vostroyans, death korps, and tau have always been all male. I'll most likely keep most of them all male. But on moral principle, if you say to me, you can either have one freedom, or more freedoms. I will always choose more.
Being an American has little to do with this. There is a entire world out there. We are not the center of it. I am not going wax poetic on morality and personal ethics. That is not why we are here.
I do not play marines, well, I did. But not the imperial flavor. I played the good guys.
There is no rule saying that you cannot model your space marines as female. Have at it. Its non sequitur, but there is space for that conversation. A game of 40k can be accepted or denied for almost any reason. No one should be hassling any other player for modeling choices. If it bothers them then do not accept the game. We can agree on this point.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cybtroll wrote: I just want to add a point about "biology" because it always get me, and I think I finally found a way to express that:
WOMEN ARE STRONGER THAN MAN.
At least for all that is important to become (note carefully: not to be) a Space Marine. Henceforth, their exclusion actively damage the setting making it more implausible than what will be if the opposite would be true.
To specify better: man are bigger and stronger than women? Irrelevant: Marine are posthuman bulkhead and we have clear example (Blood Angel) of weaklings being perfectly fine after the transformation. So it is definitely clear that it doesn't matter how physically you have before.
But then, what about the transformation process itself?
It is a bombardment of hormones and therapies that can kill any candidate, right?
Guess what gender is more resilient to changes, already used to experience hormonal imbalances and biologically suited to the teally extreme changes required to give birth?
Spoiler alert: not men, for sure.
So, if you think men are better candidates to be Space Marine, maybe you may aspire to be the Emperor... but you aren't cut to be the Emperor's Genetist for sure.
100% incorrect. Well, I am not going to engage on the idea that females are better than males or the contrast. Males, in reality, are hunters and genetically better fighters. They can also not give birth. Who is better? Both are needed. Both should be treated as equals. Its not that all of biology is equal, it most certainly is not. Its about TREATING everyone as an equal.
But the part you are incorrect about is that space marines are weaklings or could be before the transformation. Everything in the lore says the exact opposite. Your headcanon has no bearing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/10 19:18:17
Hecaton, you really are just ranting now about how we are wrong because we are and you know best. It’s sad. But as you are the one always demand to see the evidence of things, then please show me any evidence that anyone’s desire for female marines is in anyway sexual?
P.S. you can’t because their is none because you have made that little idea up. So stop.
Table wrote: Wanting female space marines could be for many reasons. But to act like one of them isn't political is just as myopic. Where was the outrage and roar for inclusion 10 years ago? The main thing that scares me is the absolute detachment from reality that some people seem to have. In life human males are stronger than human females. It is not just muscle mass. Men are built by biology to fight and hunt. There is a reason why sports are divided by sex. There is a reason why armies throughout history have been mostly male. And it is not because of "i hate girls".
Now 40k is a fictional universe, we all know this. So not all the rules of reality apply. But 40k, like most science fiction works when we have basis of comparison in our real world. There are very good reasons in game why space marines are male only. And once more, it isn't about "i hate girls". Well, for some it is I would guess. To paint everyone of that view point as the same as the he-man woman haters squad is just as bad as any bigotry. It only shows how small your perception really is.
But I do have a question that pro female marine fans have never answered on this forum. WHY do you want female space marines? There is a faction of female warriors already in the game. And while GW has historically not been kind to that faction, things are changing. Inclusion for inclusions sake is not a real reason. Is it about forcing your morality on others for a fleeting feeling of power? Is it to signal your morality? is it to take things from others you find to be less than yourself? I seriously cannot think of a decent reason to do this and find at times the above examples to be true. But my observations are biased. So if you would kindly illuminate your reasons so I can adjust my views accordingly.
I would be 100% ok with sisters of battle being just as powerful as the marines in lore. And that is perhaps what people should be pushing for.
On a side note, before I am called a number of names and my intentions are called out to be nefarious, I shall give you a tiny bit of personal history. I have a wife and a mother that I love more than any man. I in no way think that females are worth less than males. Perhaps there are good reasons why people do not want female marines. Just as I assume there are good reasons for people to want them.
You're an American right? As an American, we are taught certain principles throughout our life, whether it be by our parents, our teachers, our mentors, our friends, or other close acquaintances. Those principles are very simple, ranging from judicial ones, to more individual ones. Freedom to express, freedom to defend yourself, and your loved ones. Right to be judged as an equal amongst peers. Then ones that are not clearly defined by our code of law, but taught to every youth on this cherished land as far as I know; such as: if you value your freedoms, it would be wise to respect those same freedoms in all other individuals, regardless of origin, of faith, of upbringing. Part of that is respect, part of it is preservation of dignity, for yourself, and for others. The ones who are found in evidence based court to have violated that dignity, and our code of law, have actively forfeited those rights.
Then there are some rights that are not in the American front consciousness yet. But have been nodded at, and theorized in some of the most hallowed documents in human history. The pursuit of happiness, and freedom of choice. Freedom of Choice.
As a freedom loving individual, if you ever say to me you can choose between having one option, or more, I will always choose to have more options. Only recently in the past years, through personal growth, have I come to realize how valuable the pursuit of happiness, and freedom of choice have become to me as an individual, how much I value those freedoms in those I love, and due to events over the past decade; how fragile those freedoms can be for us Americans.
If you give me an option, and say to me: "You can either not have a gun, or you can have a gun and not need to use it." I will always choose the more option.
If you say to me: "You can have one megacorporation and have your stuff delivered super-fast, or you can have a ton of small companies that fight each other and inadvertently promote fairness." I will always choose the more option.
If you say to me: "You cannot have abortions and same-sex marriage, or you can have both, and you need not practice either." I will always choose the more option.
Regardless of personal interest in having female space marines, if you give me an option, and say to me: "We can just have male space marines, or we can have both male and female space marines, and you can just make your army however you like to." I will always choose the more option.
For me, personal preference has a little to do with it. I took up 40K as a hobby when Space Marines were all male. I still have all male space marines. My vostroyans, death korps, and tau have always been all male. I'll most likely keep most of them all male. But on moral principle, if you say to me, you can either have one freedom, or more freedoms. I will always choose more.
Being an American has little to do with this. There is a entire world out there. We are not the center of it. I am not going wax poetic on morality and personal ethics. That is not why we are here.
I do not play marines, well, I did. But not the imperial flavor. I played the good guys.
There is no rule saying that you cannot model your space marines as female. Have at it. Its non sequitur, but there is space for that conversation. A game of 40k can be accepted or denied for almost any reason. No one should be hassling any other player for modeling choices. If it bothers them then do not accept the game. We can agree on this point.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cybtroll wrote: I just want to add a point about "biology" because it always get me, and I think I finally found a way to express that:
WOMEN ARE STRONGER THAN MAN.
At least for all that is important to become (note carefully: not to be) a Space Marine. Henceforth, their exclusion actively damage the setting making it more implausible than what will be if the opposite would be true.
To specify better: man are bigger and stronger than women? Irrelevant: Marine are posthuman bulkhead and we have clear example (Blood Angel) of weaklings being perfectly fine after the transformation. So it is definitely clear that it doesn't matter how physically you have before.
But then, what about the transformation process itself?
It is a bombardment of hormones and therapies that can kill any candidate, right?
Guess what gender is more resilient to changes, already used to experience hormonal imbalances and biologically suited to the teally extreme changes required to give birth?
Spoiler alert: not men, for sure.
So, if you think men are better candidates to be Space Marine, maybe you may aspire to be the Emperor... but you aren't cut to be the Emperor's Genetist for sure.
100% incorrect. Well, I am not going to engage on the idea that females are better than males or the contrast. Males, in reality, are hunters and genetically better fighters. They can also not give birth. Who is better? Both are needed. Both should be treated as equals. Its not that all of biology is equal, it most certainly is not. Its about TREATING everyone as an equal.
But the part you are incorrect about is that space marines are weaklings or could be before the transformation. Everything in the lore says the exact opposite. Your headcanon has no bearing.
Those fellas from Baal are what I think he was referring too. Famous weak and near death from radiation but still turned into big strapping marines.
Not sure I’df it’s an official GW pic but fits the description pretty well.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/10 19:40:22
Table wrote: [
Wanting female space marines could be for many reasons. But to act like one of them isn't political is just as myopic. Where was the outrage and roar for inclusion 10 years ago?
Right here on Dakka and just as loud as it is now. It's been an ongoing thing for a VERY long time now, as any of Dakka's old guard could tell you.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
You are right. It is fantasy. Or sci fi rather. And yes, the space marines are AUGMENTED humans. Well, it could be argued what exactly a human is. The idea is they are the evolution of humanity in the direction of a meat train with a sledgehammer. They are not xenos. That being said. Yes, in a fictional setting rules can be bent.
Space Marines are augmented so much they are not human, they are ab-human much like Ogryns or Ratlings. The human that is used to make a SM ceases to become a human the moment the first genetic alterations and implants are given.
But how would you think if in 40k, all humans were purple? There is a general baseline to all sci fi, and that baseline is almost always humans shared perception of reality. And in that reality, men are better hunters and fighters. In the animal and insect world this is not always the case. But it is with humans.
In a hunter/gatherer society that doesn't have access to genetic manipulation tech as standard, that might be true. Of course, the Imperium isn't a hunter/gatherer society that lacks access to genetic manipulation tech as standard.
And to parrot a bunch of other posters, purple humans aren't real, women are.
No one said that sisters should be marines. Well, perhaps someone did, but it was not me. I said, that perhaps the Sisters should have a bigger share of the spotlight and be as effective as a faction as marines. And I am totally ok with that. You should be to.
You said they should be the same power level as SM. Here's you saying it:
I would be 100% ok with sisters of battle being just as powerful as the marines in lore
Whoops.
SoB have their own strengths and weaknesses that define them as a faction. SoB wear PA but don't have the strength and toughness of a SM because they are just baseline humans who are buff. Yup, I absolutely agree that SM have too much of the spotlight but at the same time, I also know that they will never lose that spotlight, and pretending otherwise is dumb.
So you want female space marines because, politics. Gotcha. I have seen a lot of that. And perhaps that is a good thing. I am opposed to it because of all the reasons seen on this thread. On both sides.
I want female SM for multiple reasons, allow me to list them:
Spoiler:
1 - I think they look cool.
2 - Sexism and misogyny are huge problems in the hobby, IMO making the flagship faction (that just so happens to be the route cause of most instances of sexism and misogyny) available as both male and female, would do a lot to combat this. If there's no "justification" for the exclusionary behaviour then people aren't likely to agree with exclusionary views.
3 - The only reason that there are no female SM in the first place is maybe because of sales but this might not be true because the source isn't known for their truthfulness.
4 - People are already doing it anyway.
But to say that a faction, that is the unapologetic face of a nightmare regime based off of hatred and fear and total domination of the individual. The imperium is the worst parts of extremist governments on earth. And you think there should be female marines because "equality" or "inclusion" is just silly. You are playing the bad guys. No matter how GW pushes SM, in the lore they are almost as bad as chaos. And in ways worse. Also, the Imperium does not discriminate............lol chief, I think you need to read more.
Show me where I said the Imperium were the "good guys" at any point at all in any of my posts.
Show me where the Imperium is institutionally sexist and actively prevents women from serving in its various military branches.
Have you considered that by introducing female SM there would be an added layer of "grimdark" to the setting? The Imperium doesn't care what organs or body parts you have, get indoctrinated and surgically altered and go kill these aliens meatsack.
But the part you are incorrect about is that space marines are weaklings or could be before the transformation. Everything in the lore says the exact opposite. Your headcanon has no bearing.
Weird because all the Blood Angels recruits are from the radiated wasteland that is Baal. Also, kids are weak. SM aren't made from adults, they're made from children, who are weak.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/10 19:47:09
Andykp wrote: Hecaton, you really are just ranting now about how we are wrong because we are and you know best. It’s sad. But as you are the one always demand to see the evidence of things, then please show me any evidence that anyone’s desire for female marines is in anyway sexual?
P.S. you can’t because their is none because you have made that little idea up. So stop.
It's an opinion I have and I haven't been disabused of it.
Women generally aren't as interested in that kind of power fantasy as men. Moreover, being anything in the Imperium is a gakky power fantasy since the Imperium is so morally bankrupt.
How kind of you to enforce that preference by disallowing it.
I can only imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth that would occur if I insinuated that this opinion must stem from a sexual desire of yours to see women as naturally biologically inclined towards a meek and submissive nature which would never result in them imagining smashing things.
That kind of claim is clearly only a perfectly fine and valid thing coming from the group being oppressed by the goose-stepping legions of orwell's nightmare, the concept of potential tiny plastic heads with feminine features.
"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!"
the_scotsman wrote: How kind of you to enforce that preference by disallowing it.
I'm not enforcing it. I'm saying, however, that putting a r63 power fantasy into 40k wouldn't attract a female playerbase like you say it will. Like I said, though, I don't think that having Astartes as an unironic power fantasy is a good idea to begin with.
the_scotsman wrote: I can only imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth that would occur if I insinuated that this opinion must stem from a sexual desire of yours to see women as naturally biologically inclined towards a meek and submissive nature which would never result in them imagining smashing things.
I mean I know you'd be wrong. I think I'd get over it pretty fast, though. Plenty of my Harlies are female, and I view them as more of a "power fantasy" since they aren't brainwashed goons of a despicable regime.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/10 21:51:23
Andykp wrote: Hecaton, you really are just ranting now about how we are wrong because we are and you know best. It’s sad. But as you are the one always demand to see the evidence of things, then please show me any evidence that anyone’s desire for female marines is in anyway sexual?
P.S. you can’t because their is none because you have made that little idea up. So stop.
It's an opinion I have and I haven't been disabused of it.
So this idea has come from your mind, how interesting.
Team, maybe just stop interacting with someone you know isn't interested in discussing anything. Why waste the effort on someone who's only here to insult you and waste your time?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/10 21:59:14
Table wrote: [
Wanting female space marines could be for many reasons. But to act like one of them isn't political is just as myopic. Where was the outrage and roar for inclusion 10 years ago?
Right here on Dakka and just as loud as it is now. It's been an ongoing thing for a VERY long time now, as any of Dakka's old guard could tell you.
Oh god yes. I have been on Dakka for about 10 years (if you include my time as a lurker) and I have seen more female Space Marine threads than I can remember. The discussions back then were basically the same as they are now and they never change. There was a big female Space Marine thread here when I left for a break a few years ago and now I come back to another one. Feels just like I never left.
Now personally I don't think female Space Marines are necessary (I'd much rather see female guard and Custodes), but the fact that their inclusion would end these stupid discussions that too often degenerate into name-calling and misogyny is a big argument in favor for the addition of female Space Marines.
Also people, please stop bringing biology into the discussion. Not only are a lot of the facts thrown around here false or inaccurate, but the whole question of biology is also completely irrelevant. We are talking about a setting where babies are sculpted into god-like giant killing machines and people can replace all their parts with cybernetics to become flying skulls with mechanical tentacles. This is the 41st Millennium. Biology can be whatever you want.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/10 22:27:50
Andykp wrote: Hecaton, you really are just ranting now about how we are wrong because we are and you know best. It’s sad. But as you are the one always demand to see the evidence of things, then please show me any evidence that anyone’s desire for female marines is in anyway sexual?
P.S. you can’t because their is none because you have made that little idea up. So stop.
It's an opinion I have and I haven't been disabused of it.
So this idea has come from your mind, how interesting.
That’s a weird way of admitting that you made it up with absolutely no evidence whatsoever. Now my own made up opinion that I based on the fact that you keep bringing space marine fetishism up out of nowhere leads me to believe that this is a bit of you projecting yourself on to others than it is about others actually being space marine fetishists.
Automatically Appended Next Post: PS not directed at Andy, just to be clear
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/10 22:40:22
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. -Kurt Vonnegut
Table wrote:You are right. It is fantasy. Or sci fi rather.
To be specific, sci-fantasy.
And yes, the space marines are AUGMENTED humans. Well, it could be argued what exactly a human is. The idea is they are the evolution of humanity in the direction of a meat train with a sledgehammer. They are not xenos. That being said. Yes, in a fictional setting rules can be bent. But how would you think if in 40k, all humans were purple? There is a general baseline to all sci fi, and that baseline is almost always humans shared perception of reality. And in that reality, men are better hunters and fighters. In the animal and insect world this is not always the case. But it is with humans.
Enough to matter for a 7 foot tall killing machine pumped with hormones from childhood to make them a better brainwashed super soldier? I don't think so.
You vastly overestimate the biological different between boys and girls, and even further oversell the idea that Space Marines are only picked form the physically "best" specimens. A Catachan women is going to be a vastly better hunter than a man from Terra. A Baalite boy is an irradiated weakling compared to a Cadian girl. So why do the Imperial Fists recruit from Terra, and the Blood Angels recruit from Baal when their populaces are inferior to others? Maybe it's not all about strength.
I said, that perhaps the Sisters should have a bigger share of the spotlight and be as effective as a faction as marines. And I am totally ok with that. You should be to.
As I've said previously, it's a noble goal - but unrealistic. Why? Because GW won't surrender the dominance that Space Marines have. The Astartes are their flagship faction, and for pretty good reason. Their armour is ungendered, their design simplistic and easily customised, their lore fairly simple to explain and translate, and their product range vast and interchangeable. Space Marines wouldn't be touched by another faction's influence unless the other faction had thousands upon thousands of pounds injected into it.
So you want female space marines because, politics.
And people don't want women Space Marines because politics too. It works both ways - neutrality and status quo are still "political".
But to say that a faction, that is the unapologetic face of a nightmare regime based off of hatred and fear and total domination of the individual. The imperium is the worst parts of extremist governments on earth. And you think there should be female marines because "equality" or "inclusion" is just silly. You are playing the bad guys. No matter how GW pushes SM, in the lore they are almost as bad as chaos. And in ways worse.
Absolutely. But if there's people who want to play Space Marines, why can't they make those Space Marines women?
If we're going to go down the "you shouldn't want to play Space Marines, because they're evil and the bad guys" route, sure. Should we just stop people playing Space Marines? Ban people from playing any non-good faction? I'm not sure how many factions you'd be left with.
As for "equality and inclusion" - well, yeah, because this a real game with real models that real people play in real places. Why shouldn't their real concerns of being represented and included be valid? Who cares if it's for a fictional totalitarian state? Are you saying that people shouldn't get to customise their models with alternate colour schemes, because their the bad guys, and if you do anything with the bad guys, you're a bad person by association? If you play Space Marines, do you forfeit any personal enjoyment from the real world little doll soldiers game?
Also, the Imperium does not discriminate............lol chief, I think you need to read more.
The Imperium *totally* discriminates. But not against anything that we experience, other than class (and class in the Imperium is entirely unlike anything we currently have) - discrimination in the Imperium is against actual *mutants* (like, I'm talking tentacle limbs and psychic powers), outright aliens, and Warp-spawn. Sex is largely irrelevant, and race/ethnicity has no mention. What exactly are you saying the Imperium discriminate on that I missed?
Table wrote:There is no rule saying that you cannot model your space marines as female. Have at it.
Eh, that's not what everyone who says "BUT IT'S NON-CANON" tells me.
The lore is, for some people, law (hehe). It defines their play experience - and when someone breaks that, they tend to get awfully touchy. Hell, a lot of people's first comments against women Space Marines are "but the lore says XYZ", before they pivot to arguing about biological essentialism, or how people who want women Astartes are sexual fetishists. Ultimately, the lore *is* used as a rule against people, and that ammunition should be taken away.
No one should be hassling any other player for modeling choices.
Agreed, and yet that hard rule in 40k canon still exists - that women allegedly cannot be Space Marines.
Well, I am not going to engage on the idea that females are better than males or the contrast. Males, in reality, are hunters and genetically better fighters.
Which one was it again? That you weren't going to engage in a biological discussion, or that you'd fall back on ridiculous bio-essential tropes?
They can also not give birth.
And this is relevant... how?
Its about TREATING everyone as an equal.
Like the Imperial Guard does, right? You know, with a mixed gender force?
Look, I hear a lot of these "the Imperium is sexist"/"the Imperium only cares about having the strongest warriors"/"the Emperor was a massive misogynist" comments, but they all fall apart when you look how Guardsmen are mixed gender. If any faction was the be the most stereotypically "all-male", it would be the Guard - except they're not all-male. They're a mixed gender military, born out of the Imperium's sole drive for war and need for raw bodies on the battlefield. That, to me, speaks far more of the Imperium's evil and moral decay than "hahahaha we don't include women because we're sexist". The Imperium isn't evil because it tries to be. The Imperium is evil because it is utterly dehumanising, utterly reductive of humanity and the spark of life. You're not a man or woman, you're another cog in the astronomically vast wheel, and no-one will mourn you. That is much more evil and horrifying than "we're sexists".
But, that's my opinion.
Iron_Captain wrote:Also people, please stop bringing biology into the discussion. Not only are a lot of the facts thrown around here false or inaccurate, but the whole question of biology is also completely irrelevant. We are talking about a setting where babies are sculpted into god-like giant killing machines and people can replace all their parts with cybernetics to become flying skulls with mechanical tentacles. This is the 41st Millennium. Biology can be whatever you want.
Entirely agreed. Any biological or scientific argument is rendered kinda moot when so much of the setting is completely handwaved and arbitrary. What we're discussing is *why* those arbitraries have to be the way they are.
Iron_Captain wrote: Also people, please stop bringing biology into the discussion. Not only are a lot of the facts thrown around here false or inaccurate, but the whole question of biology is also completely irrelevant. We are talking about a setting where babies are sculpted into god-like giant killing machines and people can replace all their parts with cybernetics to become flying skulls with mechanical tentacles. This is the 41st Millennium. Biology can be whatever you want.
You missed my point then. My point is that it's possible to imagine a theoretical process that would only work on male humans to transform them into Astartes. Not that it *must* be that way.
Hecaton wrote: My point is that it's possible to imagine a theoretical process that would only work on male humans to transform them into Astartes. Not that it *must* be that way.
Possible? Sure. But why would you want to make that arbitrary restriction?
I’m with fezz and Bert on this one. Hecaton has not had anything other than insulting innuendo and loud opinions based on naff all to add to this so I will not engage further. Not blocking though.
Hecaton wrote: My point is that it's possible to imagine a theoretical process that would only work on male humans to transform them into Astartes. Not that it *must* be that way.
Possible? Sure. But why would you want to make that arbitrary restriction?
I can imagine one that only works on rabbits. Or pumpkins. Or…..this is just stupid.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/11 00:09:46
Hecaton wrote: My point is that it's possible to imagine a theoretical process that would only work on male humans to transform them into Astartes. Not that it *must* be that way.
Possible? Sure. But why would you want to make that arbitrary restriction?
I can imagine one that only works on rabbits. Or pumpkins. Or…..this is just stupid.
Exactly. There's a whole load of things we could "imagine", it's theoretically infinite - which ultimately means to say it doesn't matter what you can imagine, when the point is to justify why you've made that creative decision.
I don't know why it's so hard to imagine *real world women* as Space Marines, but it's so much easier to imagine this whole realm of sentient fungi, warp daemons, and skeleton robots.
Gert wrote: Because people seem to think perpetuating real world exclusion in fictional settings is "grimdark".
I mean that's a big part of it, yeah.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Andykp wrote: I can imagine one that only works on rabbits. Or pumpkins. Or…..this is just stupid.
Aight. I demand that GW make it so rabbits can be uplifted into Astartes, and make it canon. With sculpts.
It's obvious to everyone you are just trolling, and are not here to argue in good faith. All of your "attempts" at arguments have been shown to have defeaters. All of your assertions are baseless suppositions. Why do you bother to waste your time on this thread?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Eh, that's not what everyone who says "BUT IT'S NON-CANON" tells me.
The lore is, for some people, law (hehe). It defines their play experience - and when someone breaks that, they tend to get awfully touchy. Hell, a lot of people's first comments against women Space Marines are "but the lore says XYZ", before they pivot to arguing about biological essentialism, or how people who want women Astartes are sexual fetishists. Ultimately, the lore *is* used as a rule against people, and that ammunition should be taken away.
No one should be hassling any other player for modeling choices.
Agreed, and yet that hard rule in 40k canon still exists - that women allegedly cannot be Space Marines.
*points to 'Cursed Founding' Loophole*
Just a reminder, there's a giant founding which had an unknown number of unknown geneseed mutations. 'Works on Girls' would be a lot less extreme than, say 'Ghost Rider Marines' or 'Wolverine Marines' and such a mutation would be completely in keeping with canon.
You missed my point then. My point is that it's possible to imagine a theoretical process that would only work on male humans to transform them into Astartes. Not that it *must* be that way.
But it's actually a lot easier to imagine one that works on both, if you're ideas of 'humans' mesh too closely with reality.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/11 02:27:05
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: It's obvious to everyone you are just trolling, and are not here to argue in good faith. All of your "attempts" at arguments have been shown to have defeaters. All of your assertions are baseless suppositions. Why do you bother to waste your time on this thread?
Been shown to have "defeaters"? WTF do you mean by that? Nah, I've generally been right about the things I've said. When you guys are proven factually incorrect (like about intersex conditions, or the Templar Oaths) you just change the topic and try to pretend you were right all along. The facts are on my side.
The way this hole debate is framed by the most active members of the thread no one can achieve "victory"... Its just about stating in an endless cicle if one OPINION is in favour or against FSM.
Which BTW is quite pointless since its quite obvious that GW has decided to use Sorotitas as the vehicule to increase female representation in 40K.
BaronIveagh wrote:*points to 'Cursed Founding' Loophole*
Just a reminder, there's a giant founding which had an unknown number of unknown geneseed mutations. 'Works on Girls' would be a lot less extreme than, say 'Ghost Rider Marines' or 'Wolverine Marines' and such a mutation would be completely in keeping with canon.
While very true, it doesn't really help people if they wanted their women Astartes to be Ultramarines, or Space Wolves, or in a non-Cursed Founding Chapter. And obviously, while gene-seed mutations are not exclusive to Cursed Founding Chapters, it's still not exactly wide representation.
Plus, and I'm sure you're not intentionally implying this, but just to mention it all the same, it's still a little iffy comparing being a women a "mutation" (even if, as you rightly say, it's on a lesser degree than literally being Wolverine), in the same way I don't quite appreciate a lot of the comparisons in this thread between women and fictional fish people or rabbits. It's entirely a tone thing, and just paints women as this undesirable side effect, than as equally valid and capable Astartes, which I think is important for this change.
Again, not something I think you were going for at all, but something I should highlight in the wider argument.
Vatsetis wrote:The way this hole debate is framed by the most active members of the thread no one can achieve "victory"... Its just about stating in an endless cicle if one OPINION is in favour or against FSM.
It's not really just opinion though. It's the use of factual information and artistic necessity to work out just exactly *what* is so important about women Space Marines not existing, and then why it's so important that they do.
Ultimately, at the very least, I think we've been pretty good at dispelling the various issues on why they apparently must all be male (how all the decisions are invariably arbitrary, not based in biology, and now currently incongruous with previous design philosophies). The issue is that I think many people still consider "all-male" as the default of any fictional military still, and that, as I've said to some bloke, the inclusion of women in previously non-women's spaces is seen as political just by virtue of being women, no matter what I might say to justify it.
At the very least, this discussion has been fruitful in shedding many of the myths on why Space Marines "must" be male, and that, at the very least, is something rooted in fact and analysis.
Which BTW is quite pointless since its quite obvious that GW has decided to use Sorotitas as the vehicule to increase female representation in 40K.
And I've made my comments on why that's not enough to meaningfully achieve it, in the same way that increasing representation "where it belongs" is still marginalisation.
Vatsetis wrote: The way this hole debate is framed by the most active members of the thread no one can achieve "victory"... Its just about stating in an endless cicle if one OPINION is in favour or against FSM.
Which BTW is quite pointless since its quite obvious that GW has decided to use Sorotitas as the vehicule to increase female representation in 40K.
You are right, however a lot of the people here are starting with an ideological belief and working backwards, no matter what any evidence suggests or demonstrate the conclusions are always the same.
These individuals start with a premise that 40k lacks female representation and work back from that premise to justify it, outright ignoring anything that does not fit with pre conceived conclusions as if accepted that the premise could be wrong then the whole argument falls apart.
Also due to this same school of thought nothing is considered "sacred" or "sacrosanct", any lore is irrelevant as it can just be changed (so long as it changes the way they intend), no argument is worthy as the ones making is are not worthy of making the argument (the creation of the other), any person that makes an effective argument is to be silenced or purged and always labelled with whatever in vogue term is needed to ostracise that person in the eyes of the in group.
So when you say that GW has already shown that it will be using Sisters of Battle as the Female representation you are correct, GW has shown a revealed preference by pushing them to the fore alongside its flagship product of space marines, this however does not give these individuals what they want however as their pre conceived outcome has not been reached, if they can force through pressure GW to give them Female marines then they can do the same in other areas and ultimately gain control of the platforms (the hobby, model line and intellectual property) and further push their advocacy.
Hecaton wrote: Been shown to have "defeaters"? WTF do you mean by that? Nah, I've generally been right about the things I've said. When you guys are proven factually incorrect (like about intersex conditions, or the Templar Oaths) you just change the topic and try to pretend you were right all along. The facts are on my side.
Facts? What facts? You have not once linked an article or study that you hadn't spun to hell or proved to be total BS when anyone actually bothered to click on it. So no. You have not. You've not accomplished a thing besides making the argument against look as shallow and foolish as possible without actually incurring moderation.
"All you 40k people out there have managed to more or less do something that I did some time ago, and some of my friends did before me, and some of their friends did before them: When you saw the water getting gakky, you decided to, well, get out of the pool, rather than say 'I guess this is water now.'"
