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.

Male marines are strong, but not hugely muscled, so why would the female ones be? Look at the the pictures of marines outside of their armor in Index Astartes. They are not built like a male bodybuilder, so why would the female ones be?

That picture in question is an intiate still undergoing implantation and transformation. I remember seeing that pic in the white dwarf that outlined the phases of implantation and the process to become a marine. Marines grow from that stage. That marine doesn't even possess the black carapace.

The fluff doesn't say that. That is an internet myth.

I've seen it stated specifically that there are only two chapters known capable of reproducing and that was due to decay of the geneseed. Don't ask me where, I can't for the life of me remember. I'll do some digging later.

Unless you change the geneseed to function in female physiology.

Heresy.

ShumaGorath wrote:
That picture in question is an intiate still undergoing implantation and transformation. I remember seeing that pic in the white dwarf that outlined the phases of implantation and the process to become a marine. Marines grow from that stage. That marine doesn't even possess the black carapace.

Incorrect. He has plug in points in his back, which are part of the black carapace, the final organ implanted. You are looking at a fully developed marine.

It may be fun to think they look like the hulk, but it just isn't so.

The fluff doesn't say that. That is an internet myth.

I've seen it stated specifically that there are only two chapters known capable of reproducing and that was due to decay of the geneseed. Don't ask me where, I can't for the life of me remember. I'll do some digging later.

Dig all you want. The fluff simply doesn't say that.

Unless you change the geneseed to function in female physiology.

Heresy.

Incorrect. He has plug in points in his back, which are part of the black carapace, the final organ implanted. You are looking at a fully developed marine.

That would make more sense if the plug on his back wasn't actually coming out of a piece of equipment that he's wearing. The black carapace isn't a neat vest.

It may be fun to think they look like the hulk, but it just isn't so

Clearly not.

Dig all you want. The fluff simply doesn't say that.

I'll take that challenge now that I'm back.

These considerations mean that only a small proportion of people can become Space Marines. They must be male because zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types, hence the need for tissue compatibility tests and psychological screening. If these tests prove successful, a candidate becomes a neophyte. With the completion of organ implantation and attendant chemical and hypnotic training, the subject becomes an initiate.

http://uk.games-workshop.com/spacemarines/initiation/3/


Also, just to further call your BS that exact picture of the initiate is like picture number 3 in a series detailing THAT SAME INITIATES PROGRESS INTO BECOMING A SPACE MARINE.


it's as if these hulk like men standing around him were some sort of hulking superhuman hulk creatures.


Looks like our boy has made some improvements!

Dig all you want. The fluff simply doesn't say that.

Well, in my 15 minutes of digging I have yet to find anything. I did however come upon other peoples views on the matter.

"There are three theories which can explain this fact: Space Marines are impotent, i.e. they can't have sex. Space Marines are sterile, i.e. they can have sex but not produce children. Space Marines are neither impotent not sterile, but living in self-imposed celibacy. Which of these possible answers is the right one is currently unknown."

There is never once in all the probably trillions of pages of marine text a marine having progeny. That goes pretty well in hand with the lack of texts speaking on the issue. In all likelihood its not a topic that games workshop believes is really all that important to dwell on. But here's a quick exercise in critical thinking. First, marines are soldiers for life. Even with the implants, even with the training, even with the genetic modification, even if they could have children they never would. It's a waste of time. Secondly it would just be a bad idea. You don't want your super-warriors being easily swayed by slaanesh or some beautiful eldar witch. Thirdly, it's just damn unlikely with all the implants and genetic modification and whathaveyou. Regardless, I'm done talking about it. It's... Well its weird .

Its best to not try and say how foolish it is to have female marines around Dr. Thunder. Aferall he made an entire marine army with Dolly Parton Seize Breasts.

From a science perspective there is not reason not to have female space marines. There are no physiological differences between men and women significant enough to be a factor in organ transplantation. (Though see this recent report from The Lancet. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/113875.php)

Therefore, if the "zygotes" will not function in a female body, it is the result of a deliberate choice to make them that way.

It's therefore possible that female zygotes or non-specific zygotes were created, and have been lost or suppressed over the ages.

The galaxy is a big place -- perhaps they are waiting to be discovered somewhere.

Ya know this could bring light to the "Information Lost" First founding chapters. (Ya know if you look at the first founding chart since 3rd ed 2 chapters are missing and all records were deleted)

ShumaGorath wrote:

Also, just to further call your BS that exact picture of the initiate is like picture number 3 in a series detailing THAT SAME INITIATES PROGRESS INTO BECOMING A SPACE MARINE.

I know you really wish it said that, but it doesn't say that.

Looks like our boy has made some improvements!

We're talking about what marines look like with their armor off, and you show me a picture of a marine with his armor on?

Power armor is a robotic suit complete with artificial muscles that move it around. It is not like medieval armor, so the size of the suit tells us little about the person underneath.

Dig all you want. The fluff simply doesn't say that.

Well, in my 15 minutes of digging I have yet to find anything. I did however come upon other peoples views on the matter.

I ask you for real fluff and you bring me some internet opinion?

Look, there's a reason why you couldn't find it. Do you know what that reason is?


Because it doesn't say that.


You talk about "my BS," but you are the one who cannot find anything in the fluff to back up your position.


If you don't have any valid arguments to make just concede the point and move on and stop wasting our time.

Space Marines entire physiology is designed to be *efficient*

Ergo, although their muscles might look a bit weedy compared to what you expect, they are probably more densely fibred, and thus stronger than normal muscle.

Like Kroot, for example. Scrawny to look at, inhumanly strong....

Red_Lives wrote:Its best to not try and say how foolish it is to have female marines around Dr. Thunder. Aferall he made an entire marine army with Dolly Parton Seize Breasts.

MY FEMALE MARIENS~~~!

I know you really wish it said that, but it doesn't say that.

Right, so a series of pictures clearly detailing the progress into becoming a space marine accompanying an article on how a man becomes a space marine does not in fact show the progress into becoming one because you don't want it too. Got it. Brilliant debate tactic.

We're talking about what marines look like with their armor off, and you show me a picture of a marine with his armor on?

Power armor is a robotic suit complete with artificial muscles that move it around. It is not like medieval armor, so the size of the suit tells us little about the person underneath.

Yeah, because if you understood anything about human musculature and anatomy you would know that either every picture of a space marine is physically impossible or their shoulders are inhumanly broad. It's not a small man in a giant suit, it a giant man in a suit.



Look at the width between the shoulder joints of the space marine in this picture (you wont and even if you do your so obsessed with giant breasted space fems that it wont matter) they both sit impossibly low and impossibly wide on the space marines frame. The same holds true for every picture of one you will ever see. The same holds true for every fluff recount of a space marine you will ever see. They are impossibly large and muscled so far beyond a normal man as to seem like a different species altogether.

I ask you for real fluff and you bring me some internet opinion?

Look, there's a reason why you couldn't find it. Do you know what that reason is?


Because it doesn't say that.

They probably think its enough that most people won't take the precious time out of their lives to make triple D cup space marines (For reference nothing in the fluff says that the breasts would grow proportionally and all biology and logic dictate that they would not) so who knows. Sure, you can have the victory. I'll go sit with everyone else.

If you don't have any valid arguments to make just concede the point and move on and stop wasting our time.

You show me proof of it happening and I'll show you proof of it not. There's no female orks either. You want to have out that debate? I mean, their physiology is proven to be pretty random and mutable so i guess its possible. It's pretty damn stupid, but its possible.

Have your flying spaghetti monster birthing marines, I'm happy with having proved you wrong on every count except the lack fluff concerning a definitive no on space marine offspring.

------------------------------------------------
(now to debate someone whose avatar isn't a giant anime cutsey space marine chick)

from a science perspective there is not reason not to have female space marines. There are no physiological differences between men and women significant enough to be a factor in organ transplantation.

Actually there is. Put a womb into a man without hormone therapy, or put testicles onto a female. Any organ that specifically deals with a hormonal balance (as the fluff states many marine organs do) requires the specific hormonal state of one gender or the other. If you start putting organs keyed for a male hormonal system into a female without accompanying therapy then the organ will not mature and they will not function appropriately. Yes, that can be handled through hormonal therapy so in theory you could add an extra unstated step in the creation of a marine for the purposes of fitting women in there but by that same token now your pumping chemicals into them to make them inhumanly buff as well as pumping male testosterone into them. Which basically turns them into guys with tiny vestigial boobs.



Not to mention the implantations fail in like two thirds of cases already because its so complicated (without using the wrong gender and adding extra steps).

Another perspective is that all the pictures showing SMs in their armour are judged by the apparent size of the body inside the armour, compared to the head.

Maybe the truth is that SMs get their heads shrunk during the SMisation process, to make them smaller targets!

ShumaGorath wrote:

from a science perspective there is not reason not to have female space marines. There are no physiological differences between men and women significant enough to be a factor in organ transplantation.

Actually there is. Put a womb into a man without hormone therapy, or put testicles onto a female. Any organ that specifically deals with a hormonal balance (as the fluff states many marine organs do) requires the specific hormonal state of one gender or the other. If you start putting organs keyed for a male hormonal system into a female without accompanying therapy then the organ will not mature and they will not function appropriately. Yes, that can be handled through hormonal therapy so in theory you could add an extra unstated step in the creation of a marine for the purposes of fitting women in there but by that same token now your pumping chemicals into them to make them inhumanly buff as well as pumping male testosterone into them. Which basically turns them into guys with tiny vestigial boobs.



Not to mention the implantations fail in like two thirds of cases already because its so complicated (without using the wrong gender and adding extra steps).

My point was that zygotes could have been created for females, so they would function appropriately. In which case you could expect the female zygotes to work fine in women and not work in men.

There is nothing fundamentally different between male and female physiology. The same hormones are present on both bodies (testosterone, oxytocin, oestrogen are the main sex hormones) and mediate similar functions.

As for turning women into guys with vestigial boobs...
(A) what is the definition of a man or a woman?
(B) maybe the female zygotes do actually turn women into anime space chicks.

(B) maybe the female zygotes do actually turn women into anime space chicks.

The grimmest darkest universe of all.

Less emo, more kawaii.

ShumaGorath wrote:
(you wont and even if you do your so obsessed with giant breasted space fems that it wont matter)

Do you think breaking out an ad-hominum attack or two adds to your credibility?

I'm happy with having proved you wrong on every count except the lack fluff concerning a definitive no on space marine offspring.

You think you've proven something? How do you figure that?

We've debated three points:

1) Whether or not marines can reproduce. (You conceded that point)
2) Whether or not geneseed be altered to work in females. (You conceded this point as well by refusing to counter it)
3) Whether or not marines are musclebound. (We both interpret the pictures differently)

You are 0 wins, 1 tie, and 2 losses, and you are celebrating a victory?

Kilkrazy wrote:Less emo, more kawaii.

Very classy, ShumaGorath. Breaking out an ad-hominum attack or two always adds to your credibility.

Well, I'm just following your brilliant example in that regard.

You think you've proven something? How do you figure that?

We've debated three points:

Actually if you count the black carapace thing it was four. And if you count that whole "this picture is one in a series" thing thats five. Both of which apparently you are conceding which is nice to hear.

1) Whether or not marines can reproduce. (You conceded that point)

Actually its not concession until you show me that they can. Otherwise we're just arguing the existence of bigfoot. The burden of proof falls upon those that wish to prove possibility, otherwise every conspiracy theorist and crackpot in history is right.

2) Whether or not geneseed be altered to work in females. (You conceded this point as well by refusing to counter it)

Here's my counter. Its a ridiculous point. You can turn orks into space marines by altering the geneseed too. Same with tau. IN FACT IF YOU ALTER THE BASIS OF THE ARGUMENT THEN YOU CAN DO ANYTHING YOU WANT. Turn a rock into a space marine, it still doesn't make your point particularly feasible in a debate.

3) Whether or not marines are musclebound. (We both interpret the pictures differently)

And on that count your just wrong. I mean, yeah, your welcome to your interpretation. But it still strains credulity. For what you say in marine proportions to be true the arms would have to be disatached from the torso and the waist would have to be freakishly long (way beyond Michael Phelpsian).

You are 0 wins, 1 tie, and 2 losses, and you are celebrating a victory? Perhaps this is a new and exciting definition of the word win of which I was previously unaware.

I have some friends that use the same arguments to prove the existence of ghosts. I claim victory in those situations too.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Very classy, ShumaGorath. Breaking out an ad-hominum attack or two always adds to your credibility.

Well, I'm just following your brilliant example in that regard.

When have I attacked you instead of your arguments? Do you know what ad-hominum means?

When have I attacked you instead of your arguments? Do you know what ad-hominum means?

I know you really wish it said that, but it doesn't say that.

If you don't have any valid arguments to make just concede the point and move on and stop wasting our time.

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim

You will note that I have been addressing your argument as well as tossing snide comments at you. Whereas you are tossing snide comments and randomly dropping parts of your argument when they become too risky (like the black carapace thing or the picture thing i mentioned before).

Sorry, but none of those quotes are ad-hominum attacks.

Your comments, however, were.

Please try to be more civil in future discussions.

Ciao.

Doctor Thunder wrote:Sorry, but none of those quotes are ad-hominum attacks.

Your comments, however, were.

Please try to be more civil in future discussions.

Ciao.

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim

I hate to burst your bubble but the act of exiting the argument by claiming ad hominem rather than providing a counterpoint is in and of itself a form of ad hominem. Rather than providing followup example and discussion of your opinions you have claimed that I am insulting you and refusing to provide my own argumentative base.

Ad Hominem (Argument To The Man):
attacking the person instead of attacking his argument. For example, "Von Daniken's books about ancient astronauts are worthless because he is a convicted forger and embezzler." (Which is true, but that's not why they're worthless.)
Another example is this syllogism, which alludes to Alan Turing's homosexuality:

Turing thinks machines think.
Turing lies with men.
Therefore, machines don't think.
(Note the equivocation in the use of the word "lies".)

A common form is an attack on sincerity. For example, "How can you argue for vegetarianism when you wear leather shoes?" The two wrongs make a right fallacy is related.

A variation (related to Argument By Generalization) is to attack a whole class of people. For example, "Evolutionary biology is a sinister tool of the materialistic, atheistic religion of Secular Humanism." Similarly, one notorious net.kook waved away a whole category of evidence by announcing "All the scientists were drunk."

Another variation is attack by innuendo: "Why don't scientists tell us what they really know; are they afraid of public panic?"

There may be a pretense that the attack isn't happening: "In order to maintain a civil debate, I will not mention my opponent's drinking problem."

Sometimes the attack is on intelligence. For example, "If you weren't so stupid you would have no problem seeing my point of view." Or, dismissing a comment with "Well, you're just smarter than the rest of us." (In Britain, that might be put as "too clever by half".) This is related to Not Invented Here, but perhaps it is more connected to Dismissal By Differentness and Changing The Subject.

Ad Hominem is not fallacious if the attack goes to the credibility of the argument. For instance, the argument may depend on its presenter's claim that he's an expert. (That is, there is an Argument From Authority.) Trial judges allow this category of attacks.

You should probably review what ad hominem actually means. What I was doing was a fallacious argument called...

Burden Of Proof:
the claim that whatever has not yet been proved false must be true (or vice versa). Essentially the arguer claims that he should win by default if his opponent can't make a strong enough case.

There may be three problems here. First, the arguer claims priority, but can he back up that claim? Second, he is impatient with ambiguity, and wants a final answer right away. And third, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

But then we were both doing that.

Female space marine. There are no boobies. Anyone who claims they have female space marines with boobies is lying. Personally I think this pic represents Leman Russ. "But Wait!" you say. "Wouldn't that be Lion'El Johnson?" No. There's no Marilyn Monroe skirt.

Basically yeah, that was one of the things I was getting at.

...

...

i would really not like to have sex with a space marine.

sphynx wrote:...

...

i would really not like to have sex with a space marine.

That won't make any difference if the space marine wants to have sex with you.

Kilkrazy wrote:

sphynx wrote:...

...

i would really not like to have sex with a space marine.

That won't make any difference if the space marine wants to have sex with you.

Hahahahahahaha!

Closed by the Modquisition. This one has run its course and devolved. There's only one thing left to do...