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.

 Luciferian wrote:
All it takes is one person to then say, "We can't have female space marines because Trump," and the thread is over.

Then moderate that one person who takes it to a place it shouldn't, and don't outlaw the entire topic.

 godardc wrote:
Especially as I usually don't participate in such threads. Do you remember me trolling "feminism" thread ?

No, I didn't intend to imply you (specifically) had. I'm sorry if it came across that way.

What I was referring to was that rhere is a very consistent trend of people seeing topics they don't like, going into the topic and showing their ass because they know perfectly well that the topic will be locked and they themselves more or less skate on their bad behavior.

Someone said on the last page that outliers shouldn't define the community, but when every single thread that discusses gender and wargames needs to be locked within 10 or 15 pages due to bad behavior, and it's repeatable over many years, that's not outliers any more - that's the actual community.

 Actinium wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
All it takes is one person to then say, "We can't have female space marines because Trump," and the thread is over.

Then moderate that one person who takes it to a place it shouldn't, and don't outlaw the entire topic.

Because its rarely that simple. The attack is often mixed with sensible points and counter arguments and oftne presented in a longer post; most often again it might be worded so that it can be interpreted in different ways. And when a post like that is thrown out there's often instant push back - by the time a mod gets there and starts reading there's already been back and forth between more than a few members (just like the thread we are in right now is showing).

So suddenly its not just a case of removing one person; its case of removing several who have likely dominated the discussion for the better part of two or three pages. In my moderating experience (on other sites) once you get to that stage the thread is dead. Even if you can remove the insulting content (whcih is a major hassle to try and prise it out of existing posts or leaves the thread with huge gaps) and ban/suspend or warn off the two or three arguing; the thread itself normally dies off at that point. Those watching the fight get bored; those wanting to debate feel soured by the moderation or the childish attitudes of those fighting and those who fought leave angry at the mods/site/membership etc...

Lock and remove - better than letting it fester.

 Overread wrote:
Lock and remove - better than letting it fester.

When bad actors can consistently shut down topics of conversation it's hard to see that other then a moderation strategy failure.

 Actinium wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
All it takes is one person to then say, "We can't have female space marines because Trump," and the thread is over.

Then moderate that one person who takes it to a place it shouldn't, and don't outlaw the entire topic.

I agree, but the mods have their reasons for the way they run things.

 Luciferian wrote:
I agree, but the mods have their reasons for the way they run things.

I suspect because it's just the easiest course of action, and to be honest I totally understand that. If I were Motyak or Apharius or whatever, I'd be pretty tired of spending every few days wading into yet another female space marine monkey gak fling. The urge to just lock it and move on makes a lot of sense.

 Ouze wrote:


No, I didn't intend to imply you (specifically) had. I'm sorry if it came across that way.

What I was referring to was that rhere is a very consistent trend of people seeing topics they don't like, going into the topic and showing their ass because they know perfectly well that the topic will be locked and they themselves more or less skate on their bad behavior.

Someone said on the last page that outliers shouldn't define the community, but when every single thread that discusses gender and wargames needs to be locked within 10 or 15 pages due to bad behavior, and it's repeatable over many years, that's not outliers any more - that's the actual community.

I would say this is definitely true, but I think it's vitally important to clarify that there is not a concerted effort of one side or the other - people of all political views and persuasions regularly engage in this tactic here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
I agree, but the mods have their reasons for the way they run things.

I suspect because it's just the easiest course of action, and to be honest I totally understand that. If I were Motyak or Apharius or whatever, I'd be pretty tired of spending every few days wading into yet another female space marine monkey gak fling. The urge to just lock it and move on makes a lot of sense.

I also agree with this. It's the easiest without being totally unfair - just remove the conversation. I know a lot of people want to have that conversation, including myself, but unfortunately not everyone can keep a level head.

The reason we shouldn't have feminism threads is because even this thread, which is about the topic of feminism thread as opposed to an actual feminism thread, is already showing signs of going south by page 2.

There's just no point in retreading old ground towards the same inevitable destination.

 Ouze wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
I agree, but the mods have their reasons for the way they run things.

I suspect because it's just the easiest course of action, and to be honest I totally understand that. If I were Motyak or Apharius or whatever, I'd be pretty tired of spending every few days wading into yet another female space marine monkey gak fling. The urge to just lock it and move on makes a lot of sense.

In general its not just that; there's often loads of mod discussion in the background. Trying to work out if a member is worth keeping or banning; trying to identify the people who really are trouble makers from those who just have a very poor way of typing out their thoughts. Trying to do all that takes time - so locking a thread helps stop it. Deleting or moving it out of view also helps stop people just start up the chat in another thread or derail another thread. It's an attempt to curtail chat to get a hold on the situation before it blows totally out of proportion.

If that behaviour and thread also shows a side that the mods don't want to be present on Dakka community then removing it from view and dealing with those who caused the problem is also valid.

Also don't forget many times warnings are given in a non-public manner. Many a person might be on a last warning or such without it overtly being known; heck sometimes people get suspended or banned and no one notices for ages.

In before lock... and delete?

The discussion was going nowhere, so the thread was closed.

If you are genuinely interested in advocating female Marines, maybe post a poll instead and see how many people actually want them in WH40k. It might not even be considered to be related to feminism if you exclude all that nonsense about mysoginy and justified fascism.

This way, you at least generate some data for hypothetical GW market researchers that hypothetically screen Dakka for new ideas.

From my limited experience of the "Fem Marine" threads the argument always seems to boil down to one side explaining that they like the lore as it is, with all male marines, while the opposing side believes the lore should be updated. There are players in both camps who are so passionate in their beliefs that they feel the opposing stance is almost insultingly wrong and this leads to extremely heated discussion and eventual arguing.

I think the topic of "what female models would you like to see" is a lot safer and more constructive and likely wouldn't get locked or deleted as quickly.

BertBert wrote:
The discussion was going nowhere, so the thread was closed.

If you are genuinely interested in advocating female Marines, maybe post a poll instead and see how many people actually want them in WH40k. It might not even be considered to be related to feminism if you exclude all that nonsense about mysoginy and justified fascism.

This way, you at least generate some data for hypothetical GW market researchers that hypothetically screen Dakka for new ideas.

Remembering that the active internet population is tiny compared to the real world population and the active portion of the internet community is even smaller. Even in very geeky hobbies most people are not chatting online. In most game clubs there's perhaps one or two members who are typically only ever active online; whilst some others might read but never reply or sign up to sites. So any market research that is generated purely from the internet is inherently going to be weaker than market research from more active real sites - such as GW's own stores.
This is without even touching on the accuracy of internet polls which can be abused with those using multiple accounts.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

I think the topic of "what female models would you like to see" is a lot safer and more constructive and likely wouldn't get locked or deleted as quickly.

Until someone dares to suggest that a female model they'd like to see is a female marine...

I'd like to have a discussion about Female Space Marines without it having to be supported by some 'muh gender inequality' statement.

You want female Space Marines. Many people don't. You're not winning any points by trying to pretend it's some Civil Rights activism. You win no points by trying to claim that anyone who disagrees is a bigot.

It's plastic miniatures in a fictional world where people use chainsaw swords to kill space elves and horned daemons. If you honestly believe it has that much bearing on the real world, you need serious re-evaluation of both the significance of Warhammer 40k and and the Real World itself.

I'm glad these threads get locked and shut down, because at the end of the day- it's just a feeble attempt for someone to say, "Look, they hate women! They're all bigots! This proves we NEED feminism/female space marines/guys like me!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
Until someone dares to suggest that a female model they'd like to see is a female marine...

Maybe if instead of getting upset because someone doesn't like what you want, you should accept that not everyone is going to agree with you or like what you do.

 Overread wrote:

BertBert wrote:
The discussion was going nowhere, so the thread was closed.

If you are genuinely interested in advocating female Marines, maybe post a poll instead and see how many people actually want them in WH40k. It might not even be considered to be related to feminism if you exclude all that nonsense about mysoginy and justified fascism.

This way, you at least generate some data for hypothetical GW market researchers that hypothetically screen Dakka for new ideas.

Remembering that the active internet population is tiny compared to the real world population and the active portion of the internet community is even smaller. Even in very geeky hobbies most people are not chatting online. In most game clubs there's perhaps one or two members who are typically only ever active online; whilst some others might read but never reply or sign up to sites. So any market research that is generated purely from the internet is inherently going to be weaker than market research from more active real sites - such as GW's own stores.
This is without even touching on the accuracy of internet polls which can be abused with those using multiple accounts.

I never said it would be worthwhile, but it's probably better than starting the same discussion over and over again without any significant change in the results.

 Crimson wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

I think the topic of "what female models would you like to see" is a lot safer and more constructive and likely wouldn't get locked or deleted as quickly.

Until someone dares to suggest that a female model they'd like to see is a female marine...

Then don't do it lol? Or, if you must, do it in a way where you preemptively appease those who you know will be vehemently against such a thing by making it abundantly clear that it's your opinion only.

I admit it's difficult though, some people will argue against your opinion almost for the sake of it on here I think.

I think there should be more Alpha Legion specific models, more in line with the proportions and size of the larger Death Guard or at least Deathwatch models. Not so much spikes, but rather scaled armor over the power armor.

Oh snap, some folks may disagree with me!

Oh, well it's a good thing it's my opinion and I don't need the validation of every Tom, Dick, and Harry for it to exist.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Maybe if instead of getting upset because someone doesn't like what you want, you should accept that not everyone is going to agree with you or like what you do.

I don't even really want female space marines (I definitely want more equal gender representation in the game in general though.) But it is just tiresome that when ever someone dares to mention the subject there is a huge pile in of people that need to jump to tell that the person what the lore says (like they wouldn't know) or complaining about feminism destroying Star Wars or some unrelated nonsense like that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
I think there should be more Alpha Legion specific models, more in line with the proportions and size of the larger Death Guard or at least Deathwatch models. Not so much spikes, but rather scaled armor over the power armor.

If every time you mentioned such a thing a dozen people jumped to tell you how wrong you are to want such a thing, and would continue to troll the thread until it got locked and deleted, then perhaps you might be a tad annoyed about it.

 Crimson wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Maybe if instead of getting upset because someone doesn't like what you want, you should accept that not everyone is going to agree with you or like what you do.

I don't even really want female space marines (I definitely want more equal gender representation in the game in general though.) But it is just tiresome that when ever someone dares to mention the subject there is a huge pile in of people that need to jump to tell that the person what the lore says (like they wouldn't know) or complaining about feminism destroying Star Wars or some unrelated nonsense like that.

It's not relly unrelated, though. Star Wars and Marvel have set precedents that some people might not want to see become reality in Warhammer. If they are lashing out at anthing coming even vaguely from that direction, it might not be fair or justified, but it's very much understandable.

 Crimson wrote:
I don't even really want female space marines (I definitely want more equal gender representation in the game in general though.) But it is just tiresome that when ever someone dares to mention the subject there is a huge pile in of people that need to jump to tell that the person what the lore says (like they wouldn't know) or complaining about feminism destroying Star Wars or some unrelated nonsense like that.

Then maybe stop bringing up feminism, and instead say you want actual female Guard models (so do I), Sisters of Battle in plastic (so do I), and more female characters across the board (so do I).

Because it's either about the models, or it's about an ideology. Wanting certain models is fine, as you can see even I agree with you on those points. Most people actually do. But feminism has left a bitter taste in a lot of peoples' mouths, from the actions of some feminists. To say that peoples' reactions to that is unreasonable is being dishonest or willfully disregarding some things. Whether you agree or not, it's volatile. As soon as someone makes an argument and tries to support it with 'muh feminism', I automatically know that disagreeing is going to get me labeled a bigot, a woman-hater, a virgin, or something pathetic. I want this ideology as far away from my hobby as it can possibly get, because my hobby brings people together and feminism has done nothing but cause disputes with otherwise reasonable people caught up in the mix.

If you want to discuss feminism, there are places to do that. But it has no place at all in one of the few things that a multitude of people can get together and enjoy regardless of who they are, what they believe, how they vote, etc.

 Crimson wrote:
If every time you mentioned such a thing a dozen people jumped to tell you how wrong you are to want such a thing, and would continue to troll the thread until it got locked and deleted, then perhaps you might be a tad annoyed about it.

Are you mentioning feminism, or female models? Again, modern feminism isn't appealing to most people. And if you made 'Tau Space Marines for the Greater Good', or 'Orks Loyal to the Imperium' I'd be equally questioning the idea behind it, but where I like it or not has no bearing on whether you can make it. If you need others' approval to make certain things you want, then you are obviously in the hobby for the wrong reasons.

 Crimson wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
I think there should be more Alpha Legion specific models, more in line with the proportions and size of the larger Death Guard or at least Deathwatch models. Not so much spikes, but rather scaled armor over the power armor.

If every time you mentioned such a thing a dozen people jumped to tell you how wrong you are to want such a thing, and would continue to troll the thread until it got locked and deleted, then perhaps you might be a tad annoyed about it.

Disagreement is not trolling on its face. If you present your opinion on a public forum, expect people to express their own. If you just want to state your desires without any kind of discussion, the shower is a good place.

BertBert wrote:

It's not relly unrelated, though. Star Wars and Marvel have set precedents that some people might not want to see become reality in Warhammer. If they are lashing out at anthing coming even vaguely from that direction, that might not be fair or justified, but it's very much understandable.

And then again, some people like what is happening in those franchises. Furthermore, one can be critical of the new Star Wars films, (I certainly have some quibbles) but if the main point of that criticism is that adding female characters in central roles is in itself a bad thing (rather than the specifics of how it was done), then that is pretty much textbook just misogyny. (And before anyone interprets this as me saying that only motivation for opposing female space marines is misogyny, I didn't say that. Now, if one is opposed to better gender representation in the franchise in general, then that is another matter.)

Ultimately I'd really like if it were possible to discuss how should the gender representation be improved in 40K franchise without all of those threads getting locked and/or deleted.

Lets not re-litigate the original thread, or female space marines or whatever specific item here - Nuts & Bolts isn't the place for it.

The topic is about the fact it's become de facto impossible to have a discussion about it anywhere else.

The really weird thing about this is that I'm sure most of us could agree on 90% of topics like better gender representation in the hobby. But those areas where we disagree are complete impasses.

Skating lightly here as don't really want another warning

Is it Feminism in 40k, or in the wider wargaming hobby ?

Many other games have better representation, heck Warmachine has a lady time traveller way before that was a thing, Guildball you can have almost all female teams, ditto Malifaux and many others

So is it really worth trying to change one game, admittedly the big one, when viable alternatives exist ?

 Crimson wrote:
Furthermore, one can be critical of the new Star Wars films, (I certainly have some quibbles) but if the main point of that criticism is that adding female characters in central roles is in itself a bad thing (rather than the specifics of how it was done), then that is pretty much textbook just misogyny. (And before anyone interprets this as me saying that only motivation for opposing female space marines is misogyny, I didn't say that.

Except when I say, "I dislike Rey because she's a Mary Sue with no personality whatsoever, and it seems like they're trying to make all the women super-awesome without really showing us why they're supposed to be awesome", you're going to see people that claim I just hate that they added female roles, or I hate women, or I'm a shrieking fanboy.

You say it's 'textbook misogyny', but it's always 'textbook mysogyny' when someone wants to misrepresent a valid criticism and disregard the statement's points.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Then maybe stop bringing up feminism, and instead say you want actual female Guard models (so do I), Sisters of Battle in plastic (so do I), and more female characters across the board (so do I).

Because it's either about the models, or it's about an ideology. Wanting certain models is fine, as you can see even I agree with you on those points. Most people actually do. But feminism has left a bitter taste in a lot of peoples' mouths, from the actions of some feminists. To say that peoples' reactions to that is unreasonable is being dishonest or willfully disregarding some things. Whether you agree or not, it's volatile. As soon as someone makes an argument and tries to support it with 'muh feminism', I automatically know that disagreeing is going to get me labeled a bigot, a woman-hater, a virgin, or something pathetic. I want this ideology as far away from my hobby as it can possibly get, because my hobby brings people together and feminism has done nothing but cause disputes with otherwise reasonable people caught up in the mix.

So you agree with my goals, but if I have those goals for wrong motivations, you're gonna fight me just out of spite?

Besides, it doesn't need to be mentioned. When people ask for better gender representation, or at least if they dare to mention the dreaded space female space marines, certain motivations will be assumed, correctly or incorrectly.

But sure, I'm a feminist, and luckily, like with the female Guard models, you'd probably agree with most of what that actually entails.

 Crimson wrote:

BertBert wrote:

It's not relly unrelated, though. Star Wars and Marvel have set precedents that some people might not want to see become reality in Warhammer. If they are lashing out at anthing coming even vaguely from that direction, that might not be fair or justified, but it's very much understandable.

And then again, some people like what is happening in those franchises. Furthermore, one can be critical of the new Star Wars films, (I certainly have some quibbles) but if the main point of that criticism is that adding female characters in central roles is in itself a bad thing (rather than the specifics of how it was done), then that is pretty much textbook just misogyny. (And before anyone interprets this as me saying that only motivation for opposing female space marines is misogyny, I didn't say that. Now, if one is opposed to better gender representation in the franchise in general, then that is another matter.)

Ultimately I'd really like if it were possible to discuss how should the gender representation be improved in 40K franchise without all of those threads getting locked and/or deleted.

Well, we shouldn't roll out the whole Star Wars debacle, but the way you put it is just not accurate. It's not that female lead characters per se that are the problem, those have been long established in Star Wars (Mara Jade and Ahsoka say hello), but it's the blatant pandering to certain political ideologies that results in he complete upturning of established themes and a general shift in tone that does not jive well with a large part of the fanbase, to the detriment of the whole franchise.

Now, if you want to discuss gender representation in WH40k, you'd have to find out if people consider this to be a problem in the first place.. Again, it's better to have some numbers on these things, so why not make a poll about whatever topic interest you:

Is there an issue with gender representation in WH40k - yes/no?
Should there be more female miniatures in WH40K - yes/no?
Should there be female Space Marines - yes/no?

A discussion can only really take place if there is a contentious point in the first place and the poll would be an actual indicator.

 Crimson wrote:
So you agree with my goals, but if I have those goals for wrong motivations, you're gonna fight me just out of spite?

Not so much. When your justification for it is 'feminism', it seems more like you're trying to sell what you want, and anyone who disagrees is a misogynist, and the reason you want it is some activist crusade.

It's like me trying to say that we need to change Commissars, because [insert horrible things from Soviet Union]. I don't like Commissars and want them to change, and I'm trying to sell that on an appeal to emotion and labeling anyone who disagrees a 'filthy Commie'.

 Crimson wrote:
Besides, it doesn't need to be mentioned. When people ask for better gender representation, or at least if they dare to mention the dreaded space female space marines, certain motivations will be assumed, correctly or incorrectly.

That's going to happen when you say 'we need this because feminism' rather than 'we need this because I like it'.

 Crimson wrote:
But sure, I'm a feminist, and luckily, like with the female Guard models, you'd probably agree with most of what that actually entails.

Show me egalitarianism, and I'll agree. But feminism's 'equality' is about as much 'equality' as ISIS is peaceful.