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.

BaronIveagh wrote: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.

It's because you underestimated them that they had the chance to be as deadly. Women have a shorter reach and lesser strength, and that inherently leaves them at a disadvantage.

You wouldn't stand around arguing that a smaller, weaker guy isn't at a disadvantage against a bigger stronger guy, so how does being female somehow confer a superpower that overcomes those same physical disadvantages? Well, beyond cocky blokes that misunderestimate you. But boobs don't work on Orks.

Melissia wrote:Isn't that what I just said?

...I'm pretty sure you've spent the whole time arguing that women can be physically different but suffer no penalties to their physical performance. Well, that and ignoring a lot of what I've posted.

Veteran Sergeant wrote: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.

Except those terms from the RPGs that you refuse to admit are ALSO canon, unless they support your position. Such as the argument that only men can become SM, which no longer appears in C:SM as of 5th, IIRC.

Veteran Sergeant wrote: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.

I might point out that men can only do those things (arguably in some cases) marginally better than women because of development that would take place long after you would begin your induction into the Space Marines, and is heavily altered by the process to become a SM. So, how is it relevant?

In addition: you're forgetting that power armor, in fluff, is quite capable of carrying a full combat load, even if the person inside it is not. Even a SM has a hard time firing a heavy bolter naked.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
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

Was ignoring it because at the point in biological development that SM are recruited, it's a non-issue, since hormone levels are approx equal at that stage.

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.

Until the moment GW decides there's money in it. and they already pulled it from the Codex, IIRC.

Omegus wrote:
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.

Ok, deep breath now. His assertion was that it takes an exceptional woman to beat an average man in the same weight. Studies have found there to be 0 difference between the sexes when it came to strength at the same body mass. (Wescott, 1992) The real advantage is that men typically mass more than a female fighter. He ignores the relative level of skill, experience, and difference of technique.

MarcoSkoll wrote:
You wouldn't stand around arguing that a smaller, weaker guy isn't at a disadvantage against a bigger stronger guy, so how does being female somehow confer a superpower that overcomes those same physical disadvantages? Well, beyond cocky blokes that misunderestimate you. But boobs don't work on Orks.

Except a Female SM does not lack, reach, or body strength. The SM take strong guys, short guys, fast cunning guys. Not every SM starts out at 6'5, 250 pounds and uniform. Even after they are done they are far from uniform. You have some that are larger then the other, some that are lanky( well for a SM anyhow) and some that are short or weaker or stronger. SM are not clones, they are not all they same. Now if you took a female who happen to best out the other children in the age group at testing, what does it matter she is female? she may end up weaker then some of the Male SM, but then some Male SM are weaker. By the time transformation is finished, assuming they survive a female Sm will be just as freaking terrifying and just as effective. So what they are "Only" 11 and a half times better" then a normal Human and not 12. Once you place them In power armor, you would be very, very hard pressed to tell one SM from another, and lifting is even more enhanced by the armor.

The diffidence is really insignificant The true diffidence comes in the time it takes to trains new SM as you have increased recruiting by 25- 50%

Melissia wrote:
-- 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.

I have to disagree with your first point... except for the nerdrage portion.

While the reason GW didn't include FSM is probably a fraternal/misogynistic/aesthetic choice, there are plenty of reasons why it would be less feasible to create supersoldiers out of women. Two that I find very convincing are as follows:
-- Astartes applicants are generally chosen from the biggest, strongest individuals on their recruitment planets. Changing a 6'4", 280lbs brute into an 8' giant is probably easier than someone who is 5'5" and 140lbs.
-- Additionally, if there is a system for producing super soldiers from males, there would need to be an alternate system for females, given the differences in hormonal balances and physiology. As someone previously mentioned, if they needed billions of SM, then yes, they would probably need to resort to using females as a resource. But they do not, so there is no reason to do so.

I agree somewhat with your second point, but I think you vastly underestimate the physical requirements of being an infantryman.

I have seen female soldiers in action and while they are equally accurate on the range with small arms, are just as intelligent, and equally competent in hand to hand fighting techniques, they are nowhere near as effective physically as male soldiers. Put a 50/50 group of soldiers on a 10 mile hike with full gear and the men will easily outpace the women and be a more effective fighting force immediately afterwards. Put a female soldier into a melee situation with a male soldier, even one of the same bodyweight, and generally the male soldier will overpower the female just by virtue of the unequal distribution of muscle mass and increased cardiovascular capacity. Take an average female and an average male and it becomes no contest. Especially in the 40k universe, where melee situations seem to be FAR more prevalent than modern warfare, height, reach, muscle mass and cardiovascular capacity would make female soldiers less effective - not hugely less effective, but appreciably so.

What's more, even canonically, 40k women tend to be described in scouting/sniping/marksman roles whereas their male counterparts fire the heavy stubbers, missile launchers and lug around the ammo crates. Granted, there are some notable exceptions but, as Vlad has already pointed out, exceptions only prove the rule. Add a power sword or other specialized melee weapon and the playing field is greatly evened but again, that merely illustrates the fact that there is still a physical disparity between 40k females and males.

I also agree with your third point to an extent, but it's important to point out that SM applicants live normal, if brutal, lives until they are 16-19 whereupon the thunderhawks swoop in and cart them away to be progenoidized. From birth to the point at which they are selected, they are 100% human and there is no special diet or hormonal treatment the prepare them. In fact, they would be complete with their 'formative' years after puberty (which is probably why the SM have to wait to implant them) and so there's no reason a female would be able to develop equally with a male without additional assistance.

I don't want this to be nasty, and it seems like everyone is bashing the you for no reason, so I'll stop here. While I may disagree with your reasoning, I agree that there is no insurmountable reason why there shouldn't be FSM. It's not impossible, just highly unlikely and unnecessary, which is probably part of the reason GW didn't see fit to include them in their world.

DoW

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.

It doesn't matter that it doesn't make sense. The Astartes are all male, because the geneseed used in their creation is based on Primarch DNA, who were also all male (even that poofter Fulgrim) because their DNA was in turn based on the Emperor's, who was super-duper Alpha Male.

As you yourself put it, rule of cool. Except, to clarify further, it's the rule of what's cool for boys. Whatever social stratification applies to the men and women of the imaginary 41st millennium, the stories we read are written for adolescent boys. And although that makes us a rather sad group of individuals, please allow me to assure you, with the utmost certainty, that when adolescent boys think of a "cool" girl, they aren't thinking this:

-- 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).

You also claimed that they have absolutely zero physical differences, differing only in social terms. The second part of your argument is equally ludicrous. Especially among unaugmented human soldiers, muscle strength (and increased aerobic capacity) is quite important when you have to lug that gun and its ammunition, as well as all your other gear, around said battlefield for hours/days at a time.

-- 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.

There are numerous examples of girls beginning hormone therapy at an early age, and growing up to look like very passable men, but while they're certainly not women, they still aren't men. Why go through all that trouble, when there are plenty of men to throw into the meat-grinder, whereas the women are needed to ensure there are always plenty more on the way?



Actually, you know what? Nevermind. Looking again at that picture above, that's pretty much what Fulgrim is described to look like. So there's probably a damn good chance at least one Legion is smuggling girly parts. That's why the Emperor gave them the aquila to wear on their chest, so they could conceal their rosebuds.

DogOfWar wrote:


While the reason GW didn't include FSM is probably a fraternal/misogynistic/aesthetic choice, there are plenty of reasons why it would be less feasible to create supersoldiers out of women. Two that I find very convincing are as follows:
-- Astartes applicants are generally chosen from the biggest, strongest individuals on their recruitment planets. Changing a 6'4", 280lbs brute into an 8' giant is probably easier than someone who is 5'5" and 140lbs.
-- Additionally, if there is a system for producing super soldiers from males, there would need to be an alternate system for females, given the differences in hormonal balances and physiology. As someone previously mentioned, if they needed billions of SM, then yes, they would probably need to resort to using females as a resource. But they do not, so there is no reason to do so.:

Teensy nitpick, the Adeptus Astartes can only select from children and early teenagers without drastically increasing the risk of something going wrong. So they'd probably be 5'5 if not shorter anyway.

MarcoSkoll wrote:...I'm pretty sure you've spent the whole time arguing that women can be physically different but suffer no penalties to their physical performance.

I was arguing that they would be physically different from women who underwent a normal childhood and far closer, if not almost exactly the same as, "male" marines (though honestly marines shouldn't really havea gender, but I digress).

DogOfWar wrote:
-- Astartes applicants are generally chosen from the biggest, strongest individuals on their recruitment planets. Changing a 6'4", 280lbs brute into an 8' giant is probably easier than someone who is 5'5" and 140lbs.

Well no, they take the strongest or toughest or sometimes just the most cunning of Children. They do not take grown men and do not always take someone because they are strong. Each chapter has its own way, but the ones I have read often test them and sometimes its simply a test will oneself to make it to the finish, to last days on no water, to take a beaten or survive in the jungle alone. At that Age there is often physically not all that much of a difference between male and female. It takes about the same amount of time to turn one 8 year old child into a Astarte as it does another 8 year old child

DogOfWar wrote:-- Astartes applicants are generally chosen from the biggest, strongest individuals on their recruitment planets. Changing a 6'4", 280lbs brute into an 8' giant is probably easier than someone who is 5'5" and 140lbs.

False. They are chosen from prepubescent preteenagers. If they were going by sheer size, at that age they'd pick girls, not boys.

Hunterindarkness wrote:The SM take strong guys, short guys, fast cunning guys. Not every SM starts out at 6'5, 250 pounds and uniform. Even after they are done they are far from uniform. You have some that are larger then the other, some that are lanky( well for a SM anyhow) and some that are short or weaker or stronger.

All the canon I have read regarding SM led me to believe the opposite of this claim. Aspirants are almost unanimously over 6' and are generally strong fighters that have to earn their place in trials before any augmentation takes place. I might have missed something though, where did you get your evidence from?

Hunterindarkness wrote:The diffidence is really insignificant The true diffidence comes in the time it takes to trains new SM as you have increased recruiting by 25- 50%

The word is 'difference.'

But why is there any reason to boost recruiting by 25-50%? Chapters cannot exceed 1000 individuals (as per the codex astartes) and even if decimated, finding 1000 male aspirants out of a whole planet's worth of people would be easy.

DoW

Veteran Sergeant wrote: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.

Congrats. How many of those ten years at Camp Lejeune?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

DogOfWar wrote:All the canon I have read regarding SM led me to believe the opposite of this claim. Aspirants are almost unanimously over 6' and are generally strong fighters that have to earn their place in trials before any augmentation takes place. I might have missed something though, where did you get your evidence from?

Might pick up the Ultramarines novels or Creation of a Space Marine. SM (other than SW, for some reason) typically recruit pre-pubescents.

Melissia wrote: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.

Translation: I can't dispute your argument, which offends me, therefore I'm just going to ignore it and thus be "right" by default.

Veteran Sergeant wrote: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.

Why not? Go for it, dude.

Hunterindarkness wrote:The way it has always been is both Arbitrary and complete BS.

When you finish crying that river, you should build a bridge and get over it. It's part of the setting. If you don't like it, you are perfectly within your rights to create your own alternate storylines, with GW's blessing (as long as you don't make any money).

Melissia wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:-- Astartes applicants are generally chosen from the biggest, strongest individuals on their recruitment planets. Changing a 6'4", 280lbs brute into an 8' giant is probably easier than someone who is 5'5" and 140lbs.

False. They are chosen from prepubescent preteenagers. If they were going by sheer size, at that age they'd pick girls, not boys.

They are definitely not prepubescent in the Space Wolf novels. Nor are they in the Ultramarines novels. They take their applicants at around the age of 16, which is well into puberty for most males.

But that was the only response to my entire post you had? I guess that's what I get for appreciating your position, defending your viewpoint, and trying to be nice.

What a waste of time. Feel free to continue cherry picking from people's posts and feeling like you've accomplished something.

DoW

EDIT - Nightbringer chapter 2, Uriel is 14 when he starts training on Macragge. He's also described as being one of the youngest aspirants.

I asked this before and no one found one. Is there a codex that says SM are male only? I know FFG says that, but people don't take everything in them as completely cannon.

DogOfWar wrote:

Melissia wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:-- Astartes applicants are generally chosen from the biggest, strongest individuals on their recruitment planets. Changing a 6'4", 280lbs brute into an 8' giant is probably easier than someone who is 5'5" and 140lbs.

False. They are chosen from prepubescent preteenagers. If they were going by sheer size, at that age they'd pick girls, not boys.

They are definitely not prepubescent in the Space Wolf novels. Nor are they in the Ultramarines novels. They take their applicants at around the age of 16, which is well into puberty for most males.

But that was the only response to my entire post you had? I guess that's what I get for appreciating your position, defending your viewpoint, and trying to be nice.

What a waste of time. Feel free to continue cherry picking from people's posts and feeling like you've accomplished something.

DoW

According to the Space Wolves novel Ragnar was barely old enough to have his voice cracking, this implies an age range of about 12-14, rather late for a space marine. As for the Ultramarines, Uriel Ventris was what? Six or Eight when he was brought in?

DogOfWar wrote: Nor are they in the Ultramarines novels. They take their applicants at around the age of 16, which is well into puberty for most males.

Grind to a halt here: Not what Ventris says. IIRC he talks about a particular incident when he was sixteen, and it may be when he was selected to be sent to a particular barracks, but he also states that he had earned it, so his actual selection to be an Ultramarine was probably earlier.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nomotog wrote:I asked this before and no one found one. Is there a codex that says SM are male only? I know FFG says that, but people don't take everything in them as completely cannon.

Previous codecies did, however, IIRC it was omitted in 5th.

EDIT: In Chains of Command, Ventris' narration states: 'Since the age of six, he had been training to bring death to the Emperor's enemies..."

DogOfWar wrote:All the canon I have read regarding SM led me to believe the opposite of this claim. Aspirants are almost unanimously over 6' and are generally strong fighters that have to earn their place in trials before any augmentation takes place. I might have missed something though, where did you get your evidence from?

I do not know where you got that, I do not have the books on me now but if ya look at this link http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Creation_of_a_Space_Marine#.T5XpAtlA50I you will see the idea time to start the first three implants( not training or selection which would have already happened) is ages 10-14. Older then that the rejection gets worse.

How many 8 and 9 year old you know even a whiff of 5'5"?

DogOfWar wrote:The word is 'difference.'

But why is there any reason to boost recruiting by 25-50%? Chapters cannot exceed 1000 individuals (as per the codex astartes) and even if decimated, finding 1000 male aspirants out of a whole planet's worth of people would be easy.

First off, blame spell check. The words are a bit to similar to me and I often get em wrong. as to why, replacements man, at any one time you could be down 10-50 percent( a random number I pulled out of thine air) or better. SM die, often and a lot. and as it takes 8 years to transform and train a single replacement , which a good number of those dying before it is done.Do you not think it is a good idea to recruit more? Or at the very lest expand the pool of recruits to take the very best, not just the very best of 50% of the population.

Hunterindarkness wrote:Except a Female SM does not lack, reach, or body strength.

If they retained any feminine qualities, yes they would. Narrower torso, wider hips or lesser height - all of these things are what makes women less physically strong.
If a lady Marine could still be identified as a lady (beyond facial/voice differences, having to study her naughty parts or pervy tech-adepts giving her H-cup armour) those physical differences would affect her reach, body strength and cardiovascular limits.

By the time you get a female Marine that is an equal for a male Marine, she'd be so alike in appearance that the it'd be moot beyond which bathroom they had to use. Mind you, maybe that's a reason for making them: "We can't go in there, Captain, that's the ladies. Someone get Sergeant Dolores to do it."

If people want their female super-soldiers to be curvaceous and still match the physical performance of male marines, geneseed is not the way to go about it.

DogOfWar wrote:They are definitely not prepubescent in the Space Wolf novels. Nor are they in the Ultramarines novels. They take their applicants at around the age of 16, which is well into puberty for most males.

This information was taken from the Games Workshop website (which I'm not sure if this specific article is still up yet, and White Dwarf #98. It refers to the order in which implants should be introduced, and the ages at which they are ideally introduced to the initiate.

DogOfWar wrote:But that was the only response to my entire post you had?

No, but I admit I'm getting rather tired of the insult-tossing and flame-baiting (which is not related to you) in this thread, so my desire to respond isn't exactly high right now. I'll read over the posts again after my Rogue Trader roleplay that if you want, though it'll be a few hours.

Kain wrote:According to the Space Wolves novel Ragnar was barely old enough to have his voice cracking, this implies an age range of about 12-14, rather late for a space marine. As for the Ultramarines, Uriel Ventris was what? Six or Eight when he was brought in?

Uriel was 14 and "young for an aspirant" and Ragnar was out of puberty having "become a man", has sex, and fights hand to hand with older, battle-hardened tribesmen. If he's 12, then he's a pretty intimidating 12.

DoW

DogOfWar wrote:
While the reason GW didn't include FSM is probably a fraternal/misogynistic/aesthetic choice

Shouldn't that be enough for an explanation? Well that and $$$$$$.

I mean - this thread has gone of the rails from the initial question asked - mainly because people keep jumping between real-world experiences and the realm of fiction.

So we can try to center this in legitimate differences between the genders in terms of physical capacities...but then the biology breaks down at the chromosomal level because the fiction never bothered (never cared?) to explicate about how this is done.

Which results in "A Wizard Did it." style of explanation - its Fiction, ergo it works.

Ok...so we can go with the "Its Fiction" explanation - but precisely because its Fiction there aren't any particular hardened rules of biology. Which means the difference in physical capacities can be thrown out the window....if the writer so chooses.


It just makes a lot more sense to simply acknowledge that this was a consumer strategy by GW. Whether one feels right or wrong about it is a different issue altogether.

Melissia wrote:This information was taken from the Games Workshop website (which I'm not sure if this specific article is still up yet, and White Dwarf #98. It refers to the order in which implants should be introduced, and the ages at which they are ideally introduced to the initiate.

Spoiler:

-- Phases 1-3 [secondary heart, ossmodula, biscopea] can be introduced at the same time, ideally between 10 and 14 years of age.
-- Phases 4 [Haemastamen] and 5 [Larraman's Organ] can be introduced at the same time, ideally between 12 and 14 years of age.
-- Hypnotherapy normally begins at phase 6 [Catalepsean Node], ideally sometime between 14 and 17 years of age.
-- Phases 7 to 9 [Preomor, Omophagea, Multi-Lung] are normally introduced simultaneously, ideally at a point between 14 and 16 years old. The following series of organs are also ideally implanted between the ages of 14 and 16.
-- Phases 14 [Occulobe] and 15 [Lyman's Ear] may be introduced at the same time, ideally between 15 and 16 years of age.
-- The remaining series of implants [Sus-an Membrane, Melanchromic Organ, Golitic Kidney, Neuroglottis, Mucranoid, Betcher's Gland, Progenoids, Black Carapace] are then ideally introduced to the recipient between the ages of 16 and 18.

Evidently there is a disparity between then novels and what GW wants to indicate. Perhaps to appeal to younger players? Aspirants are clearly older in both the Space Wolf and Ultramarines novels before they even begin their implants.

Melissia wrote:No, but I admit I'm getting rather tired of the insult-tossing and flame-baiting (which is not related to you) in this thread, so my desire to respond isn't exactly high right now. I'll read over the posts again after my Rogue Trader roleplay that if you want, though it'll be a few hours.

Not necessary. But thank you for the offer.

DoW

MarcoSkoll wrote:If they retained any feminine qualities, yes they would. Narrower torso, wider hips or lesser height - all of these things are what makes women less physically strong.

Yeah, but counter that with a lower center of gravity and a modification to the power armor's paldrons and you have one nasty power weapon user due to the smaller target and shorter arc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DogOfWar wrote:Uriel was 14 and "young for an aspirant"

And, again, Uriel states he began at six years old in Chains of Command. He was assigned his Barracks later.

Hunterindarkness wrote:I do not know where you got that, I do not have the books on me now but if ya look at this link http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Creation_of_a_Space_Marine#.T5XpAtlA50I you will see the idea time to start the first three implants( not training or selection which would have already happened) is ages 10-14. Older then that the rejection gets worse.

How many 8 and 9 year old you know even a whiff of 5'5"?

Evidently what GW lists and what they allow black library writers to indicate, are not the same things. Both the Space Wolf and Ultramarines novels only start their training, let alone implants, at 14+.

Hunterindarkness wrote:[...] as to why, replacements man, at any one time you could be down 10-50 percent( a random number I pulled out of thine air) or better. SM die, often and a lot. and as it takes 8 years to transform and train a single replacement , which a good number of those dying before it is done.Do you not think it is a good idea to recruit more? Or at the very lest expand the pool of recruits to take the very best, not just the very best of 50% of the population.

But it seems that they have recruitment continuing constantly so there is always a new influx of Marines as others die. Again, if they lost a huge number (say 500+) all at once, it still wouldn't be difficult to find 500 able-bodied males to fill the ranks. There's no incentive to include women as aspirants unless you're sorely lacking in numbers, which SM never are by virtue of their small numbers anyway.

DoW

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.

Every major and medium military power in the world has lower fitness standards for women than for men. Same idea, ideal body fat % for women is way higher than for men, and this is NOT simply to account for fat tissue present in breasts, btw.

DogOfWar wrote:

Hunterindarkness wrote:I do not know where you got that, I do not have the books on me now but if ya look at this link http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Creation_of_a_Space_Marine#.T5XpAtlA50I you will see the idea time to start the first three implants( not training or selection which would have already happened) is ages 10-14. Older then that the rejection gets worse.

How many 8 and 9 year old you know even a whiff of 5'5"?

Evidently what GW lists and what they allow black library writers to indicate, are not the same things. Both the Space Wolf and Ultramarines novels only start their training, let alone implants, at 14+.

Hunterindarkness wrote:[...] as to why, replacements man, at any one time you could be down 10-50 percent( a random number I pulled out of thine air) or better. SM die, often and a lot. and as it takes 8 years to transform and train a single replacement , which a good number of those dying before it is done.Do you not think it is a good idea to recruit more? Or at the very lest expand the pool of recruits to take the very best, not just the very best of 50% of the population.

But it seems that they have recruitment continuing constantly so there is always a new influx of Marines as others die. Again, if they lost a huge number (say 500+) all at once, it still wouldn't be difficult to find 500 able-bodied males to fill the ranks. There's no incentive to include women as aspirants unless you're sorely lacking in numbers, which SM never are by virtue of their small numbers anyway.

DoW

Again, Uriel explicitly says that he was SIX when he was selected for the Ultramarines, he just didn't get assigned to a barracks until later.

And if your voice cracks at age 16 you have some massively delayed puberty.

DogOfWar wrote: Evidently there is a disparity between then novels and what GW wants to indicate.

Should this really surprise any of us?

They already have a "Get out of Jail Free" card in terms of sticky situations between novels and Codices.

"Keep in mind Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 are worlds where half truths, lies, propaganda, politics, legends and myths exist. The absolute truth which is implied when you talk about "canonical background" will never be known because of this. Everything we know about these worlds is from the viewpoints of people in them which are as a result incomplete and even sometimes incorrect. The truth is mutable, debatable and lost as the victors write the history...

Here's our standard line: Yes it's all official, but remember that we're reporting back from a time where stories aren't always true, or at least 100% accurate. if it has the 40K logo on it, it exists in the 40K universe. Or it was a legend that may well have happened. Or a rumour that may or may not have any truth behind it.

Let's put it another way: anything with a 40K logo on it is as official as any Codex... and at least as crammed full of rumours, distorted legends and half-truths."

Courtesy of Marc Gascoigne, former editor of BL.

nomotog wrote:I asked this before and no one found one. Is there a codex that says SM are male only? I know FFG says that, but people don't take everything in them as completely cannon.

It dates back all the way to the 1988 White Dwarf Article "The Origins of the Legiones Astartes" by Rick Priestley, which was reprinted numerous times as "The Creation of a Space Marine" or something similar in multiple books including the Index Astartes articles and books. The description in the Deathwatch rulebook is pretty much identical, information-wise. When you look at the sheer number of times the fluff has been changed, details have been changed, even names have been changed and new characters invented, the process for creating Space Marines has been almost identical since 1988. It's probably the oldest surviving bit of fluff there is to the 40K canon that has never been changed or rendered obsolete. The language used was: "They must be male because zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types".

Evidently what GW lists and what they allow black library writers to indicate, are not the same things. Both the Space Wolf and Ultramarines novels only start their training, let alone implants, at 14+.

Sons of Dorn says 12-14 is the range they look for, though compatibility last for 10-16, I would simply assume that 12-14 has the implants take better.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Every major and medium military power in the world has lower fitness standards for women than for men. Same idea, ideal body fat % for women is way higher than for men, and this is NOT simply to account for fat tissue present in breasts, btw.

Yes, but the question is how much of that is a hold over from centuries of the 'barefoot and pregnant' mindset? Unfortunately the Israelis and the Swiss are the only ones to examine this in depth, and both have more or less come to the same conclusion. (Which can be damn impressive in a fight)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Veteran Sergeant wrote:[ It's probably the oldest surviving bit of fluff there is to the 40K canon that has never been changed or rendered obsolete. The language used was: "They must be male because zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types".

Except for the part where it was cut in the most recent edition. Now it only soldiers on in FFG's RPGs, which some people claim are inadmissible here.