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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
and what has no reason to not exist canonically:

No reason hey? If there were no reasons, then this wouldn't be a discussion. Something tells me you know this already.

To be honest I am still not entirely seeing the reasons. Now I haven't really read all of the recent threads so maybe that is my fault, but then perhaps someone can enlighten me.
The way I'm seeing things GW has already been trying to improve female representation and there are other, more logical factions than Space Marines that could use more female representation (what about female guard or Custodes?). So "increasing female representation" can't really be the only reason.

The other reason I have heard basically amounts to "but I don't want to play as Sisters of Battle, female guard or [insert female-inclusive faction here], I want to play as female Space Marines." To be quite frank, I don't think that is a good reason. Firstly, you can already play as female Space Marines. There is no one stopping you from just giving your Space Marines all helmets and/or female heads and calling them female. Secondly, I want a plastic Squiggoth, units of Meganobz on wartrikes, updated Imperial Guard models and more plastic regiments that aren't Cadians and a whole lot more stuff. But imho, "I want it" is on its own not necessarily a compelling reason for why these things should be added. We all have our wishlists of stuff we want to see GW do. But GW simply can't accommodate the wishes of everyone. And especially with a somewhat controversial topic like female Space Marines where it is clear that most people don't like this idea, the merits of GW doing this just because a vocal minority wants it to be done are questionable.

Either way, those are my reasons for not wanting female Space Marines. I am not vehemently opposed to the idea, but given that most people wouldn't like this change and that I have heard no compelling reasons why female Space Marines have to be added, I just think the change wouldn't be worth the hassle and uproar we'd likely get. That, and I can't think of a good inclusive replacement for the term "battle-brothers". "battle-persons?", "battle-people?" "battle-comrades?" None of that alliterates!
Imho, it is better to leave the Space Marines alone and focus more on diversifying other factions.

So the sister thread to this one has already been deleted? What a surprise!

It got moved to the Background forum not deleted.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Recently 40k very much has good guys and bad guys.
Girlyman is definitely marketed as the good guy, Ultramarines vs Deathguard or whatever is definitely marketed as good vs evil.

Although that's kinda besides the point. My comment was more in regards to the world in general. Evil faceless mooks slaughtered by the dozens in Hollywood movies are always male. But no one minds that, we just need female leads that beat everyone else up.

The point about Guilliman is fair of course, but I would argue that when you think about it, there is still at least a bit of nuance there. Guilliman might be a good guy compared to the current imperium because he is a relic of a bygone age, but he is still a genocidal warlord. There is really no denying that fact.
This now is just my personal opinion, but I think Guilliman serves as a nice contrast to illustrate how stupid and evil the imperium really is. When even said genocidal warlod from the crusade era is horryfied by current practices in the imperium, it doesn't paint that faction in a good light imo. The only question is whether chaos is even more evil than the imperium and as I said both positions are tenable.....tyranids are objectively worse though, being eaten alive by disgusting gribblies can't be nice.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

kirotheavenger wrote:Oh so you were deliberately twisting what I've said, gotcha.

Which bit?

Battle Sister as in the female equivalent to Battle Brother.

But it's not, no more so than GuardMAN is the equivalent of Battle Sister.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Wouldn't it be better then to just add Chapter Serfs to Space Marines, instead of reinventing the wheel and causing a fuss?
FSM seems like a really inelegant solution when there are more effective ways of going about it.

Wouldn't Chapter serfs be even more like "reinventing the wheel"? After all, that's a whole load of new models you need to make, new units, new designs, new rules. Actually, I suppose it's not "reinventing the wheel", it's more like "inventing a hand glider".

As opposed to a headswap and "Cawl invented a new way to make women using the Sangprimus Portum"? That one seems so much simpler and effective.

It's reinventing the wheel because you have to fiddle with the fluff even more and risk the same level of uproar (perhaps even greater) as the Primaris release. People are still aggravated over that, and it's been, what, 2 years?

Aggravated? But usually the people who are aggravated are the same people who say that the lore "is because it is"?

I apologise if I'm using your point to make another one, but you're emphasising just how utterly arbitrary this worship of the lore is for some people. Sometimes, the lore is sacred and perfect and right, and other times, it's a source of "aggravation"?

Chapter Serfs already exist in the fluff. I would much rather an existing element of the fluff gets developed and receive models than have yet another messy retcon that makes Cawl into an even greater Deus Ex Machina who can do anything the Emperor can but better.

Well, the Emperor didn't do it in the first place, for a start. Second, as we've addressed, the fluff isn't exactly rigid.

Not only would such a retcon and headswap be messy but also really lazy and will reek of a cash grab.

And any Space Marine update wouldn't?

It's as if people who really like the setting as is don't like it when retcons happen. You saw it happen with the Necrons and you saw it happen with Warhammer Fantasy. They spent time in money on a hobby they love, of course they are going to have a negative reaction when something drastic happens; to them its becoming less of what they invested it.
It's like that old thought experiment, the Ship of Theseus; if you keep changing parts of the ship, are you left with the same ship? Same idea with the setting, if you keep changing parts of it, are you left with the same setting? A lot of people don't think so.

Just because GW could change the fluff, doesn't necessarily mean they should. Would you be fine with the the fluff if, after a rigorous night of peyote abuse, they decided to make every faction a squig? That would cause quite a stir, wouldn't it?

I dare say that there is a great disparity in creative effort between fleshing out an established concept and creating an entire miniature line, and changing a couple of lines and introducing headswaps. The latter is no different from yet another Primaris Lieutenant, the former is actually interesting. And this is coming from someone who really doesn't like Marines getting the lions shares of releases, and would rather see them update Imperial Guard and Eldar. Though technically a Chapter Serf update wouldn't be "Marine" update, but that's splitting hairs.

So, let me get this straight: including Female Marine is something that, in your mind, can be compared to change every single being in the galaxy into a Squig?

Or instead where you sarcastic, voluntarily exaggerated or simply do you have some time (yours and ours) to waste writing stuff that doesn't make sense?

Should we take you seriously? But more importantly, do you expect to be taken seriously after this kind of comments?

BTW, I'm one of those lost to GW (at least about Fantasy) after the nuking of the Old Word. But I can see the difference between Female Marine, Primaris and the End Times. As said, it's all a matter of how, rather than what.

 Cybtroll wrote:
So, let me get this straight: including Female Marine is something that, in your mind, can be compared to change every single being in the galaxy into a Squig?

Or instead where you sarcastic, voluntarily exaggerated or simply do you have some time (yours and ours) to waste writing stuff that doesn't make sense?

Should we take you seriously? But more importantly, do you expect to be taken seriously after this kind of comments?

BTW, I'm one of those lost to GW (at least about Fantasy) after the nuking of the Old Word. But I can see the difference between Female Marine, Primaris and the End Times. As said, it's all a matter of how, rather than what.

It's more of a hyperbolic rebuke of the idea that since it can be changed, it should be changed. I do not agree with that idea.
To you it may not seem like a big deal and a little thing. To others it is a big deal because it's a little change that adds up to a bunch of other little changes.

Perhaps it doesn't make sense to you because you didn't understand? Should I take you seriously because you didn't understand?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:


Just because GW could change the fluff, doesn't necessarily mean they should.

Likewise just because gw could keep things exactly the same, doesn't mean they should either.

Imo if 40k was conceived today, this wouldn't even be a discussion.

Building a bigger table for the community doesn't cost me anything, even if it's something I hypothetically never want to include in my army. 'No girls allowed' is fun when youre 8, but all my best friends are female. *shrug*

And anyway, Personally I see a lot of cool historical/fantasy/mythical/fictional characters and themes that can now be marinified as well.

My opinion? Dont change marines. They're established and well defined in the fluff and tabletop models.

We have sisters of Silence, sisters of battle and new guardsmen (and eldar/dark eldar) showing some great representation. But instead of female Space Marines which just would need significant background rewrite, and feel shoe horned in I'd love to see that energy and effort on expanding the other lines/newer things.

Hell we now have a bad ass highlord model and she kicks serious arse on the tabletop whilst being as you'd expect from a highlord in fluff, unrepentantly a bit of a dick.

Deadnight wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:


Just because GW could change the fluff, doesn't necessarily mean they should.

Likewise just because gw could keep things exactly the same, doesn't mean they should either.

Imo if 40k was conceived today, this wouldn't even be a discussion.

Building a bigger table for the community doesn't cost me anything, even if it's something I hypothetically never want to include in my army. 'No girls allowed' is fun when youre 8, but all my best friends are female. *shrug*

And anyway, Personally I see a lot of cool historical/fantasy/mythical/fictional characters and themes that can now be marinified as well.

There's no guarantee nor evidence to show that doing this would attract women to the hobby. It's almost as if there's other factors at play that's being a barrier to entry.
Price comes to mind.
If they don't want to collect marines because of the lack of FSM, is that truly a bad thing? Don't we want other factions to have more players, instead of marines all of the time?
If none of the factions, even those that overtly have women in them, are attractive to prospective women hobbyists, what makes you think FSM would suddenly make them interested? It doesn't make sense to me that a woman, after perusing the hobby's catalogue, would suddenly change her mind because of a head swap.

Deadnight wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:


Just because GW could change the fluff, doesn't necessarily mean they should.

Likewise just because gw could keep things exactly the same, doesn't mean they should either.

Imo if 40k was conceived today, this wouldn't even be a discussion.

Building a bigger table for the community doesn't cost me anything, even if it's something I hypothetically never want to include in my army. 'No girls allowed' is fun when youre 8, but all my best friends are female. *shrug*

And anyway, Personally I see a lot of cool historical/fantasy/mythical/fictional characters and themes that can now be marinified as well.

But it wasn't conceived today, and there are people invested in the universe with its setting, themes and characters. And no one said "no girls allowed in 40k". You're asking to undermine the basic idea of fraternal militant orders of crusading space knights. Kinda like how men should not be allowed into the sisters of battle.

Representation is important, but you can do that without depriving others of a fantasy or idea. There are plenty of avenues for new and expanded factions and characters. You just want this one hyper specific thing.

No I understand you perfectly. Probably better than you imagine.

Stratagem n°1 - Enlarging
To take the adversary proposition outside its natural limits, interpreting it in the widest possible way and extremizing it; while narrowing down our own affirmation in the strictest limits, because the wider a proposition is, the more vulnerable it is.
Arthur Schopenhauer, "The Art of Being Right", 1831.

(Translation mine, don't have the English version).
So, we all understood it from at least a couple of centuries ago. You're much less imaginative that what you seem to believe.

And, on an incidental note, I think everyone who want to debate online should read it, it's 44 pages long, so half of a Codex, but incommensurately more useful (and I'm pretty sure should be available online for free).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On an unrelated note: if your "being invested" in something is due to exclusion/opposition to someone else (a real one, not a fictional one) maybe you are not really invested in the setting, but only in your misinterpretation of the setting.

In the end, people think the Imperium is good right? Can't you simply be wrong in your interpretation of Marine? None is infallible.
That's why between a restriction and a non-mandatory options, the second one is always the best.

Funnily enough, the idea that the Imperium is good is in itself a misinterpretation of the setting.

What real people are being excluded? Surely you don't mean to say that real women are being excluded from the hobby because of a lack of FSM? Considering how there are other factions in the game and other mitigating factors, that seems like a gross simplification of a complex issue and also a rather marine-centric view.

 Cybtroll wrote:
No I understand you perfectly. Probably better than you imagine.

Stratagem n°1 - Enlarging
To take the adversary proposition outside its natural limits, interpreting it in the widest possible way and extremizing it; while narrowing down our own affirmation in the strictest limits, because the wider a proposition is, the more vulnerable it is.
Arthur Schopenhauer, "The Art of Being Right", 1831.

(Translation mine, don't have the English version).
So, we all understood it from at least a couple of centuries ago. You're much less imaginative that what you seem to believe.

And, on an incidental note, I think everyone who want to debate online should read it, it's 44 pages long, so half of a Codex, but incommensurately more useful (and I'm pretty sure should be available online for free).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On an unrelated note: if your "being invested" in something is due to exclusion/opposition to someone else (a real one, not a fictional one) maybe you are not really invested in the setting, but only in your misinterpretation of the setting.

In the end, people think the Imperium is good right? Can't you simply be wrong in your interpretation of Marine? None is infallible.
That's why between a restriction and a non-mandatory options, the second one is always the best.

Marines being fraternal brotherhoods of space knights is literally what space marines are and have been for 20+ years. Are you really trying to argue otherwise and suggest that I'M the one who doesn't understand the setting?

The sexism accusation is also unfounded, and frankly insulting. My argument has been from a thematic and lore based perspective this entire time.

 Sledgehammer wrote:

 Cybtroll wrote:
No I understand you perfectly. Probably better than you imagine.

Stratagem n°1 - Enlarging
To take the adversary proposition outside its natural limits, interpreting it in the widest possible way and extremizing it; while narrowing down our own affirmation in the strictest limits, because the wider a proposition is, the more vulnerable it is.
Arthur Schopenhauer, "The Art of Being Right", 1831.

(Translation mine, don't have the English version).
So, we all understood it from at least a couple of centuries ago. You're much less imaginative that what you seem to believe.

And, on an incidental note, I think everyone who want to debate online should read it, it's 44 pages long, so half of a Codex, but incommensurately more useful (and I'm pretty sure should be available online for free).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On an unrelated note: if your "being invested" in something is due to exclusion/opposition to someone else (a real one, not a fictional one) maybe you are not really invested in the setting, but only in your misinterpretation of the setting.

In the end, people think the Imperium is good right? Can't you simply be wrong in your interpretation of Marine? None is infallible.
That's why between a restriction and a non-mandatory options, the second one is always the best.

Marines being fraternal brotherhoods of space knights is literally what space marines are and have been for 20+ years. Are you really trying to argue otherwise and suggest that I'M the one who doesn't understand the setting?

The sexism accusation is also unfounded, and frankly insulting. My argument has been from a thematic and lore based perspective this entire time.

I do believe he was referring to me, good sir.
And yes, the sexism accusation is unfounded, as if I have an ulterior motive in not wanting FSM.

Tiberias wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Recently 40k very much has good guys and bad guys.
Girlyman is definitely marketed as the good guy, Ultramarines vs Deathguard or whatever is definitely marketed as good vs evil.

Although that's kinda besides the point. My comment was more in regards to the world in general. Evil faceless mooks slaughtered by the dozens in Hollywood movies are always male. But no one minds that, we just need female leads that beat everyone else up.

The point about Guilliman is fair of course, but I would argue that when you think about it, there is still at least a bit of nuance there. Guilliman might be a good guy compared to the current imperium because he is a relic of a bygone age, but he is still a genocidal warlord. There is really no denying that fact.
This now is just my personal opinion, but I think Guilliman serves as a nice contrast to illustrate how stupid and evil the imperium really is. When even said genocidal warlod from the crusade era is horryfied by current practices in the imperium, it doesn't paint that faction in a good light imo. The only question is whether chaos is even more evil than the imperium and as I said both positions are tenable.....tyranids are objectively worse though, being eaten alive by disgusting gribblies can't be nice.

honestly I think Tyranids and Orks are the closes to the good guys in the story. orks are orks and just love war because it was what they were designed for they are basically sci fi soccer hoolagins looking for a good time. meanwhile Tyranids are just hungry and all biomass they see as thier food. They look at a humanoid and a tomato the same way.,

 G00fySmiley wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Recently 40k very much has good guys and bad guys.
Girlyman is definitely marketed as the good guy, Ultramarines vs Deathguard or whatever is definitely marketed as good vs evil.

Although that's kinda besides the point. My comment was more in regards to the world in general. Evil faceless mooks slaughtered by the dozens in Hollywood movies are always male. But no one minds that, we just need female leads that beat everyone else up.

The point about Guilliman is fair of course, but I would argue that when you think about it, there is still at least a bit of nuance there. Guilliman might be a good guy compared to the current imperium because he is a relic of a bygone age, but he is still a genocidal warlord. There is really no denying that fact.
This now is just my personal opinion, but I think Guilliman serves as a nice contrast to illustrate how stupid and evil the imperium really is. When even said genocidal warlod from the crusade era is horryfied by current practices in the imperium, it doesn't paint that faction in a good light imo. The only question is whether chaos is even more evil than the imperium and as I said both positions are tenable.....tyranids are objectively worse though, being eaten alive by disgusting gribblies can't be nice.

honestly I think Tyranids and Orks are the closes to the good guys in the story. orks are orks and just love war because it was what they were designed for they are basically sci fi soccer hoolagins looking for a good time. meanwhile Tyranids are just hungry and all biomass they see as thier food. They look at a humanoid and a tomato the same way.,

That's not really good though. That's more neutral, in the same way that a natural disaster isn't evil but will still ruin your day.

I feel like the people who argue for FSM are the same people that ruined Star Wars. It is fine to want female representation, it is fine to want more female models and representation and it is most definitely fine to want the ability to make your minis YOUR minis. What is not fine is to change a fundamental aspect of a setting that is older than most of the people wanting to change it just because of their current social sensibilities.

The Imperium of Man has been represented as a villain in the setting since the beginning to anyone that has payed even remote attention to it. It is a theocratic oppressive system that primarily focus on an unending war machine with little use for anything other than efficiency. Humanity are NOT the "good guys" nor is any other faction in the game because a rather fundamental aspect of the lore is that there are no winners in war. The idea that a oppressive regime would have role definition based on sex is not exactly a revelatory idea.

If your ultimate desire is to completely rewrite the fundamentals of a setting then why on earth don't you just create another setting? Disney did the same thing to Star Wars by trying to rewrite everything from themes to characters in such a way that it was just disappointing to established fans of the series. I would have disliked the new trilogy a whole lot less if they hadn't married it to the existing story line of the past six movies then spent three movies trying to rewrite and re-imagine that past six movies.

I am not a hater of Primaris Marines because I see them for what they are, a scheme to make Space Marine players buy an entire new army. Hell, I am guilty because I restarted my Black Templars as pure Primaris. The lore is shallow and kind of a joke but at least it doesn't try to change what a Space Marine is as their base level.

To answer the question of posed at the beginning of the thread, just put more resources into Sisters of Battle. Sisters of Battle are the female equivalent of Space Marines as far as game play goes and asking for female space marines is akin to asking why Ultramarines can't take Daemon Engines.

I feel like the people who argue for FSM are the same people that ruined Star Wars

Star Wars is ruined? Somebody should tell Disney, so that they can stop profiting off of the IP.

asking for female space marines is akin to asking why Ultramarines can't take Daemon Engines.

This is also a valid question, though. A group of Ultramarines can go renegade and have/meet a warpsmith and sorcerer who can craft Daemon Engines. They'd still use Ultramarines tactics/equipment (Codex: Space Marines) but have some Chaos stuff.
This is why Open Play is good, you can actually play the fluff they spent so much time building.

Arbiter_Shade wrote:
I feel like the people who argue for FSM are the same people that ruined Star Wars.

No, unfortunately I am not George Lucas.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Recently 40k very much has good guys and bad guys.
Girlyman is definitely marketed as the good guy, Ultramarines vs Deathguard or whatever is definitely marketed as good vs evil.

Although that's kinda besides the point. My comment was more in regards to the world in general. Evil faceless mooks slaughtered by the dozens in Hollywood movies are always male. But no one minds that, we just need female leads that beat everyone else up.

The point about Guilliman is fair of course, but I would argue that when you think about it, there is still at least a bit of nuance there. Guilliman might be a good guy compared to the current imperium because he is a relic of a bygone age, but he is still a genocidal warlord. There is really no denying that fact.
This now is just my personal opinion, but I think Guilliman serves as a nice contrast to illustrate how stupid and evil the imperium really is. When even said genocidal warlod from the crusade era is horryfied by current practices in the imperium, it doesn't paint that faction in a good light imo. The only question is whether chaos is even more evil than the imperium and as I said both positions are tenable.....tyranids are objectively worse though, being eaten alive by disgusting gribblies can't be nice.

honestly I think Tyranids and Orks are the closes to the good guys in the story. orks are orks and just love war because it was what they were designed for they are basically sci fi soccer hoolagins looking for a good time. meanwhile Tyranids are just hungry and all biomass they see as thier food. They look at a humanoid and a tomato the same way.,

That's not really good though. That's more neutral, in the same way that a natural disaster isn't evil but will still ruin your day.

i am more looking at the relativistic good than actually really making the universe a better place. though given how bad the 40k univers is ultimatly if the tyranids win and things can start over mayeb that is for the best.

Rihgu wrote:

I feel like the people who argue for FSM are the same people that ruined Star Wars

Star Wars is ruined? Somebody should tell Disney, so that they can stop profiting off of the IP.

asking for female space marines is akin to asking why Ultramarines can't take Daemon Engines.

This is also a valid question, though. A group of Ultramarines can go renegade and have/meet a warpsmith and sorcerer who can craft Daemon Engines. They'd still use Ultramarines tactics/equipment (Codex: Space Marines) but have some Chaos stuff.
This is why Open Play is good, you can actually play the fluff they spent so much time building.

That's some mental gymnastics if I've ever seen some. Ultramarines going chaos wouldn't be Ultramarines anymore in the sense that they don't belong to the chapter any more that absolutely won't use demon engines.

Also the newest 3 star wars movies were absolutely horrendous and were poorly recieved by fans.

Why "The Imperium is evil" needs to mean that they are sexist? They aren't racist agains humans either. Sexism is bad of course but jut saying "they are evil so they do all things we consider evil" doesnt make any sense for any fantasy or scifi universe.

The Imperiun of Man has never been shown to discriminate humans for their skin colour or sex. And when they do, is always painted as individuals acting by their own accord. Even seggregated imperial guard regiments are less sexist and more organizatinal in nature, because everything needs to be compartimented.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Girlyman...

And they say the community has issues with its attitude to women...

I swear I have *no idea* where that misconception might come from!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
and what has no reason to not exist canonically:

No reason hey? If there were no reasons, then this wouldn't be a discussion. Something tells me you know this already.

yeah, there is no in-lore reason why there are no female chaos marines, or female custodes. We've never actually SEEN an in-canon female chaos space marine or Custode, but that's...kind of the standard, when it comes to 40k. For years we didnt actually know that there were female guardsmen, or female tau soldiers, or female new conscious personality-having necrons, or female imperial knights, or female GSC. They tend to appear or get mentioned in the lore somewhere eventually, and then possibly, maybe show up in models somewhere down the line.

I'll also say that more than one woman would do a little more than raising an eyebrown with the arguments some people are using in this debate.


"Adding women to a all male army is equivalent to making everyone in the galaxy a squig/having loyalist using demon possessed vehicles"

Tiberias wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

I feel like the people who argue for FSM are the same people that ruined Star Wars

Star Wars is ruined? Somebody should tell Disney, so that they can stop profiting off of the IP.

asking for female space marines is akin to asking why Ultramarines can't take Daemon Engines.

This is also a valid question, though. A group of Ultramarines can go renegade and have/meet a warpsmith and sorcerer who can craft Daemon Engines. They'd still use Ultramarines tactics/equipment (Codex: Space Marines) but have some Chaos stuff.
This is why Open Play is good, you can actually play the fluff they spent so much time building.

That's some mental gymnastics if I've ever seen some. Ultramarines going chaos wouldn't be Ultramarines anymore in the sense that they don't belong to the chapter any more that absolutely won't use demon engines.

Also the newest 3 star wars movies were absolutely horrendous and were poorly recieved by fans.

So they would instantly forget all of their training and throw away all of their weapons? Which Legion Tactics would they use? Iron Warriors? Black Legion? Where would they have learned these tactics? Do Ultramarines routinely train their Space Marines in enemy tactics (this might actually be the case, thinking about it, but I don't see why they'd suddenly start using said tactics)?

And people say the lore matters!

 Galas wrote:
Why "The Imperium is evil" needs to mean that they are sexist? They aren't racist agains humans either. Sexism is bad of course but jut saying "they are evil so they do all things we consider evil" doesnt make any sense for any fantasy or scifi universe.

The Imperiun of Man has never been shown to discriminate humans for their skin colour or sex. And when they do, is always painted as individuals acting by their own accord. Even seggregated imperial guard regiments are less sexist and more organizatinal in nature, because everything needs to be compartimented.

Yeah, after all they did just add in a new High Lady of Terra. Not a lot of room for a sex-based glass ceiling there.

Even the Imperial Knights, who are hard-coded mentally to adhere to a freaking feudal system by their magic robot chairs, aren't old-fashioned enough by the standards of the imperium to discriminate by sex. The time gap between our modern world and the imperium is the same time gap between us and cavemen.

The Emperor Himself is just about the only living human in the 40k setting who it would possibly make sense to portray as sexist. His ideas might actually be tens of thousands of years out of date.

Tiberias wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

I feel like the people who argue for FSM are the same people that ruined Star Wars

Star Wars is ruined? Somebody should tell Disney, so that they can stop profiting off of the IP.

asking for female space marines is akin to asking why Ultramarines can't take Daemon Engines.

This is also a valid question, though. A group of Ultramarines can go renegade and have/meet a warpsmith and sorcerer who can craft Daemon Engines. They'd still use Ultramarines tactics/equipment (Codex: Space Marines) but have some Chaos stuff.
This is why Open Play is good, you can actually play the fluff they spent so much time building.

That's some mental gymnastics if I've ever seen some. Ultramarines going chaos wouldn't be Ultramarines anymore in the sense that they don't belong to the chapter any more that absolutely won't use demon engines.

Also the newest 3 star wars movies were absolutely horrendous and were poorly recieved by fans.

poorly received by some fans, personally i liked them and they made a ton of $. I would have preferred something like the rogue squadron books being adapted to screen, but alas we got what we got which was imo slightly above average scifi so i'll take it

So the pic of the female marine I posted on the first page of this thread. Remember how I said couldn't post it in FB's largest (maybe largest, not sure) Space Marine group as it would get swarmed with hate and moderator would delete it. I did actually post it there yesterday evening, and I was positively surprised how few negative comments there were. There were some, but nothing terrible and the pic received about 200 likes. The moderator deleted it nevertheless.