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.

 Ashiraya wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SolarCross wrote:
If 10 people want it and 100,000 will go nuts and dump GW then it would not make sense.

Then it honestly sounds like a good change. If 100,000 will go nuts just from the existence of Marines who are not men, then I seriously question their priorities in things to go nuts over, and the community would probably be better off that way...

Yes, GW should just dump their entire fanbase to appeal to a fringe group when said fans don't agree with YOU.
The game will be better off without the people who currently play and enjoy it.

 =Angel= wrote:

It's not. Some people would like the option of tuning into women's tennis where the matches were nude. That's not a good reason for the Grand Slam to start providing them because there are compelling arguments against .
'some people would like it changed' isn't a good reason to change such a fundamental part of who space marines are ( and therefore what 40k is) or to change any piece of art or entertainment.

What does that picture have to do with anything?

Do you feel having to contemplate the existence of female Marines is equally as degrading as playing tennis naked?

Your comparisons make no sense whatsoever.

The solution would be to go and create art, games or a tennis league that serves your tastes rather than trying to adapt what other people enjoy.

Do you often to go metacritic and tell the critics to go make a better movie themselves if they don't like the ones you like?

 SolarCross wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Its more likely they were Scythian women - some of which appeared to ride to battle with their men according to the archeological record...............the evidence for the removal of a breast is at best dubious.

The Greek Physician Hippocrates reports:

Their women, so long as they are virgins, ride, shoot, throw the javelin while mounted, and fight with their enemies. They do not lay aside their virginity until they have killed three of their enemies, and they do not marry before they have performed the traditional sacred rites. A woman who takes to herself a husband no longer rides, unless she is compelled to do so by a general expedition. They have no right breast; for while they are yet babies their mothers make red-hot a bronze instrument constructed for this very purpose and apply it to the right breast and cauterize it, so that its growth is arrested, and all its strength and bulk are diverted to the right shoulder and right arm.

How is that dubious?

As you may have read there are various discussions about who or what the Amazons where - ranging from all women tribes, to Scythian raiders through to Hermaphrodites or even castrated male warriors. IIRC he is quoting and adding to the previous works of Herodotus and its difficuot work out what bits are true and which bits (like a lot of ancient writing is allegorical or just made up - tricky) :

"one of their marriage customs is that no young woman may marry until she has killed a male enemy. Inability to fulfil this condition means that some of them do not marry until they are old."

He notes them as former Scythians as well. Interesting article here:

The women warriors whose graves she dug up were ordinary, man-loving (as against man-killing), child-rearing women, not muscle-bound man-haters. She points out that that women's physique suits them particularly well to horse-riding and specifically distance-riding. Men who spend a great deal of time in the saddle can become impotent, because of the heat and friction on their testicles, whereas women have no such problem. The bow suits women well too: it requires less muscle strength to use than some other weapons, but it does demand calm, concentration, good co-ordination of hand and eye, and a precise sense of distance and timing. These are all skills which could be acquired through rigorous daily training in childhood. At one site Renate had found a girl between 10 and 12 years old buried with chain-mail armour which suggests that she was already trained and considered ready to fight. She says that Scythian body armour was very elastic and practical and that certainly women and girls could have worn it without any discomfort.

http://www.stoa.org/diotima/essays/wilde.shtml

I am not aware of any known and documented culture where women have removed a breast to make them better archers - even though it has been a popular skill for women for an awful long time - Queen Elizabeth and many Tudor ladies were excellent archers.........

Some people would like the option of tuning into women's tennis where the matches were nude

Could go the Spartan route and have all sports in the nude - male or female - not something I would be desperate to see but its not a new idea

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
The Imperial Guard doesn't care what utilities you have as long as you can hold and point a flash light.

This is important. Women do not aim any worse than men (better, actually, if what Israel says about its female soldiers is true), and who cares if you have 20% or 30% or whatever more upper body strength if that creature will one hit KO you and the two guys next to you anyway if you do not flashlight it down first?

IG has no reason to care about your sex.

Imperial gaurd don't care at all about that you are correct. Take flashlight - go die for the emperor! I get the feeling that being in the IG is kind of like being in the red army during WW2 while Germany was laying the smack down.

You'd be wrong. People seem to have the idea that the IG is a single monolithic entity that has the same recruitment policy and tactical doctrine across all regiments.
That is incorrect. Recruitment and tactics vary per regiment; Mordians fight in 19th century style ranks, Catachans use guerilla tactics, Valhallans are more like WW2 Red Army, Death Korps are WW1 Trench Warfare specialists ect.
The one thing that is consistent is equipment and high command - all regiments are supplied and are commanded by the Imperium's Departmento Munitorum. The Departmento has no say on what tactics the guard use, just on what their strategic objectives are.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 =Angel= wrote:

It's not. Some people would like the option of tuning into women's tennis where the matches were nude. That's not a good reason for the Grand Slam to start providing them because there are compelling arguments against .
'some people would like it changed' isn't a good reason to change such a fundamental part of who space marines are ( and therefore what 40k is) or to change any piece of art or entertainment.

What does that picture have to do with anything?

Do you feel having to contemplate the existence of female Marines is equally as degrading as playing tennis naked?

Your comparisons make no sense whatsoever.

The solution would be to go and create art, games or a tennis league that serves your tastes rather than trying to adapt what other people enjoy.

Do you often to go metacritic and tell the critics to go make a better movie themselves if they don't like the ones you like?

The picture I believe is meant to be an example of what happens when people do something just because they think it is a “good idea” regardless of whether or not they should. It’s a rather famous example; on the left you have an ancient painting on the walls of an old church. It’s old, damaged and fading, a relic from a time long since passed but still beautiful in its own way. On the right you have what happens when someone from the nearby village decided that it would be good idea to attempt to “fix it” regardless of what anyone else in the local community wanted. What we are left with is a pale, watered done and distorted imitation of the original.

As for the nude tennis I think a better example could have been used but the point is a valid one. There are a lot of groups out there that want things that may not be considered “morally or ethically” correct (and no I ‘am not saying that there is anything morally or ethically wrong with female-space marines). Changing something just because someone says “I want this changed” is not a good enough excuse to do it. It’s up to the people who want to see such a change to provide credible and convincing justification for doing so. I’m not fundamentally opposed to the idea of female-space marines but there needs to be a more convincing argument then “I want” to convince me that such a large fluff change is the right way to go.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
The Imperial Guard doesn't care what utilities you have as long as you can hold and point a flash light.

This is important. Women do not aim any worse than men (better, actually, if what Israel says about its female soldiers is true), and who cares if you have 20% or 30% or whatever more upper body strength if that creature will one hit KO you and the two guys next to you anyway if you do not flashlight it down first?

IG has no reason to care about your sex.

Imperial gaurd don't care at all about that you are correct. Take flashlight - go die for the emperor! I get the feeling that being in the IG is kind of like being in the red army during WW2 while Germany was laying the smack down.

You'd be wrong. People seem to have the idea that the IG is a single monolithic entity that has the same recruitment policy and tactical doctrine across all regiments.
That is incorrect. Recruitment and tactics vary per regiment; Mordians fight in 19th century style ranks, Catachans use guerilla tactics, Valhallans are more like WW2 Red Army, Death Korps are WW1 Trench Warfare specialists ect.
The one thing that is consistent is equipment and high command - all regiments are supplied and are commanded by the Imperium's Departmento Munitorum. The Departmento has no say on what tactics the guard use, just on what their strategic objectives are.

Thanks that was pretty informative .

 Mr Morden wrote:

I am not aware of any known and documented culture where women have removed a breast to make them better archers - even though it has been a popular skill for women for an awful long time - Queen Elizabeth and many Tudor ladies were excellent archers.........

foot archery is quite different to horse archery. When on foot the archer has the liberty to adjust his or her stance against the target such that the bow string is unhindered by anything on the torso such as breasts that would obstruct a clean movement. When on horse your freedom to alter stance is restricted by the horse so to properly aim at targets off to the left side necessitates drawing the bow very close to the chest. The Sarmartians / Scythians way of archery was predominantly from horseback. A particularly flat chested woman might have no issue but it is much easier and safer to remove a breast at infancy than wait until maturity to see if it is necessary or not. That little detail of the account of Hippocratus makes it seem quite plausible to me.

As for the upper body strength needed to be a good archer it is actually quite considerable. The range and power of an arrow shot from a bow is closely related to the draw weight. Following the Magna Carta English Kings couldn't easily raise money for professional soldiers so they instituted a number of Archery Laws requiring peasants to keep and train with longbows so that if they couldn't pay for professional soldiers they might at least conscript some reasonably effective non-professionals. These peasant archers apparently developed arms like gorillas from all this training and could draw to bows as big as they were tall. The arrows they shot could punch through steel plate at 300 metres as was shown during Henry V's campaigns in France.

Sport archery is not equal to war archery.

Side note, I just found some SoB concept fanart on Deviantart.



I love this. It is 682% less dumb looking than their current PA while still being very distinct from Astartes. It would scratch that female Marine itch for many, I think, and provide a good solution to the thread's problem that hopefully should not enrage fans of either faction.

Looks great - to be honest though this looks like a dude with a bird chest leaning back.

Na. I'd argue it looks pretty androgynous, which armour this heavy should. No boobs, no pecs, etc.

More importantly it looks very different from Marines, so there'd be no doubt it's a SoB.

Yeh, that looks less SoB and more generic fantasy armored dude.
If it weren't for the rare bits of Imperial Iconography I would never have made the connection with 40k, and without the barely noticeable Fleur de Lys I would not have been able to make the connection with SoB.

Its nice artwork, but its a bit bland. The current SoB models are great; I love the armor's design. They just need to be in plastic.

The gratuitous boobplate makes SoB one of the worst model ranges in GW's arsenal.

You make no connection with 40k because this is a change suggestion, not a depiction of the status quo.

Also, this mindset 'no boobplate = must be a man' is seriously getting dumb now. That armour is more feminine than real plate armor, even though it is thicker, due to the chest bump and back curve and so on.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Side note, I just found some SoB concept fanart on Deviantart.



I love this. It is 682% less dumb looking than their current PA while still being very distinct from Astartes. It would scratch that female Marine itch for many, I think, and provide a good solution to the thread's problem that hopefully should not enrage fans of either faction.

The SOB have the potential to be one of the best looking factions in the game if given half the chance.

As for the topic of discussion how about a compromise. During the heresy we see that people like luther of the Dark Angels can be modified to be comparable to Space Marines physically without the need of the gene-seed; with the added bonus of not become overly large and ugly. If GW were to introduce a new elite choice for the SOB that where the equal of the space marines both in the fluff and on the table-top and could take similar load out options to their marine counterparts (including their own version of terminator armour) would that be more acceptable? The Ecclesiarchy could certainly afford it.

 SolarCross wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

I am not aware of any known and documented culture where women have removed a breast to make them better archers - even though it has been a popular skill for women for an awful long time - Queen Elizabeth and many Tudor ladies were excellent archers.........

foot archery is quite different to horse archery. When on foot the archer has the liberty to adjust his or her stance against the target such that the bow string is unhindered by anything on the torso such as breasts that would obstruct a clean movement. When on horse your freedom to alter stance is restricted by the horse so to properly aim at targets off to the left side necessitates drawing the bow very close to the chest. The Sarmartians / Scythians way of archery was predominantly from horseback. A particularly flat chested woman might have no issue but it is much easier and safer to remove a breast at infancy than wait until maturity to see if it is necessary or not. That little detail of the account of Hippocratus makes it seem quite plausible to me.

As for the upper body strength needed to be a good archer it is actually quite considerable. The range and power of an arrow shot from a bow is closely related to the draw weight. Following the Magna Carta English Kings couldn't easily raise money for professional soldiers so they instituted a number of Archery Laws requiring peasants to keep and train with longbows so that if they couldn't pay for professional soldiers they might at least conscript some reasonably effective non-professionals. These peasant archers apparently developed arms like gorillas from all this training and could draw to bows as big as they were tall. The arrows they shot could punch through steel plate at 300 metres as was shown during Henry V's campaigns in France.

Sport archery is not equal to war archery.

Agreed but also the type of bow is going to make a difference as well as the way in which you use it. I am not sure that the breasts would not be constrained already by the clothing armour? Not an uncommon ting for women to do in the anceint world and throughout the ages if they were going to war. Hippocratus may indeed have been right, although other peices I have read debate it.......... but its not clear where his informaiton was coming from...........some of it is from older sources but that particular element?

I understand recurved/ compound bows require different muscle structure to those required for the English/Welsh longbow - same as the Japanese bow is different again - and it has a very different way of being used from horseback. Again as I understand it, many ancient archers only pulled back to the chest whereas Scythian and others ( I seem to recall Createn) pulled back to the ear generating considerably more power?

 Ashiraya wrote:
The gratuitous boobplate makes SoB one of the worst model ranges in GW's arsenal.

You make no connection with 40k because this is a change suggestion, not a depiction of the status quo.

Also, this mindset 'no boobplate = must be a man' is seriously getting dumb now.

What if we just give her a cloak and a nun hood? I think the original picture looks more feminine for a heroic-type character, but that's my opinion.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Side note, I just found some SoB concept fanart on Deviantart.



I love this. It is 682% less dumb looking than their current PA while still being very distinct from Astartes. It would scratch that female Marine itch for many, I think, and provide a good solution to the thread's problem that hopefully should not enrage fans of either faction.

That actually looks pretty good, different enough from Astartes that they're unique, but still looks like power armor.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Side note, I just found some SoB concept fanart on Deviantart.



I love this. It is 682% less dumb looking than their current PA while still being very distinct from Astartes. It would scratch that female Marine itch for many, I think, and provide a good solution to the thread's problem that hopefully should not enrage fans of either faction.

I feel like this artwork is what SoB models should be based on
Its Practical, Themed, Not Absurd AND it still manages to be Grimdark
I give it a 9/10, 10/10 if the same picture was done without a helmet

 Ashiraya wrote:
The gratuitous boobplate makes SoB one of the worst model ranges in GW's arsenal.

You make no connection with 40k because this is a change suggestion, not a depiction of the status quo.

Also, this mindset 'no boobplate = must be a man' is seriously getting dumb now. That armour is more feminine than real plate armor, even though it is thicker, due to the chest bump and back curve and so on.

Spoiler:

Must admit when I brought my SObs to local stores and some of the gamers saw Sisters fro the first time - they were more just - hey they look cool / different / great - never any mention of boobs or sniggering or the like.............. a few even looked at buying them - especially when they found out about Dominions- 4 scouting meltaguns - Wow!

The of course the 7.5 Power codexes came out and laughed at the last remnants of balance.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Agreed but also the type of bow is going to make a difference as well as the way in which you use it. I am not sure that the breasts would not be constrained already by the clothing armour? Not an uncommon ting for women to do in the anceint world and throughout the ages if they were going to war. Hippocratus may indeed have been right, although other peices I have read debate it.......... but its not clear where his informaiton was coming from...........some of it is from older sources but that particular element?

I understand recurved/ compound bows require different muscle structure to those required for the English/Welsh longbow - same as the Japanese bow is different again - and it has a very different way of being used from horseback. Again as I understand it, many ancient archers only pulled back to the chest whereas Scythian and others ( I seem to recall Createn) pulled back to the ear generating considerably more power?

In terms of range/power whether a bow is a straight bow or a recurve is not the issue so much as what draw weight it has and whether the archer is strong enough to meet that draw weight. That said the English Longbow was used in the context of period and place where armour technology was rapidly advancing so maxing out draw weight was necessary to ensure reliable penetration.

The advantage of a recurve is you can build a bow with a given draw weight in a smaller size than a straight bow. A straight bow built for maxed out draw weight is too big to be used from horseback. The japanese yumi is my favourite bow, really the pinnacle of bow technology. A recurve longbow with an asymetrical grip postion such that the lower half is short enough to be used from horseback. All the power of a longbow with the ability to used from horseback, awesome.

As far as boobs go how much a hinderance they are depends on the their size. Boobs can get really, really big. I guess the Scythians didn't want to take the chance of being invalided out of archery because of an unlucky cup size, which is kind of badass honestly.

 SolarCross wrote:
Nordic Warriors: It is actually wrong to say that there were women Vikings. Viking means the "activity of raiding", women never took part in those escapades.

That's hardly a consensus.

 SolarCross wrote:
Nordic Mythology: In Norse mythology there are many strong and interesting female characters but none of them were warriors! The valkyrie were not warriors, they were goddesses tasked with collecting the finest warriors from mankind's battlefield dead so that those warriors could help the gods fight the Jötunn at the end of the universe. They did no fighting themselves.

Here, I got some quote from there.

I am sure those spears are for sewing.

 SolarCross wrote:
On the subject of female space marines, or indeed female guard, on no account should we ever entertain the idea to pander to political correctness, tokenism or SJWs. All of that stuff is garbage and belongs in the trashcan of history. If we have any self-respect we should never give an inch to such pathetic trolling.

Ahah, rule #1? It seems like you are really, really anguished by “SJW”. Too bad for you.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Most factions are a mix of things, I see SW as the brotherhood of indoctrinated warriors common to all the SM chapters, just with a Nordic flavour. I guess I shouldn't be surprised at your narrow mindedness that you can only see a faction in one way that fits a singular historical trope.

So, it's absolutely CRUCIAL that space marines are men because they need to be like a “monastic group and religious knightly order”, but it is not a problem that they are not like a “monastic group and religious knightly order” in literally any other way?
I see your point. Good faith and sincerity.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Then it honestly sounds like a good change. If 100,000 will go nuts just from the existence of Marines who are not men, then I seriously question their priorities in things to go nuts over, and the community would probably be better off that way...

Yeah, it's be pretty great to see them go…

 =Angel= wrote:
Um, TRIGGERED?
[…]
/PTSD

Why do you like making a fool of yourself? You don't get anything else that look ridiculous out of this kind of little tricks, that honestly border on infringing Rule #1.
I think next time I'll report you.

 =Angel= wrote:
As a religious, conservative leaning, male presenting, cis gendered, humankin person of minority (celt) I find your insinuations horrifically bigoted and intolerant.

Ahah you are a Celt .

 Ashiraya wrote:
Side note, I just found some SoB concept fanart on Deviantart.



I love this. It is 682% less dumb looking than their current PA while still being very distinct from Astartes. It would scratch that female Marine itch for many, I think, and provide a good solution to the thread's problem that hopefully should not enrage fans of either faction.

As commented on DeviantArt, it is a very good concept but it lacks blings! It should have SO MUCH MORE blings. It's Sisters we are talking about, not marines.

 Ashiraya wrote:

You make no connection with 40k because this is a change suggestion, not a depiction of the status quo.

No, I make no connection because it lacks the baroque style that makes Sisters the Sisters.
When I think Sisters I think baroque, catholic art inspired armor. I don't think generic, plain looking medieval armored dude #86
They are Space pseudo-Catholics, not Space pseudo-Protestants.

These are foot soldiers of the Eccleisarchy, you know, like this fellow



I don't know why the image is so big. It wasn't like that when I found it.

The enemy should know who they are.
Also, note the seraphim in the background. That's pretty rad.

As boobplates go its not that bad. Its obvious enough to be noticed, but not in such a way that detracts from the rest of the model. Its better than grishnak's plate, which uses straps, a bit too obvious and frankly makes the model look unarmored.
Its a nice model, its just aesthetically the originals were better in that way.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Ahah, rule #1? It seems like you are really, really anguished by “SJW”. Too bad for you.

I don't believe it is a rule 1 violation. It might have been if I had named you as an SJW and if the term SJW is an insult. Anyway SJWs are mostly clownish creatures I am not really anguished by them. They are often hilarious actually. That doesn't mean I want to obey them.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
As commented on DeviantArt, it is a very good concept but it lacks blings! It should have SO MUCH MORE blings. It's Sisters we are talking about, not marines.

You really don't read fluff, do you? Marines have much more bling than the sisters.

Yeah, Marines can be pretty flashy.
Death Korps would be more accurate.

so, lemme get this portion straight:

people are partially pissy because there are no GW 'official' female inquisitor, commissar, or other such IG models? Does no one look for 3rd party models any more? And how many people DON'T kitbash their inquisitors? Are we gonna ignore the often cheaper, high quality 3rd party female Cadian models?

Most Eldar armies can go at least ~25% female without extra bits or kitbashing
Necron models are effectivley gender-less (I'm assuming the c'tan were more worried about turning their food into better fighting forms more so than gender equality in their robo-suits)
Orks are created physically 'male' because they were only intended to be the biggest and strongest (or because the frog-men were looking to make an army, not a 'balanced' race)
Tau suits and fire warriors can go 100% female with no conversions since no defining female traits other than the forehead slit
IG requires 3rd party models or green stuff work (or we grow up and remember that the battle plate probably doesn't leave much room for sexual traits to show), so at least a head swap to sell the gender, Most inquisitors (male or female) deserve a kit bash,
A SOB update would be nice
No female Space marines (due to 30 years of fluff beating the demands of a super tiny population).

outside of subtly calling the player base sexist ("Oh, i'd be glad with those 100,000 leaving") and gacky attitudes on BOTH sides of the argument in this thread (that is a result from demanding a change, and then implying nay-sayers sexist for disagreeing or vice-versa), this change in fluff would arguably be bigger than the necrons, and the only reason it would happen is to pander to the small population who apparently want to be pandered to.

Beyond all of this: Why are we bringing modern gender issues into a WAR game focused in a near-apocalyptic far future? Not everything needs to involve (or portray) every gender in equal lighting, not everything needs to shoe-horn in our modern values into non-modern settings. This is a problem in modern day both due to: 1) more media being watered down to pander (and that's what it is) to a 'modern' tiny audience and 2) this issue of holding the past to modern standards is resulting in attempted (and occasionally successful) historical revisionism, and abandoning heroes of the past due to them living by their times standards.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

As commented on DeviantArt, it is a very good concept but it lacks blings! It should have SO MUCH MORE blings. It's Sisters we are talking about, not marines.

I'd be 100% okay with more bling added (though I think the fleur on the helmet is genius). I just want the underlying shape.

 Brennonjw wrote:
outside of subtly calling the player base sexist ("Oh, i'd be glad with those 100,000 leaving")

Mind you, I said it would be good if they left assuming they would indeed be enraged. I really think and hope that the community is sensible enough to not get outraged over getting more options (that they do not have to use).

Beyond all of this: Why are we bringing modern gender issues into a WAR game focused in a near-apocalyptic far future? Not everything needs to involve (or portray) every gender in equal lighting, not everything needs to shoe-horn in our modern values into non-modern settings. This is a problem in modern day both due to: 1) more media being watered down to pander (and that's what it is) to a 'modern' tiny audience and 2) this issue of holding the past to modern standards is resulting in attempted (and occasionally successful) historical revisionism, and abandoning heroes of the past due to them living by their times standards.

Because it's a realm where my guys can fling lightning from their fingertips as they fight symbiotic fungus-apes, blue anime men and ancient egyptian robot zombies with the help of Lovecraftian tentacle monstrosities. Soldiers being female is what bugs you out of all these things?

Where the bloody hell is the picture of the Emperor in the pillow fort with "No girls allowed" on it when you need it!

 Ashiraya wrote:


Because it's a realm where my guys can fling lightning from their fingertips as they fight symbiotic fungus-apes, blue anime men and ancient egyptian robot zombies with the help of Lovecraftian tentacle monstrosities. Soldiers being female is what bugs you out of all these things?

Needlessly changing the lore is somewhat bother some. But that applies to more than girl space marines. If you want girl space marines then boom, the second and eleventh legion were girls, thats why the emperor got mad because he didnt want them to be. Use the second and eleventh to represent girl marines, or just make girl marines and tell people its your army you can do as you like. Alot of people dont care about the fluff anyway it seems.

Also, I know that there arent alot of girl models. But one can easily just say their Tau/Imperial Guard soldiers are girls, sure the waists arent quite right but you dont see military clamoring to give the women form fitting armor or uniforms. For the Tau they even have full face helmets, or are in Battle Suits.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

As commented on DeviantArt, it is a very good concept but it lacks blings! It should have SO MUCH MORE blings. It's Sisters we are talking about, not marines.

I'd be 100% okay with more bling added (though I think the fleur on the helmet is genius). I just want the underlying shape.

 Brennonjw wrote:
outside of subtly calling the player base sexist ("Oh, i'd be glad with those 100,000 leaving")

Mind you, I said it would be good if they left assuming they would indeed be enraged. I really think and hope that the community is sensible enough to not get outraged over getting more options (that they do not have to use).

Beyond all of this: Why are we bringing modern gender issues into a WAR game focused in a near-apocalyptic far future? Not everything needs to involve (or portray) every gender in equal lighting, not everything needs to shoe-horn in our modern values into non-modern settings. This is a problem in modern day both due to: 1) more media being watered down to pander (and that's what it is) to a 'modern' tiny audience and 2) this issue of holding the past to modern standards is resulting in attempted (and occasionally successful) historical revisionism, and abandoning heroes of the past due to them living by their times standards.

Because it's a realm where my guys can fling lightning from their fingertips as they fight symbiotic fungus-apes, blue anime men and ancient egyptian robot zombies with the help of Lovecraftian tentacle monstrosities. Soldiers being female is what bugs you out of all these things?

the first comment was more directed at Hybrid rather than you, truth be told. And any community outrage would hopefully be there. Not because they are sexist (they would be called sexist, since any disention is called that in these types of subjects. I direct attention to the "atheism plus" debacle and "gamer gate". People with legitimate reasons to be upset, shouted down as sexists.), but because this change would have ONLY been done to pander to the small population demanding girl marines for no reason other than "I don't like that they are all men" or "I am unable to relate to something that isn't just like me"

As I've said before, I don't mind more female models and in fact would like to see some more for IG (as IG is the only army where the option is really there by the fluff, but not represented by models. a single sprew with 3-5 torsos (maybe a thinner waste, but that's it), and the same number of heads would probably be more than enough.) What annoys me is the fact that both with our real-life history and our media today, there's this huge push to hold EVERYTHING to a modern standard. And if hitting that 'modern standard' means ignoring, or rewriting history in real life(as we've seen many times in the past 5 years), or changing 30 years of fluff in a game for no real reason beyond making the tiny percentage of people who want it happy at the expense of every one else who cares for, or follows, the fluff then yes: I don't want that.

You said it yourself "it's a realm where my guys can fling lightning from their fingertips as they fight symbiotic fungus-apes, blue anime men and ancient egyptian robot zombies with the help of Lovecraftian tentacle monstrosities." Is one army-type that doesn't have women really enough of an issue to warrant a fluff change? or would that fluff change be strickly for pandering?

BEHOLD MERE MORTALS THE INDISPUTABLE TRUTH BEHIND WHY THERE ARE NO FEMALE-SPACE MARINES.